Editorial

The Crimson Edi orial board

Datamatch Got Us Two Free Meals, Harvard Should Get Us One

Perhaps there really is no such thing as a free lunch. After running out of funding for the rest of the year, Classroom to Table — a popular program that subsidizes meals for College under graduates and their professors in Harvard Square — is now “on hiatus” for the remainder of the spring semester.

The program, which started in 2015, has been suspended mid-semester each term between spring 2018 and spring 2019, and its future direction is now un der review.

Since its inception, we have been ex tremely supportive of Classroom to Table for providing a non-academic setting in which students and faculty can get to know each other on a more intimate lev el.

Though exchanges during class and office hours are no doubt productive and meaningful, they are often restricted to dissecting readings or planning upcom ing assignments.

In contrast, dinner conversations are more comfortable and friendly, enabling students to form personal relationships with professors who they may other wise only see in the half-light of the academic’s reading lamp.

The persistent shortage of funds demonstrates that students and in turn the faculty they invite recognize the val ue and joy of these meals. As such, in putting the program on hold — and stronger still under review — the College sends a sort of mixed message about the rela tionships and forms of engagement they want to promote and their ultimate will ingness to make them financially possible.

Our conclusion, if simplistic, is that Harvard should, for lack of a better phrase, pony up.

Our conclusion, if simplistic, is that Harvard should, for lack of a better phrase, pony up.

Still more, a sustainable solution to this constant funding problem would seem to also involve creating other fo rums to fill what is obviously a void in personal engagement between faculty and students.

One idea would be to increase the number of faculty dinners in Annenberg and the Houses, which would seem to be more cost-efficient as well as inclusive. But we’d also like to make an appeal to faculty members themselves.

Of course, we understand that as leaders in their fields — not to mention family members, friends, and private persons — Harvard faculty balance busy schedules.

And we want to acknowledge the in credible dedication so many faculty members show to their students.

But it’s worth remembering that, as teachers, faculty have a critical respon sibility — and we’d hope, given the caliber, not to mention charm, of students here, desire — to get to know their stu dents as people.

It’s the sort of practice that seems to be done best at small liberal arts col leges, but that need not prevent the same from happening here.

The fight for programs like Class room to Table should not be taken up by students alone. A faculty-student meal should be a pleasure and privilege on both sides of the table.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journal ism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar top ics.

Submit an Op-Ed Today!

The Crimson @thecrimson

olumn Eric Yang Plain Tru h Complicating the Virtues of Political Correctness

What is political correctness? To some it is a key reason why the Democrats lost their way and the 2016 election. Others argue that it is a right-wing fiction, a means to rile up the base against an imaginary enemy. Polit ical correctness hasn’t featured prominently in discussions thus far, but as the Democratic primary progresses, it is fairly likely that it will make a reappear ance in pundit discussions of 2020, especially if the Democrats lose again.

Within Harvard at least, political cor rectness is more than a phantasmic foe. It is how, despite the diverse backgrounds and ambitions of the greater Harvard community, most come to abide by a con sensus view about what is acceptable, especially in public conversation.

In fact, taking Harvard as its own miniature society with a distinct cul ture, political correctness is a testament to Edmund Burke’s arguments about the positive power of prejudice, whereby our unconscious and instantaneous acts are really a reflection of accumulated socie tal wisdom and virtue. The ability to immediately recognize politically “incorrect” phrases and react to them, even with humor, presupposes the existence of common norms and beliefs about what is correct.

Yet our miniature society is not com pletely separate from the outside world. I believe that political correctness has become a needlessly charged topic in so ciety outside of the Harvard bubble partially because of the values that belie the state of political correctness with in it. We promote a divisive emphasis on retributive justice and neglect the value of dignity rooted in common humanity. Within the framework of retribu tive justice, individuals see themselves as moral agents obligated to restore or create a moral equilibrium. This justice encourages a Manichean conception of moral action: corruption of the mor al equilibrium is attributed to the deliberate actions of evil groups (the billionaires, the WASPs, the privileged) and institutions (Immigration and Customs Enforcement and now The Crimson).

Individualized examples of actual wrongdoing only typify this mentality. Jeffrey E. Epstein and Harvey Weinstein are not viewed as flawed individuals but as manifestations of latent, structural in justice.

