Thank you so much, Dr. Katz, for elucidating eloquently what it means to love a subject unequivocally without ulterior motives. As an incomparably inferior classicist and linguist, I know how much a teacher like you means to students. You and your peers are far and few between yet have evolved the intellectual creativity of many.

Expand full comment

first observation is that you never let someone who has a built in Bias tell you what needs to happen. He gets a nice big check from a University and wants it to continue. So that sort of disqualifies almost everything he wrote. I read many comments that nail the reality down and that is the colleges are not longer about merit and excellency and coupled that with a declining college aged population we find that we have way too many duplicative places of higher education and the only way to weed them down is to expose them to the free market. IE cut off the subsidies called Student loans and grants let them figure out how to get more price competitive and actually provide value for what they do.

Expand full comment

Third party student loan guarantees have removed market accountability from higher education in the US. Too much of the money goes to administration, which is enforcing Discrimination, Exclusion and Incitement (DEI) and Compulsive Racist Theory (CRT). Although it may not seem so, judging people by the color of their skin, rather than the content of their character, violates both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended and the 14th Amendment. Nowhere does it say straight white men are second class citizens who may be discriminated against to make up for the racism of their possible ancestors, even if they can prove descent from abolitionists, Union soldiers, civil rights activists or even freedom riders, or arrivals after 1965.

DEI & CRT are contrary to academic freedom and should be supressed. State governments should start the process by outlawing mandated or even optional DEI & CRT at state funded colleges & universities. Failure to comply should lead to high level administrators getting fired without delay, pour encourager les autres. Give the governor the power to do the firing, by law.

Student support for any terrorist organization should lead to loss of all funding, cancelation of all federally guaranteed loans, and if repeated, expulsion. If saying there are only 2 biological sexes is "hate speech," then supporting a genocidal organization that seeks hand to hand combat with Jewish babies in daycare is definitely hate speech. From the quad to the dorm, campus should be free of genocidal idiots. Send them home. Zero tolerance.

Jews are indigenous to Israel for 3,000 years. Anti-colonialism based on starting the clock in 1948 is ridiculous. Start the clock at 1500 BCE.

Expand full comment

They are beyond saving. Literally. There is nothing left to save.

Bari et al are correct. New, cancer free institutions must be built to replace them.

To make it work, though, American businesses need to stop hiring students from today's elite universities. This will dry up the demand for the old, corrupt activist generation machines now masquerading as places of learning.

Expand full comment

I wouldn't burn down the Universities, but I would eliminate student loans (or scale them way back), not so as to punish the colleges, but to force them to start teaching useful information. It's the middle class students are who get stuck with these loans while not learning useful skills, and then they can't pay them back. Make the colleges themselves fund financial aid, or better yet, lower their prices. Make them use their endowments. Stop paying professors who rarely teach huge salaries. This would force the universities to clean house, since these loans kids are taking out are a major source of a university's income. Make the schools pay their own way, and these radical crazy people will be gone. There is no point in the government continuing to drive students into debt for a poor or radicalized education. Cut off the money.

Expand full comment

Homer doesn't need academics. He will survive. But academics have abandoned Homer for revolutionary pursuits. And they are destroying minds, institutions and the truth in the process. And they don't care. I don't think anything other than the buildings and the libraries are of much use (there are always a few exceptions). It's time to pull the plug on government funding, tax them like businesses and require full disclosure from any institution that takes any money from the public or the government. Let's see what applying GAAP principles, SEC reporting rules and Sarbanes Oxley might reveal. And let's start a pool about how long garbage departments like Ethnic and Peace and Diversity Studies would survive if the schools actually had to pay for them from money they earned, not extracted.

