Viewpoint: Harvard graduate students are upset that a well-known American businessman and public official was gathered for an event to explore cutting authorities waste.
Recent events at the Institute of Politics caused Harvard University graduate students to vent their frustrations about Elon Musk’s unique position as head of the Department of Government Productivity.
The students expressed concern about Lord Dominic Johnson’s Monday night speech at The Crimson about DOGE, the federal agency that President Donald Trump has designated as the source of useless federal spending.
The graduate students, reflecting typical Ivy League elitism, lamented that Musk is not using “public servants – like those the Kennedy School trains”, but rather” twenty-something-year-old software engineers, including one who resigned after his racist social media activity resurfaced”.
( Fact check: That staffer will work for the federal government again, and Vice President JD Vance, who has an Indian wife, apologised to the staffer for his anti-Indian tweets. )
I’ll interpret the problems from Gabriella Aboulafia ( a former employee in the Trump administration ), Nadia Bell, and Amy Eisenstein:
Musk is letting young, adult school students help shake up the federal authorities. However, they didn’t attend wealthy universities like we did! I mean, that one gentleman dropped out of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln! We went to Berkeley, and UNC, and Northwestern ( for a history and gender studies degree ). We’re the professionals! We’ve worked as “policy” experts.
According to his biography, Johnson served as a secretary in the section of business after decades of experience in the fields of finance and investment. In other words, he sounds like a great man when it comes to discussing what worked and didn’t in the UK and what the United States is learn from it.
]embedded information]
But the student pupils were upset, saying Harvard was” involved” in “democratic backsliding”. The budding academics and open plan “experts” wrote:
The Kennedy School’s portrayal of DOGE as a traditional government establishment follows today’s event, demonstrating to the people that it is a reliable source of information rather than a renegade entity. It is dangerous and careless to discuss the potential benefits of DOGE while ignoring its blatant disregard for the rule of law.
The individuals claim that they only want to axe conservative speakers who use a different discretion than they do. Even.
Writing of possible choices, the students suggested:
For instance, a thoughtful IOP-hosted occasion on this topic was examine questions like: How may we increase political efficiency? Is it best to involve the personal business in this endeavor? Which governments have the best regulation systems, and how can we take lessons from them?
The authors claimed to have been present at the conversation, but I’m curious as to what they might have missed. since all of those subjects were covered in the conversation. Discover a sampling below.
Stephen Gibson, a former American politician with a background in regulatory economy, was likewise present at the event.
The pair discussed what Johnson learned, including the” problems” he faced in deregulation.
That sounds like how to “enhance state performance” and “effective regulation techniques”.
Johnson said he “failed magnificently” in his work.
It is noble to be polite, but it’s unfortunate that Harvard graduate kids haven’t yet learned that lesson.
Less: Elise Stefanik is no longer a member of the Institute of Politics expert table.
IMAGE: Frederic Legrand – COMEO/Shutterstock.
Follow The College Fix on Twitter and Like us on Instagram.