Crucially, this sense of justice is not limited to political correctness. If any thing, other examples of societies motivated primarily by a sense of justice — such as the one which animated multiple generations of Christian crusades — pro vide a worrisome model of how an overemphasis on justice promotes a virtue of zealotry. If the world is divided into “us” and “them’’, virtue is calling out and challenging the injustices perpetrated by “them”, especially where injustice is least obvious.

The overall culture, however, espe cially among the apathetic, is one of reluctance or even fearful compliance to an ever-expanding set of norms of what is politically correct. Thus a culture of political correctness rooted only in jus tice, that attempts to address fundamental societal issues of inequality, will fail on its own terms. The more that one de scribes a looming threat and berates others for their insensitivity and lack of acknowledgment, the more one alienates potential allies to combat this very threat of an all-consuming, immoral “them”.

The more persuasive grounding for a culture of political correctness is one which recognizes a dignity in each in dividual. This dignity is not dependent on the status of the individual as a mor al agent who identifies and combats evil, but stems from a mutual recognition of human weakness. Aleksandr Solzhenit syn, a victim of some of the greatest acts of institutional oppression perpetrated against an entire people, still wrote af ter his experiences that “the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being.” This conception of humanity is not a coping mechanism nor an idealistic fantasy, but a necessity for change. “The really terrible thing,” writes James Baldwin to his nephew, is that “you must accept them and accept them with love. For these ‘innocent’ peo ple have no other hope.”

One might argue that this degree of love expects too much out of victims or detracts from the original impetus of justice, but I disagree. Solzhenitsyn and Baldwin were writing even as they lived under institutions of oppression, and still were capable of critiquing these dehumanizing, oppressive institutions while acknowledging the humanity of their oppressors.

The recognition of the dignity of oth ers is the best display of one’s own. This moral standard set by Solzhenitsyn and Baldwin is high, but that is where Burke’s prejudice works to make up for our de ficiencies. The mechanics of prejudice work to transform an ideal of virtue into a reality of action as we are both agents and objects of change.

A politically correct society can still strive towards retributive justice, but this justice ought to be dependent on and tempered by a conception of individu al dignity. If virtue within this society is acknowledging the dignity of others, then culture is one of constant mutual encouragement and self-examination, because no one’s virtue is guaranteed.

To the reader eminently concerned with social justice, I thank you for read ing this far. I also challenge you to take Baldwin and recognize the flawed indi vidual humanity of not just those most downtrodden and oppressed by society, but also of its most powerful and privi leged members.

In the 24 Minutes Home Op-Ed

The Hong Kong International Airport is a good half an hour away from the center of Hong Kong Island, even on the airport ex press, the direct train between the busy city and the busy airport.

Whenever I come back from the States, after a semester of school and after a 15-hour flight back, I board that airport express, headed to wards home.

During the ride, I look out the window and glimpse the familiar scenes.

There is the Tsing Ma Bridge with its sus pending cables that twinkle at night, the cargo docks that operate even at the early hours when my flight lands, and right before the terminal stop, the station which a few of my friends live right above. By JUSTIN Y. C. WONG

Whenever I come back from the States, after a semester of school and after a 15-hour flight back, I board that airport express, headed towards home.

When the train passes, I send a text to say “hi.”

It feels like I am back in my whole past world, a dazzling place that I have always known, as if the entire horizon is painted in a nostalgic mix of sepia tones.

In fact, every time I come home, I do the things that I have always enjoyed doing: vis it the restaurants that my mum and I love, play football (soccer) with my interclass team, hang out with friends in Causeway Bay, and stay up at sleepovers, squeezing every minute of the night into Alex Hunter’s FIFA career.

At some moments, when I happen to forget about choosing classes on my.harvard.edu, log ging on my college email, and checking the buzzing notifications from my friends in the United States, I almost feel like I have never left.

Don’t get me wrong — I enjoy my classes (not so much checking emails) and really appreciate the friends that I have gotten to know and rely on at Harvard.

I do feel like I belong at this place. Maybe you think that I am still lonely on the inside and sim ply do not dare to admit it.

But I know what it feels like to be at home, and I feel that way when I am at Harvard with my friends and in Hong Kong with my friends and family.