We would all like to return to those halcyon days when academics aspired to an ascetic life of the mind, free to inquire and write and tech. But that is no longer the case. Universities are over-funded, co-opted entirely from top-to-bottom with leftist, illiberal ideologues. Those who might object are busy getting government grants so they can monetize the labs that students and endowments fund for their own benefit. The entire enterprise has become corrupted - with 90%+ of faculty everywhere being sucked into (or shoving) garbage oaths to garbage programs funded by unknowing and unwitting taxpayers. And by the very nature of the 'tenured' faculty, nothing short of a purge (defunding and failure) can change any of this.

I have degrees from several top 10 universities - and I don't give a pauper's damn about them until we clear the decks. And by the way, I preferred Hume and Wittgenstein... but certainly admired Ulysses courage.

Expand full comment

Good luck. People respond to incentive structures and right now, the incentive for most profs who aren't in STEM is to toe the leftist line. It's gross and corrupt but it is what it is.

It takes Elon level of money - and a lot of commitment- to combat this.

Expand full comment

We all Rightly criticize what is (and has been) going on, on University/College campuses. Thing is many (most) students are already indoctrinated (or at least Exposed) to Progressive/Woke Ideology by the time they arrive. The Heart of the problem lays in The Schools Of Education.

James Lindsay The School Choice Trap


Apr 20, 2022 New Discourses Bullets

New Discourses Bullets, Ep. 3

School choice is an important component not only of liberty and improving educational outcomes but also of defeating the Woke Marxist influence in our schools and upon our children. It isn't so easy as making the money follow the child or the backpack however. School choice legislation has to be smart, and it has some challenges in need of clever solutions before we blunder ahead into a trap the Woke Marxists are setting for us. In this episode of New Discourses Bullets, James Lindsay spends a few minutes breaking down the challenges and pitfalls of bad school choice policy by explaining how it will fail to solve the essential problem and might even walk our communities and our children into a Woke trap even worse than what we currently see in the public schools.

Expand full comment

Medgard Evers was shot trying to cross a street. I say this because no matter how bad people ave it there were Americans who fought for schooling who out with with far worse. I don't say this to underestimate the current threats but to stiffen the spine of those who oppose the new clerisy.

Expand full comment

The FP should explore recent attempts at reform in the Florida public universities, to help us distill which aspects should be abandoned as misguided and which ones may constitute a reasonable path forward.

Expand full comment

I have—for decades—-(I’m 65) thought that the invention of new BS departments/“studies” not only diluted the University but were destined to be a cancer that would take over and destroy them. Eliminate these bogus departments and degrees. Sanity will return.

Expand full comment

Bogus, is the right word.

Expand full comment

Katz takes a cheap shot by mocking the trans scholar who studies rivers and then follows up with this: "I must also mention that knowledge of the kind most people deem useless can suddenly become very useful." The context before and after this part of the essay demonstrates the author is being inconsistent; he sets up a punchline that compares the hydrologist with another classical scholar in order to denigrate the trans hydrologist. Not only is such pettiness unbecoming, but it is brazen hypocrisy given the sanctimony that follows to the end of the essay.

I went and looked up the work by the trans hydrologist. As a former professional theatre producer who worked with some of the greatest performance artists of the 20th century and other more mainstream figures, and as a mid-career change into water use, law, and politics, I have a unique perspective on the topics this transgender hydrologist studies -- and it is fascinating.

Oh, but you may wish to denigrate me -- good luck with that: I'm, armed to the teeth with privilege, educated at a ritzy New England boarding school, then private liberal arts college, then at a UC graduate program; I'm a white cis-gender heterosexual male, and put the blade down on the bulldozer in first gear when writing critiques and cracking skulls.

Katz should never have been run out of Princeton; the school showed its weakness. Unfortunately, Katz has shown his as well.

Expand full comment

Why mention Transgender at all?

Expand full comment

Because the author of the article did in his disrespectful statement:

"...the environmental scientist who describes “zerself” as a “salmon oracle” (no, I’m not making this up) and who last year published a monograph with a major academic press that (and I quote) “explores how a queer-trans-feminist approach can ally with indigenous praxis to renew human-water-fish relations.”"

