觉悟没你
这么高,不考虑国家发展,考虑的就自己这一亩三分田。
对我个人来说,来美后最大的收获之一是明白了pursuit of happiness 是堂堂正正对个人来说的#1 priority, 没有人可以举着道德大旗说我应该怎么做,我妈都不行,更别说他人。
趁机跟你说:周末读了一篇,这篇在纸版的名字会是:Tower in flames 就想到你写的 “论象牙塔的倒掉”
Published in the print edition of the May 6, 2024, issue, with the headline “Tower in Flames.”
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/06/academic-freedom-under-fire
The right at stake in these events is that of academic freedom, a right that derives from the role the university plays in American life. Professors don’t work for politicians, they don’t work for trustees, and they don’t work for themselves. They work for the public. Their job is to produce scholarship and instruction that add to society’s store of knowledge. They commit themselves to doing this disinterestedly: that is, without regard to financial, partisan, or personal advantage. In exchange, society allows them to insulate themselves—and to some extent their students—against external interference in their affairs. It builds them a tower.
The pro-Palestinian demonstrators who created the conditions that the Jewish students allege are antisemitic are immunized by the First Amendment. “From the river to the sea” is a political slogan, classic protected speech. That is why Congress does not subpoena the demonstrators but goes after university presidents instead. The members of Congress who grilled Shafik want universities to punish demonstrators precisely because the government cannot.
Academic freedom is an understanding, not a law. It can’t just be invoked. It has to be asserted and defended. That’s why it’s so disheartening that leaders of great universities appear reluctant to speak up for the rights of independent inquiry and free expression for which Americans have fought. Even after Shafik offered up faculty sacrifices on the congressional altar and called in the N.Y.P.D., Republicans responded by demanding her resignation. If capitulation isn’t working, not much is lost by trying some defiance
木有文化
2024-05-05 22:02:59这篇 New Yorker 的文章写的很好,里面有很多我同意的观点