But I know what it feels like to be at home, and I feel that way when I am at Harvard with my friends and in Hong Kong with my friends and family.

So what is this strange feeling that I cannot seem to shake off?

On the first few nights back home, I always get jet-lagged at 3 or 4 a.m. As my phone lights up with messages from my U.S. friends, the city is softly asleep.

I can stare out the window and see yellow street lights on empty roads, dark figures of highrises cast against the sky, and the occasion al apartment light that stays on throughout the night.

At that time, I feel the rift between two parts of my life, the two places that I call home.

Like a secret agent, I live my double lives, with only so many insiders who are in on my se crets and can understand both worlds.

They say you get a chance to start anew at col lege, that no one knows who you were, so you get to press the reset button and reinvent yourself. Even the first prompt from the First-Year Ex perience Office’s Journal Project asked, “What parts of your pre-Harvard self do you choose to leave behind?”

But why should I leave a part of myself be hind? How can I distance myself from the past that has brought me to where I am, from the friends and family who have witnessed my baby

How can I distance myself from the past that has brought me to where I am, from the friends and family who have witnessed my baby steps and giant strides, and most of all, from my own self?

steps and giant strides, and most of all, from my own self?

And even if I choose not to leave behind parts of myself, how do I reconcile the new parts with the old?

It is no secret that Harvard “transforms” you, from the way you dress to the way you act and talk.

But any experience, by definition, changes you. So I guess this feeling of change is just a nat ural occurrence that I should and will eventually get used to.

But even as I grow accustomed to Lyft’s des ignation of 945 Memorial Drive as “Home” and get closer to changing my Facebook cover pho to, taken a few years ago when my friends and I sat by the reservoir after an afternoon of bik ing, I am still tightly holding onto the people and things I belong with and adapting to the distant parts of my life.

comey From Page 1 Comey Defends His FBI Directorship

the position we were in — that I was in — on October 28, you walk away saying, ‘Oh my god, that was a very hard decision,’” Comey said. “So I’d want her to understand that.”

Comey said he has nev er met Clinton, but added it was “painful” for him that she wrote in her book she had been “shivved” by him.

Asked by an audience mem ber if he would have written a different report than for mer Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III, who investigat ed Russian interference in the 2016 election, Comey assented. “If I had to do it over again in the benefit of hindsight, I would either not include any of the facts about obstruction or lay them all out and make the accusation,” Comey said.

He added that he also would have tried to “communicate in a way that Americans consume information today,” as opposed to a 448-page report, which Mueller released to the public last April.

In his report, Mueller found 10 actions by Trump that could have constituted obstruction of justice, but he declined to make a determination as to whether or not Trump broke any laws. Rosenbach also asked Com ey about academic espionage and brought up the controversy surrounding Harvard Chemis try Chair Charles M. Lieber,

If I had to do it over again in the benefit of hindsight, I would either not include any of the facts about obstruction or lay them all out and make the accusation.

James B. Comey Former FBI Director

who was placed on leave last month after being charged in federal court for failing to dis close funding from the Chinese government. Rosenbach called Lieber’s alleged actions “inap propriate.”

“What we have to do in plac es like the FBI is simply sensitize the academic community to know everyone’s not a friend, and some people want to collaborate to develop better ideas — better formulas — but some people are working for an adversary to steal your stuff,” Comey said, though he added he was not familiar with Lieb er’s case.

Experts told The Crimson that Lieber’s arrest was part of an ongoing crackdown on aca demic espionage.

Attendee Erin M. Guetzloe ’23 said she left Monday’s fo rum with a newfound respect for Comey.

“I’m still skeptical of the decisions that he made, but I think that I leave with a more positive impression of him as a person,” Guetzloe said.

Comey, who published a best-selling book in 2018, said at the event he was satisfied with his actions as FBI direc tor.

“I’m really proud of the way we conducted ourselves,” Comey said.

jasper.goodman@thecrimson.com

hcfa From Page 1 HCFA Continues to Receive Christian Union Funding

resignation of a bisexual assistant Bible course leader who said HCFA leadership pressured her to step down after learning of her same-sex relationship.

Harvard spokesperson Aar on M. Goldman wrote in a statement at the time that, in order to reverse its probationary status, HCFA would have to demon strate compliance both with Harvard’s non-discrimination policies and with “stated expec tations regarding local governance” — namely the requirement that student groups maintain “local autonomy.”