It is precisely the quality of being transgender the author is demeaning that makes the hydrologist's work so fascinating and "useful." I just ordered their book " Underflows: Queer Trans Ecologies and River Justice." The hydrologist explores how we are all just more of the river flowing through the lens of being queer transgender.

Expand full comment

I had no idea that being trans is required as a prerequisite to be able to study human-river-fish interactions. Did the patriarchy dominating previous study deform results significantly?

Silly me, I thought you were a scientist whose observations were independent of who the observer was. That way the truth discovered was universal. I guess now trans truth is different from cis normative truth?

I guess that at 73, I am too old and mis-or mal-educated to understand today's gender fluid world and its interactions with fluid dynamics in rivers. Or perhaps you're weaponising gender fluidity to invalidate objective science as a way to destroy modern engineering? Smashing the patriarchy is obviously much more important than modern sewage systems built with excessively white cis norm math and engineering.

Expand full comment

You make assertions and complaints that no one has made -- neither I, Joshua Katz, nor the hydrologist who brings their life to the work they do.

No one said being trans is a prerequisite to study human-river-fish interactions.

Not since the early-mid 20th century did scientists think they were separate from their experiments; indeed, the very act of coming up with a creative hypothesis is inseparable from the scientist who chooses what to think and then go test for it. All credible experiments must be replicable in other labs by other people; if a scientist brings their life to their work in unique and creative ways and others can objectively replicate that work, then we have the best of both worlds: a creative and human exploration that others can confirm and connect with in the process of advancing knowledge and experience. This is the standard now for over 70+ years.

No one has speculated on you and your abilities; only you have done so. And no one has suggested that patriarchy has to be smashed in order for other perspectives to exist -- only you put forth the idea that they are mutually exclusive. There is a very important term that came out of the Enlightenment called "Pluralism," which is the idea that multiple ideas can coexist. Both patriarchy and other systems of power can and do coexist. Being queer and viewing the world through other lenses than patriarchal lenses is one way to live that exists alongside other ways of living. No one has told you you can be who you are and live the way you do, however that life may be.

You should know that most math is done by non-white males these days. One of my friends graduated from U Chicago as a math wizard and they are queer transgender; my niece graduated with an incomprehensible level of math as a major; my daughter probably won't go into math but has such a high level of understanding and near perfect math SAT score that my eyes glaze over; hundreds of thousands, if not millions of citizens from may Asian nations are extraordinary engineers, many of whom are women. No one said anything about smashing patriarchy and invalidating objective science and the minority of "cis-norm math and engineering."

I am fascinated at what fear and loathing look like: it's people who manufacture statements and claims such as you have done here -- putting words and presumptions into the discussion no one has said. To the author's credit and to the trans hydrologist he defames, neither have said for one perspective to exist another must necessarily be silenced. How people like you come to the conclusion of a "zero-sum" or "mutually-exclusive" reality is a branch of psychology and sociology that ought to be studied by a diverse and wide community of scientists from a range of backgrounds to really get a pluralistic view of the condition. You, sir, are worthy of being studied -- the subject of a scientific experiment!

Expand full comment

Sorry if I broke your rice bowl. Science should be independent of the sexual orientation of the scientist. If it ain't, then it ain't science. I am tired of people who claim that a trans approach to science brings new insight. It shouldn't. Unless you are investigating the sexual orientation of fish, it shouldn't make any difference.

The laws of fluid dynamics are not dependent on the sexual orientation of the observer. If you think they are, you ain't a scientist. I don't care about your sexual orientation, because it's scientifically irrelevant unless the paper is about sexual orientation.

I have lifelong friends that are gay. I have no hate for anyone. You, on the other hand, seem to have a new, unprecedented, required framework for science & politics that's completely intolerant of opposing views. Sorry, but I won't comply. The Party will not censor my thoughts. For the moment at least, the Bill of Rights is still in force. Good luck with being a domestic enemy of the Constitution.

