书单｜特朗普对哈佛禁令背后的文化与历史

Group 1 - The article discusses President Trump's measures against Harvard University, including cutting federal funding and intervening in admissions policies, which has sparked widespread attention [1] - There is a notable divide in public opinion on Trump's actions, with some supporting the measures from ideological perspectives, viewing Harvard as a bastion of "leftist" ideology and blaming it for various societal issues [2][6] - The sentiment against elite institutions like Harvard is rooted in a long-standing tradition of anti-intellectualism in American society, as explored in Richard Hofstadter's book "Anti-intellectualism in American Life" [4][5] Group 2 - Hofstadter distinguishes between "intellect" and "intelligence," highlighting how practical intelligence is valued in American culture, while critical and reflective intellect is often marginalized [5] - The book illustrates how anti-intellectualism manifests across various sectors, including religion, politics, business culture, and education, revealing a recurring social sentiment against intellectualism [6] - The backlash against Harvard and similar institutions reflects a deeper cultural current of anti-elitism and skepticism towards higher education, which can undermine public reasoning and critical thinking [6] Group 3 - Michael Sandel's "The Tyranny of Merit" provides a counterpoint to the critique of anti-intellectualism by examining the responsibilities of elites and the ethical dilemmas of meritocracy [8][9] - Sandel argues that the obsession with meritocracy creates divisions and resentment, as it leads to a lack of empathy for those who struggle, framing their failures as personal shortcomings rather than systemic issues [10][11] - The phenomenon of Trump can be seen as a reaction to the arrogance of elites, with Harvard representing a microcosm of broader societal issues related to privilege and inequality [11] Group 4 - The economic context surrounding Trump's actions is explored through the lens of two books that address public misconceptions about economic issues, including immigration and trade [12][13] - "Good Economics for Hard Times" by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo aims to clarify economic narratives and correct misunderstandings that contribute to societal tensions [13][14] - The book emphasizes the importance of equitable distribution and the pursuit of human welfare, providing a framework for understanding the economic backdrop of political sentiments [15] Group 5 - "Strangers in Their Own Land" by Arlie Russell Hochschild delves into the individual experiences of conservative communities, revealing their feelings of alienation and betrayal in the face of social change [17][18] - Hochschild's research highlights the emotional narratives that shape political views, particularly among those who feel overlooked by the government and societal progress [19] - The parallels between Hochschild's findings and the sentiments of Trump's supporters illustrate a broader trend of discontent among marginalized groups in America [19] Group 6 - Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" provides historical context for understanding the rhetoric and mobilization strategies seen in Trump's political discourse [22][23] - The book traces the "paranoid style" in American politics, characterized by exaggerated fears and conspiratorial thinking, which resonates with contemporary political narratives [24] - This historical perspective helps to analyze the emotional and rhetorical underpinnings of Trump's support, revealing a pattern of distrust and division in American political culture [24] Group 7 - Karl Marx's "The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte" offers insights into the dynamics of power and class struggle, relevant for understanding Trump's rise and governance style [26][27] - Marx's analysis of political maneuvering amidst class conflict provides a framework for examining how Trump appeals to disaffected groups while potentially serving elite interests [28][29] - The book's exploration of historical patterns of political authority and social division can inform contemporary discussions about populism and elite dynamics in the U.S. [29]