College spokesperson Ra chael Dane wrote in another Feb. 2018 statement that HCFA would need to sever ties with Christian Union in order to re gain recognition from the College at the end of the probation. At the time, Christian Union — a national organization that bankrolls religious groups at all eight Ivy League schools and Stanford — provided HCFA with financial support and “minis try fellows” to lead Bible study courses. HCFA’s probation con cluded in March 2019, and the club was restored to its regu lar recognized status, despite its last pair of co-presidents ac knowledging that HCFA continued to be “resourced” by Christian Union.

Dane declined to comment on behalf of the Dean of Students Office on Christian Union’s con tinued funding of HCFA in a Wednesday email. Christian Union’s website lists six fulltime staff members as part of its Harvard-based team. The orga nization’s 2017-2018 tax filings do not include the salaries of its Harvard staff, though they list the salaries of its highest-paid employees, such as former Co lumbia University ministry director Lane Young, who earned $130,717 in that fiscal year.

Mah’moud and Lai main tained that, despite the presence of these six advisors, HCFA is autonomous in its policy-mak ing decisions.

“HCFA is happy to accept outside support just like many other organizations on Har vard’s campus. HCFA is a student-led organization — students have made and continue to make all policy decisions,” they wrote in an email Wednesday. Don Weiss, Christian Union’s director of undergraduate min istry at Harvard, reiterated the point.

“HCFA leaders make all pol icy decisions,” he wrote in a Wednesday email. Mah’moud and Lai did directly answer questions as to whether HCFA made changes to its policies on its expectations for leaders during or after their probation period.

“Our leadership standards are commensurate with the standards of other devout reli gious, moral, and ethical communities on our campus. We are a fully recognized student organization in good standing with the college,” they wrote in a follow-up email Thursday. The Crimson reported in May 2018 that former Associate Dean of Students for Diversity and In clusion Roland S. Davis allegedly told a group of undergraduates in a private meeting that the College was reticent to sanction HCFA because Harvard did not want to be perceived as waging war on Christianity.

juliet.isselbacher@thecrimson.com

HGSU From Page 1

HGSU Claims NLRA Violation

universities across the nation await the imminent release of new federal Title IX guidelines. “[Harvard is] continuing to deny these protections, even as Betsy Devos’s Department of Education is working to roll back Title IX protections and other civil rights protections on cam pus,” Austiff wrote.

Austiff also alleged in the email that, in recent bargain ing sessions, the University has reneged on previously agreed upon proposals over issues such as workload provisions.

University spokesperson Ja son A. Newton declined to comment on the new bargaining session, citing the confidentiality of the mediation process.

Austiff further alleged that, under the National Labor Rela tions Act, “regressive bargaining” is illegal. She wrote that the University is relying on “the Trump National Labor Rela tions Board” — which is responsible for carrying out the law — to “not enforce student workers’ labor rights.”

Former NLRB chairman William B. Gould IV said in an interview that the behavior Aus tiff termed “regressive bargaining” does not constitute bargaining in bad faith, and thus, per the NLRA, is not illegal.

“To take a position that is less favorable to a union, which would be regressive bargaining, is not in and of itself an unfair la bor practice,” Gould said.

“I’m not even sure that it could be said that Harvard is en gaging in what would generally be called regressive bargaining based on these facts,” he added. HGSU’s email also stated that the University will not guaran tee a “union security” provision to ensure all student workers pay dues to the union.

Austiff wrote in the email that, after asking to meet with administrators to discuss these complaints, the University asked the union to instead file an un fair labor practice charge.

She wrote that, given that the federal board is currently dom inated by Trump appointees, bringing a charge before it might lead the NLRB to reverse the 2016 decision that permits stu dent unionization at private universities.

“The administration knows that to file a charge now would put all student workers at private universities at risk,” Austiff said. Gould said that asking HG SU-UAW to file such a charge could be illegal, especially without an explanation for the changed position.

“Now we know why they want them to file a charge here because the Trump Board will hold that the graduate students are not employees within the meaning of the law,” Gould said.

Proud to cover Harvard for 147 years and counting.

The Crimson thecrimson.com