Michael Sandel is one of the most influential political philosophers in the world—popular like a rockstar. He teaches at Harvard, where he leads the renowned Justice course, followed online by tens of millions of people. His books, translated into over 30 languages—the latest being The Tyranny of Merit—tackle crucial themes such as ethics, inequality, democracy, and the common good. This interview begins with the Trump administration’s assault on Harvard but expands into a profound reflection on American democracy and the role of cultural institutions under attack. Sandel calls it «a real threat to democracy» comparing the U.S. president to Orbán and Erdoğan.
Professor Sandel, Donald Trump has launched a direct attack on Harvard University. In your view, is he putting American democracy at risk?
«President Trump’s attack on Harvard University is part of a wider attempt to exert power beyond the institutions of government to America’s cultural, intellectual, and civic institutions. We have seen this in his long-standing attack on the national media, which he has called “the enemy of the people,” and in his attempt to intimidate law firms that have represented his political opponents. He now wants to intimidate and control major universities, of which Harvard is the most visible symbol. These attacks on the autonomy and independence of institutions within civil society, if successful, would put democracy at risk».
Trump has called for Harvard’s tax-exempt status to be revoked. What do you think is the real – both symbolic and practical – impact of such a move?
«Private universities, as not-for-profit institutions, are tax exempt. Trump’s call to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status is unlikely to succeed. The law prohibits a president from interfering with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which administers the tax laws, or from using it to punish his political opponents. As with many of his actions, Trump is trying to test the limits of legal restraints on his power. The symbolic effect of his threat is to insist that Harvard does not serve the public good, which is the rationale for the tax-exempt status of universities».
He also proposed cutting $2.2 billion in public funding to Harvard and other “hostile” universities. What would that mean for the American higher education system?
»Actually, the $2.2 billion is the amount Trump has cut in funding for Harvard alone. He is threatening additional funding cuts for other universities. American universities receive more than $60 billion a year in federal funds for research, much of it devoted to biomedical research and scientific innovation. Trump is trying to use this federal money as a weapon to punish universities he considers “hostile” to him. Such cuts will not only damage the global standing of American universities; they will also slow the pace of scientific research and discovery».
What is the impact of Trump’s recent threat to ban student visas for foreign students?
«Trump’s threat to ban student visas for foreign students is even more damaging to higher education than his threat to withhold billions of dollars in federal funding. Sixteen per cent of Harvard undergraduates and one-quarter of Harvard students overall (including graduate and professional schools) are international students. Their presence on our campuses enriches the educational experience for everyone. It makes us less parochial in our outlook; it challenges our complacencies; it broadens our intellectual horizons; it connects us to the world».
Do you see these attacks as part of a deliberate strategy against the academic and intellectual world? What for?
«Yes, these attacks are a deliberate assault on academia, which Trump sees as a bastion of “woke” ideology and liberal values. In this respect, Trump’s strategy is similar to the attacks on academic freedom carried out by Viktor Orban in Hungary and Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey. Trump claims elite universities are elitist, politicized, and disconnected from “real Americans.” To what extent does that reflect a real fracture in American society? Over the past decade, the public’s confidence in higher education has declined, from 57 percent expressing confidence in 2015 to only 36 percent in 2023. The drop has been most dramatic among Republicans, only 19 percent of whom now say they have confidence in higher education. Support for universities has become a partisan issue. Here’s another measure: Three-fourths (74%) of Democrats view universities has having a positive impact on the country, but fewer than one-third (31%) of Republicans do. Trump has encouraged and exploited this partisan divide».
You have often spoken of the «tyranny of merit». Do you think universities have, in part, contributed to the resentment that Trump is now capitalizing on?
«Yes, universities bear some responsibility for their declining public support and for contributing to the resentment that Trump exploits. In my book “The Tyranny of Merit,”, I argue that universities have not been the engines of upward mobility they promise to be. In some cases, they provide avenues for opportunity for talented students from low-income families; but on the whole, they have reenforced and entrenched existing inequalities. This is because affluent parents are able to provide their children the economic and cultural advantages to compete successfully for admission to top universities. Here is an illustration: Elite American universities provide generous financial aid policies. At Harvard, students from families who earn less than $200,000 per year attend free, without having to pay tuition. Those whose families earn less than Inserisci qui il tuo testo00,000 per year pay no tuition and no living expenses; students’ housing, meals, books, and other expenses are all provided. A yet, despite this generous policy, there are more students at these universities from families in the top one per cent of the income scale than there are students from families in the entire bottom half of the income scale. This is because few students from lower income families are able to win the intense competition for admission».
What responsibility do academic elites bear in fostering the sense of exclusion and injustice felt by many Americans?
