Customer Reviews

How Harvard Rules: Reason in the Service of Empire

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Given the recent interest in Harvard sparked by the women in science controversy, it seems many people are eager to learn more about the world's leading institution of higher learning (according to some, anyway) Because of the power the name Harvard commands, this attention is a good thing, and long overdue. How Harvard Rules is a collection of essays all by current and former Harvard insiders with tales to tell--the kinds of tales Harvard would not willingly make public itself. The tone of the volume is indeed critical, but these are not screeds--they rely much less on opinion than they do on straight history and facts. The lesson is this: we cannot afford to take for granted the benign nature of academic institutions. And not because the elite among them contribute to any kind of left-wing brainwashing of our youth--that's pure hogwash. Harvard is a revolving door for the wealthy and powerful, and as such does more than almost any single organization to validate the machinations of the world's rulers. Under a guise of books and ivy lies a corporation dealing in the joint commodities of knowledge and power. This book is a great place to start learning not just about Harvard per se, but the complex web of power and influence that it is essential to unravel to get at the truth about the way our world works. Get this book today!

You can toss this one in the trash along with anthropogenic global warming. Harvard, long considered a left-wing hotbed, is here accused of being a Great Right Wing Conspiracy.
The recent women in science controversey makes the point. In the 1980's, I was among the very last group to take the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT) with a mathematics section. The math section of the exam was cancelled thereafter upon the lobbying of feminists who complained bitterly that it embodied blatent discrimination against women because women were naturally inferior in the arts and sciences in comparison to men, women being more artistic and philosophical. It was the feminist left who first insisted the difference was biological, perhaps even genetic.
Flash-foward two decades and the President of the University is knocked out on a vote of no-confidence by that same feminist left for the crime of suggesting that their own theory may have been correct after all.