They first came for Columbia | Notice

Like many autocrats before him, Donald Trump launched what could be a devastating attack against universities.

During the last week, the Trump administration has canceled $ 400 million in subsidies and contracts at Columbia University and 800 million dollars in Johns Hopkins University.

The two schools appeared on a list of 10 universities (including Harvard) that the Ministry of Justice announced that it was investigating politicized anti -Semitism allegations. The Ministry of Education later launched a similar survey of 60 universities.

And last week, the administration arrested a former student who did not for a crime but for his political speech on campus. Trump, who is committed to punishing universities that allow illegal demonstrations, calls him the first arrest to come.

Until now, the universities of the managers of the Americas have remained practically silent in the face of this authoritarian aggression against higher education establishments. It must change. Harvard must get up, speak and direct a public defense of our freedom to speak and study freely.

The left and right autocrats always attack universities. The justification of the public varies. A bit like Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua And Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Türkiyewould accuse universities or students of supporting terrorism; Others, such as pro-government points of sale to Hungarian Viktor Orbans, accuse them of Work for foreign interests; Still others, like Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in Mexico, accused universities of supporting neoliberalism and corruption.

But they are pretexts. Universities are independent ideas and often important dissent centers. Autocrats are allergic to the sources of dissent, they therefore seek almost invariably to silence them, weaken them or control them.

The Trump administration is no different. His pretension to fight the anti -Semitic rings of the campus as hollow as Ortegas said that the alleged fighting terrorism at the University of the Jesuits of Nicaraguas. The administration armed the fight against anti -Semitism as a means of another end: to punish and weaken universities.

Most of the universities, including Harvard, responded to these attacks with self-service strategies. They are blurred, avoiding public debate (and sometimes cooperate with the administration) in the hope of alleviating the upcoming assault. To our knowledge, no major university direction has publicly denounced the attack on Columbia or Mahmoud Khalil. Faced with an open assault on an institution of the Ivy League and the basic principles of freedom of expression, Harvard remains silent. With American democracy at stake, the university has crawled in a protective shell.

Not only is silence in the face of increasing authoritarianism morally reprehensible, but, as the case of Columbia suggests, this does not work. Columbias Leadership made repeated concessions to right -wing criticism, to be the first to be attacked.

Staying silent will not protect us, but it comes with at least two major costs.

First, not to speak of Harvards discourages other more vulnerable universities to take measures, which undermines our collective defenses. If Columbia or another university confronts the administration itself, it will lose. If the Americas nearly 6,000 universities and colleges are launching a campaign to defend higher education, it is likely that Trump will lose.

Someone has to direct this collective effort. And if Harvard and other leading universities remain in their protective shells, there is a good chance that nobody will do it.

Second, and above all, silence gives way public debate. Public opinion is not formed in a vacuum. Research in social sciences is clear: in the absence of a compensatory message, a unilateral debate will powerfully shape public opinion. As long as he confronted no public with higher education leaders, Trump will punish universities and will not pay any cost at the Court of Public Opinion. If Harvard and other universities make a vigorous defense of higher education and the principles of freedom of expression and democracy, a large part of the public will come together by his side.

Our ability to carry out research, teach and speak freely is threatened. This can be an existential moment for higher education. Colleges and universities are a key element in the fabric of American society. What we do is essential to the American economy, technology, public health and scientific advancement in general.

Americans have an interest in the success of higher education establishments. Important stakeholders include companies and their CEOs, hospitals and their doctors, public schools and teachers, parents, former students and elected officials. But many of them fear raising their voice. Harvard has the stature to mobilize them. It also has the financial and institutional strength to resist the rise in undemocratic attacks.

As schoolchildren, many of us have read the poem by the German pastor Martin Niemollers, they came. Written just after the Holocaust, Niemollers' poem highlights the moral and practical cost of allowing fear (or indifference) to prevent us from expressing themselves when others are targeted.

We have to learn from the past. We cannot remain silent in the face of authoritarian attacks against our peers, even if they have not yet come for us.

Ryan D. Enos is professor of government. Steven Levitsky is Professor David Rockefeller for Latin American Studies and Professor of Government.