Harvard’s ivory tower just took a serious hit as a veteran professor bids farewell with a scathing critique of its progressive turn.
James Hankins, after 40 years at Harvard, announced his retirement in a piercing essay published in Compact Magazine on Monday, decrying the university’s shift toward policies he sees as discriminatory against white males and detrimental to academic standards, Breitbart reports.
His decision to step away wasn’t made on a whim, as Hankins himself noted it was “not a sudden one,” reflecting deep frustration with changes he witnessed over recent years.
Back in the late 1990s, Hankins saw the groundwork for today’s issues when feminist activists pushed for equal representation in faculty hires, leading to the scrapping of Harvard’s rigorous “two-book standard” for proving expertise. This move, he argues, lowered academic benchmarks to meet demographic goals since women held fewer than 10% of history PhDs at the time.
Fast forward to the fall of 2020, and Hankins encountered troubling shifts in graduate admissions while reviewing applicants. He found a stellar candidate, but was quietly informed by an admissions committee member that admitting a white male was off the table for that year.
This wasn’t an isolated incident, as Hankins later learned of a “certifiably brilliant” white male student who was rejected from every graduate program he applied to. Such outcomes suggest a pattern, not a fluke, and raise hard questions about fairness in academia’s gatekeeping.
Hankins dug deeper, reaching out to colleagues at other universities, only to uncover a disturbing consistency—admissions committees nationwide were following similar unspoken rules to exclude white males, with rare exceptions tied to unique personal histories.
Then came the university’s response to major societal events, including the George Floyd riots, which Hankins described as Harvard having “collectively taken a knee.” That response, he argues, reshaped admissions with “serious consequences,” tilting the scales further against merit-based decisions.
Adding to his grievances, Hankins endured nearly two years of what he called “tyrannous invasions of private life” under Harvard’s strict coronavirus rules. For a man who dedicated four decades to the institution, such overreach likely felt like a betrayal of trust between scholar and school.
These policy shifts, Hankins contends, are eroding the foundation of education itself. He points to the replacement of Western civilization courses with global history as a misstep that harms the socialization of young Americans.
In his view, this curricular overhaul contributes to a broader “moral and intellectual disorientation” among the younger generation. When core teachings about civilization vanish, he warns, the result is predictable: a less civilized society.
Beyond admissions and curriculum, Hankins also saw the department increasingly promote junior faculty after standards were adjusted. This rush to elevate, he suggests, mirrors congressional recklessness in spending.
Reflecting on his long tenure, Hankins doesn’t just lament personal slights; he’s sounding an alarm for academia’s future.
His exit essay isn’t merely a goodbye—it’s a call to rethink the direction of elite institutions like Harvard. While some may dismiss his views as outdated, others might see a principled stand against a system veering off course.
In the end, Hankins’ retirement marks more than the end of a career. As debates over fairness and standards in education rage on, his words offer a sobering reminder: even hallowed halls can lose their way.
