Imagine a renowned historian, after dedicating four decades to shaping minds at one of the world's most elite universities, deciding it's time to walk away—and not quietly. Professor James Hankins, a stalwart of Harvard's history department, has penned a fiery essay unveiling the reasons behind his retirement, painting a picture of an institution he believes has strayed from its foundational principles. This isn't just a personal farewell; it's a bold critique of how universities like Harvard are evolving, and it might just make you question what higher education stands for today. But here's where it gets controversial...
Hankins, who authored the piece titled 'Why I Am Leaving Harvard' published in Compact magazine, didn't make his choice impulsively. He traces it back to 2020, when Harvard enforced what he calls a 'strict COVID regime.' Professors were mandated to wear masks during lectures and shift entirely to Zoom for classes—measures that, in Hankins' view, clashed with the essence of a true liberal education. For beginners wondering what that means, liberal education emphasizes free inquiry, open dialogue, and hands-on interaction, fostering critical thinking through direct engagement rather than virtual barriers. Hankins saw these policies as overreaching and invasive, describing them as 'tyrannous invasions of private life' that disrupted the heart of teaching.
Yet, the pandemic wasn't the only catalyst. The tragic killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers in 2020 prompted Harvard to overhaul its admissions standards, with profound ripple effects on how the university operates. From his vantage point after 40 years of service, Hankins observed a shift that prioritized diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, which aim to ensure equal opportunities for underrepresented groups but, in his eyes, came at the expense of merit and balance. This is the part most people miss: the subtle ways such changes can alter the fabric of academic selection, raising questions about fairness for all.
Take, for instance, Hankins' experience with graduate admissions. He recalls evaluating a candidate who seemed like an ideal match for the program based on traditional criteria—strong academics, passion for the field, and potential to contribute. But informally, a committee member informed him that admitting a white male simply wasn't feasible under the new ethos. Similarly, an outstanding undergraduate student, hailed as the top performer in his class, was denied entry to the graduate program. Guess what? He was also a white male. Hankins reached out to colleagues at other universities to understand this pattern and discovered a nationwide trend: admissions committees were adhering to an unwritten rule excluding white males, with one rare exception being a candidate who had transitioned from female to male. This paints a stark picture of how DEI efforts, while well-intentioned, can sometimes lead to exclusions that spark debate. Is this progress, or a form of reverse discrimination? What do you think—does prioritizing diversity sometimes overshadow individual merit?
Hankins didn't stop there. He lambasted Harvard for ditching its 'two-book standard,' a longtime requirement for professors to demonstrate expertise through publishing two scholarly books. He attributes this change to pressure from feminist activists, arguing it lowered the bar for academic rigor. Meanwhile, he contrasts this with his new role at the University of Florida’s Hamilton School of Classical and Civic Education, where he's finding his time better spent. There, the focus is on reviving the study of Western civilization—a core that Hankins believes Harvard has undermined by swapping traditional courses for more global history perspectives. He warns that sidelining Western civilization in favor of a broader, less structured curriculum harms young Americans, potentially leaving them without the tools to understand and uphold civilized society. It's a provocative stance: without teaching the roots of our shared heritage, how can we navigate global challenges?
Adding fuel to the fire is Harvard's ongoing feud with the Trump administration. The university has been targeted for its 'woke' ideologies, leading to withheld federal research funding—a hefty sum totaling billions across institutions. Schools like Cornell, Brown, and Columbia have cut deals to restore their money, agreeing to certain terms. Harvard, however, has resisted, with reports last September suggesting they were nearing a $500 million settlement to regain access. This standoff highlights a broader cultural clash over what universities should teach and fund. And this is where controversy really ignites: Is the Trump administration's approach a necessary check on ideological bias, or an overreach into academic freedom?
NewsNation attempted to get Harvard's response to Hankins' essay on a Wednesday, but only received an out-of-office message due to the holiday season. As Hankins teaches his last class at Harvard this month, his departure serves as a mirror for deeper societal debates. In a time when universities grapple with balancing inclusivity, tradition, and innovation, his story forces us to confront uncomfortable truths. What side of this divide are you on? Do you agree that DEI policies have gone too far, or do they represent essential progress? Share your thoughts in the comments—let's discuss!