Expand full comment

Rice bowl? I don't get the reference.

You said: "You, on the other hand, seem to have a new, unprecedented, required framework for science & politics that's completely intolerant of opposing views."

You realize what you said is the exact opposite of what I spoke about above when I said: "There is a very important term that came out of the Enlightenment called "Pluralism," which is the idea that multiple ideas can coexist. Both patriarchy and other systems of power can and do coexist. Being queer and viewing the world through other lenses than patriarchal lenses is one way to live that exists alongside other ways of living."

And when I said: "How people like you come to the conclusion of a "zero-sum" or "mutually-exclusive" reality is a branch of psychology and sociology that ought to be studied by a diverse and wide community of scientists from a range of backgrounds to really get a pluralistic view of the condition."

The fundamental basis of pluralism is embracing opposing views. Yet you accuse the person (me) who supports pluralism as being intolerant of opposing views. You become more and more interesting to study as the dialogue advances.

You mention the party will not censor your thoughts. No one ever said your thoughts were to be censored -- that's un-American and uninteresting. Your thoughts are central to the American ideal -- to say whatever you want, think whatever you want regardless of how inconsistent, hypocritical, or uninformed others make think of you. I'd carry a gun to war -- one of my many -- to defend your right to ignorant non-sequiturs, if not because it would also protect all rights to free speech, but because of the entertainment value.

As a card-carrying paying subscriber of The Free Press and proud Real American, I appreciate this opportunity to engage a person who thinks the world is out to get them and that they are under attack by people who, just by living their own lives, threaten your sense of safety, security, and welfare. While ideas are powerful and diverse lifestyles are fascinating, they are not out to get you. You live your life true to your own self and quit worrying about how others live theirs and sooner than later, you'll find peace and serenity is this dynamic and interesting world you are not the center of.

Expand full comment

Good Lord! LOL.

“explores how a queer-trans-feminist approach can ally with indigenous praxis to renew human-water-fish relations.”

(A saying I have recently been using Quite A Bit) Just When I think Things Can't Get Any Crazier...Turns Out I'm Wrong."

Coming from a family that views Fishing Opener as High Holy Day, I view human-water-fish relations, as VERY Important!

Expand full comment

Yes, fishing is one of the most important activities holding families and societies together -- The Public Trust Doctrine is a 2,000 year old law going back to roman times that holds water in trust to protect fisheries and navigable rivers. Native Americans entire cultures were held together by anadromous fish migrations.

The Free Press exists to preserve and promote the liberty of thought and pressing out into new areas of thought and reporting on a wide range of ideas other media won't touch. I believe TFP is about fearlessly being present with an open mind to see what others are not.

Expand full comment

"The Free Press exists to preserve and promote the liberty of thought and pressing out into new areas of thought and reporting on a wide range of ideas other media won't touch."


Expand full comment

Homelessness; drug abuse; human trafficking; violate the law until caught; unequality; inequality; racial discrimination; religious discrimination; mass poverty; 400,000 people dying from medical and hospital malpractice a year; huge percent of our population cannot adequately read or write; hell half of america could not understand your article; That is what academia has taught and continues to teach. The rest of what you said is bullshit propaganda.You sir have wasted a perfectly good life. BTW Princeton is now a muslim controlled school.

Expand full comment

The advent and the explosion of the internet,social media, and AI is destroying the educational institutions. The youth know how to use and game the systems far better than the professors. Cheating( having AI do the work)is rampant in all fields of study. I am told that the first 2 years of medical school are virtual ( started before covid but that sealed the fate of in person classes) .Real human- face to face interaction is rapidly dying and with that education as we once knew it is gone. What a professor thinks he or she is teaching is no longer what the students are receiving. It is an alien enterprise and will not be remedied with traditional means if at all.

Expand full comment

I hope you are right!

Expand full comment

Thank you Professor.

Expand full comment