特朗普与哈佛的冲突：3亿美国人的意识形态在分裂

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the escalating conflict between the Trump administration and Harvard University regarding the admission of international students, highlighting the ideological battle between right and left in the U.S. [1] Group 1: Background - The conflict stems from student protests against U.S. support for Israel, leading the Trump administration to accuse these movements of anti-Semitism and to impose restrictions on universities, including Harvard [4] - The Trump administration froze $2.6 billion in research funding to Harvard, which is significant given that Harvard's total revenue for 2024 is projected at $6.5 billion and its expenses at $6.4 billion [4] - Harvard's international students contribute over $300 million annually in tuition, making the administration's decision to revoke its ability to enroll international students impactful [4] Group 2: Ideological Divisions - The article identifies three core ideological conflicts shaping American society: globalism vs. nationalism, liberalism vs. conservatism, and elitism vs. populism [5][6][11] - Globalists advocate for U.S. involvement in international affairs and multiculturalism, while nationalists prioritize national interests and border control [7] - Liberals focus on individual rights and social justice, contrasting with conservatives who emphasize traditional values and limited government [10] - The rise of populism, exemplified by Trump, challenges the established elite, leading to a polarized information ecosystem where both sides have increasingly divergent views on facts [12] Group 3: Political Dynamics - The article notes that the Democratic Party is reflecting on its disconnect with ordinary citizens, as many feel alienated by the party's focus on diversity and identity politics [14] - Trump's support among Asian and Hispanic voters has increased, indicating a shift in political dynamics as these groups react against extreme policies [15] - The U.S. constitutional system is described as a balancing mechanism that encourages coexistence rather than the complete victory of one side over the other [15][16]