Letters to the Editor: The goal of higher education is not to churn out ‘godly patriots’

To the editor: In his opinion piece about the President Trump-Harvard University clash, contributing columnist Josh Hammer asserts that American higher education has defaulted on the quid-quo-pro deal to churn out “godly patriots” in exchange for public support (“Trump’s clash with Harvard puts higher ed on notice,” April 20).

Given that he has an undergraduate degree in economics from Duke University and a law degree from the University of Chicago, I’m sure he can point me to the “Intro to Godly Patriots 101” classwork he completed at either school. But, given the soggy weight of his theocratic entitlement, he should go back for a do-over and hopefully learn the basics of critical thinking, especially the difference between education and indoctrination.

Rev. Gary M. Keene, Ventura

..

To the editor: The real kick in the gut was “the problem of higher education churning out not godly patriots but decadent ingrates.” I supported my children’s higher education to allow them to excel in their field of study, not to become a “godly patriot.” I would like to let Hammer know that my successful, well-rounded children are not decadent ingrates.

Kathy Monaco, Huntington Beach

..

To the editor: Without providing any evidence, Hammer condemns “the fiscal and cultural excesses of elite American higher education.” Hammer is annoyed that these institutions benefit from a lower tax rate on their endowments and ought to be taxed at rates comparable to private businesses or investment funds that may or may not provide any tangible public benefit. In the case of most corporations and high net worth individuals, they are taxed at a significantly lower rate than the average working-class stiff.

As for university endowments, their purpose is to provide a wide array of public benefits to students, faculty, infrastructure and, through technical, medical, social and other research, to society in general.

But Hammer opposes cultural excesses, which is conservative-speak for a liberal education. Instead, Hammer favors a curriculum that instills “love of their faith traditions, their nation and God.” May sound right for a religious institution, but not for a university that is dedicated to free speech and the robust exposure to a wide range of viewpoints in the ideologically unimpaired pursuit of knowledge.

Andrew Spathis, Los Angeles

..

To the editor: Another Sunday, another screed of legalistic fantasy mumbo-jumbo from Hammer, none of it based on law or in reality. That the L.A. Times would publish this stuff is insulting to all who can read above a third-grade level.

Scott Hughes, Westlake Village