Giving Trump an inch is akin to surrender

Despite a series of legal wins against the Trump administration, Harvard officials have concluded that those victories alone might be insufficient to protect the university. So Harvard is reentering negotiations with Trump.

Among the sticking points with the Trump White House are issues of admissions, hiring, and viewpoint diversity.

Lawrence H. Summers, a former Harvard president, suggested in an interview with TheNew York Times on Monday that a deal, in and of itself, should not be seen as a surrender. “I don’t hear anyone at Harvard saying Harvard doesn’t need to work at diversity of perspective,” he said.

Hello? What the hell does “diversity of perspective” mean? More professors and students who believe in authoritarianism and fewer who believe in democracy? More courses emphasizing biblical views and fewer based on science? More students who are racist and xenophobic and fewer who are tolerant?

And who’s to decide when and whether Harvard’s “perspectives” have become sufficiently “diverse” anyway? Stephen Miller? Trump?

A deal with Trump would be a surrender if Harvard agrees to even a smidgeon of government oversight over who’s hired or admitted or what’s taught. Even negotiating with Trump gives his demands a degree of legitimacy he should never have.

Responsible leaders of American institutions must deal with the tyrant in the Oval Office by saying unequivocally “no” and unambiguously refusing to do what he demands.

There’s no reason for Harvard to negotiate. So far, federal courts have backed its independence. And the courts will continue to do so — if academic freedom means anything at all and the First Amendment still holds.

In the meantime, Harvard is sufficiently wealthy and prestigious to withstand Trump’s assaults. Not so with other universities in America — which makes it even more urgent that Harvard hang tough and lead the way with a firm “no.”

The “nos” of the brave institutional leaders who have stood up to Trump reverberate across America. They give courage to others. They enable people to see the tyrant for what and who he is. The meek “yeses” undercut American democracy.

Besides, it’s impossible to appease a tyrant. Negotiations only encourage him to ask for more.

After ABC settled a baseless lawsuit Trump filed against it for $15 million, Trump demanded CBS pay him even more to settle an even less credible charge. Trump’s lawsuits have never been about winning. They’ve been designed to impose financial and political costs on institutions that say and do things he doesn’t like.

When some of the nation’s biggest law firms agreed to deals with Trump, the initial terms appeared straightforward. But Trump then signaled far more ambitious plans for what he will call on those firms to do, and he sees their promises of nearly $1 billion in pro bono legal services as a legal war chest that he can do with as he wishes.

Leaders of America’s great institutions — of our top universities, law firms, museums, the media — should treat Trump for what he is: a liar, bully, conman, and malignant narcissist who cares only about wreaking vengeance and accumulating more personal power and wealth.

Negotiating with him only contributes to the dangerous mythologies of omnipotence and invincibility he is seeking to cultivate.

This is not a partisan political fight between the traditional political left and right, but a struggle between democracy and dictatorship.

At this perilous time in American history, the moral leadership of great American institutions like Harvard University is desperately needed.

Harvard should not negotiate.

Robert Reich is a professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/