In recent decades, universities have become “sorting machines.” They define the merit and confer the credentials that a market-driven, meritocratic society rewards. The college premium (the earnings advantage that college graduates have over those without a diploma) has been growing. During the age of globalization, politicians of the center-left left and the center- right responded to widening inequality and stagnant wages by telling people to get a university degree. “If you want to compete and win in the global economy,” they said, “go to university. What you earn will depend on what you learn.” Those who offered this answer to inequality missed the implicit insult it conveyed: “If you are struggling in the new economy, and if you didn’t go to university, your failure is your fault.” That’s the implication. It’s no wonder many working people felt resentful. In The Tyranny of Merit, I suggest that many Americans without university degrees feel looked down upon by credentialled elites. They feel that the work they do isn’t valued or respected by those in the professional classes who sit astride the economy. One the deepest divides in voting behavior today is between those with, and those without a university degree. Trump overwhelming won the votes of those without a degree».
Universities are meant to be spaces for open dialogue, yet today they are accused of being closed and ideological. How can critical thinking be defended in this climate?
«Many students report that they are uncomfortable voicing their opinions on controversial topics in the classroom and in campus conversations. Equally troubling, many professors say they are uncomfortable introducing ethically charged questions in their classrooms. This is a serious problem. University classrooms and campuses should be places of open inquiry, discussion, and debate. We need to cultivate the art of thinking together, reasoning together, arguing together about the moral and civic questions of our time. For this to be possible, we need to cultivate the art of listening—respectfully and sympathetically—especially to those with whom we disagree».
Political polarization is now penetrating campuses. Do you see a real risk to academic freedom in the U.S.?
«The most serious threat to academic freedom comes from the Trump administration’s attempts to intervene in the hiring and admissions policies of universities, to monitor the “viewpoint diversity” of academic programs, and to deport international students who express political opinions it dislikes. For their part, universities have a responsibility to cultivate in students the ability to engage in vigorous political debate with civility and mutual respect, even when passions run high. This isn’t always easy, as we’ve seen over the past year».
Do civic education and moral philosophy still have a place in universities under attack?
«Yes. Civic education and moral philosophy are more important than ever at a time when universities are under attack. Last fall semester, I revised and reinstated my course “Justice: Ethical Reasoning in Polarized Times,” in support of Harvard’s efforts to promote civil discourse on campus. (For years, the Justice course has been freely available online, where it has been viewed by tens of millions of people.) Students are eager to think through the big ethical questions we confront in politics and in our everyday lives. They want a better kind of public discourse than the shrill, angry fare we find on social media. Universities have a responsibility to equip students to engage effectively as democratic citizens with big questions that matter: What makes for a just society? How should we contend with climate change, immigration, AI, widening inequality? What do we owe one another as fellow citizens?».
What do you say to those – like Trump – who argue that universities produce ideologues rather than informed citizens?
«If universities fall short in promoting effective civic education, the problem will not be solved by autocratic attempts by the government to enforce its notion of ideological balance. The solution is for universities to give greater emphasis to courses in moral and political philosophy, and to create campus climates hospitable to vigorous but respectful political debate».
You are one of the most widely respected philosophical voices in the world. What role should a university like Harvard play in defending democracy today?
«In my opinion, Harvard should work to defend democracy in the face of these attacks in three ways: First, it should continue to resist the unlawful measures Trump has used to punish Harvard for its supposed offenses (mostly unspecified and unproven), and challenge them in court. Second, it should strengthen its curricular emphasis on moral and civic education. Third, it should undertake a bold project, along with other universities, to restore the credibility of higher education with the American public. This project should make the case that universities exist not only for the benefit of the privileged few who attend them, but that they are, or can become, institutions that serve the public good—and in ways that go beyond their contributions to biomedical research. For example, why not make hundreds of courses freely available online to the public? Why not partner with public schools in low-income communities to improve public education for all students, including those who will not make it to the Ivy League? To defend democracy in this time of peril, universities like Harvard need to make their case in the court of public opinion».
Could this clash between politics and academia escalate into a broader institutional crisis?
«It has already escalated quite dramatically, and could transform the relation between higher education and the federal government that has prevailed since the Second World War».
How can the trust between universities and the American public be rebuilt?
«Universities need to persuade the American public that they serve the public good, not only the career prospects of the students fortunate enough to win admission. This will require more than a public relations campaign reminding people of their scientific and technological discoveries. It will require universities like Harvard to give greater emphasis to their democratic mission– improving public education, providing resources for civic education accessible to everyone».
Finally, what future do you see for American universities – and for American democracy – if attacks like Trump’s continue or intensify?
«American universities serve democracy insofar as they are independent institutions devoted to teaching, learning, and the pursuit of truth. Trump’s attempt to intimidate universities and bend them to his will threatens both higher education and American democracy».
23 aprile 2025
© RIPRODUZIONE RISERVATA
