The days of giving out of nostalgia are over. It’s time for donors to speak up.
On May 23, the House Education and Workforce Committee will hear testimony from Northwestern University President Michael Schill, Rutgers University President Jonathan Holloway, and University of California, Los Angeles Chancellor Gene Block as part of their continued investigation into the takeover of antisemitic activity on college campuses. Northwestern was one of the first universities to cave and make concessions with anti-Israel encampment occupants and protestors in recent weeks.
Since the October 7 attack by Hamas, Hillel International recorded an alarming 700% increase in antisemitic incidents against Jewish students on college campuses compared to the same period in 2022. While antisemitism on college campuses is not a new problem, the current uptick in virulent antisemitic rhetoric, protests and violence has exposed a glaring bigotry and hypocrisy in today’s social justice movement.
Universities have spent millions on so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) resources and staff and made numerous public statements in support of racial equity and justice. And yet, in December, three presidents of the most elite universities in America–Harvard, MIT, and University of Pennsylvania–could not unequivocally say that calling for the genocide of Jews violates their campus rules.
To contrast this, in 2020, over 600 Jewish groups locked arms with social justice groups and joined celebrities, athletes, businesses, colleges, universities, and nonprofit institutions committing to change over racial tensions. Today, malleable college students, who so ardently protested the historic mistreatment of Blacks in America just three years ago, are now spewing hateful messages and violent threats against Jews on the same college campuses. Where is the outrage from DEI supporters?
It's no secret philanthropy has been a strong proponent of the social justice movement and DEI efforts in higher education and beyond. According to the philanthropy research organization Candid, donors have committed nearly $17 billion to support racial equity since 2020. But racial justice statements and monetary commitments made by high-profile individuals, organizations, and corporations in the past ring hollow if they do not condemn antisemitism and calls for violence today.
Donors and philanthropic organizations would be wise not to support institutions that fuel or remain silent about racial hate against Jews. Americans should also consider how their charitable dollars may indirectly advance antisemitism in America, especially in academia, through blind support for alma maters and higher education institutions that fail to protect Jewish students from harassment now.
As Philanthropy Roundtable President and CEO Christie Herrera has stated, “The days of giving out of nostalgia are over,” and ceasing charitable giving to institutions that are falling short is one way donors can speak up. We’ve seen a number of donors threaten to end financial support or rescind major gifts to top universities. New England Patriots owner and Columbia University alumnus Robert Kraft is one of the latest outspoken donors who recently pulled his funding from Columbia.
Kraft also funded ads in major cities' newspapers blasting elite universities’ handling of antisemitism. In the ads he stated, “They have not only given up their positions of authority but also their moral compasses in upholding the core missions of these colleges and universities—to protect their students and the principles of critical thinking and free speech—to teach how to think, not what to think.”
However, donors need not abandon academia entirely. With thousands of higher education institutions, donors should direct their dollars toward colleges and universities that share their values. Big donors have outsized influence on academia: gifts of $1 million or more made up less than 1% of donors but 57% of total donations in 2022. But don’t underestimate the generosity of other alumni and smaller donors in telegraphing their disapproval of an administration’s actions.
Through charitable giving, Americans can support reforms, extract accountability and demand change in higher education. Allying with academic institutions and issues-based think tanks that share their values and goals, donors can do the legwork with fundraising staff, administrators, faculty, and researchers, leading to lasting relationships.
By maintaining those relationships, Americans can be active participants in how their gifts are used by establishing clear grant agreements that protect donor intent and rights. Two great ways to guard against donations not being used as intended—or even worse, to support abhorrent activities—are to make restricted gifts and give while living as opposed to leaving funds to institutions in your will.
This year, donors should send a clear signal with their wallets that bigotry and hate have no place on college campuses or in society. Through these best practices in higher education giving, Americans can support reforms that return these institutions to what they were built for—their core work of intellectual pluralism, academic excellence, workforce preparedness, and research.
