David Warsh on Andrei Shleifer
On his blog, economicprincipals.com, David Warsh weighs in on David McClintick's article, "How Harvard Lost Russia."
Like me, Warsh finds McClintick's story an impressive piece of reporting. Unlike me, he thinks it will have a significant impact around the 02138 zip code.
Here is one of Warsh's conclusions: "When Summers returns to Cambridge from Davos, it will be to a university more determined than ever to understand the history of its failed Russia project. McClintick's article will circulate hand to hand. The frustration among the faculty that McClintick details will only grow. Some fellow economist may yet come forward to defend Shleifer publicly (instead of grousing anonymously that he has been treated unfairly), but that hasn't happened yet."
As much as I'd like to agree with Warsh, this is wishful thinking. In the past five years, the Harvard faculty has shown a remarkable talent to bury their heads in the sand and pretend that what's happening on campus—the moral emasculation of their university—isn't really happening at all. By the time they lift their heads into the air, the change will have been effected, and they can pretend that they never had a choice.
After all, how many faculty members have had the guts to say something publicly about the fact that Andre Shleifer—whose illegal behavior has cost the university between $30 and $40 million—is still a member of the Harvard faculty in good standing?
A grand total of two: Harry Lewis and Richard Thomas.
Meanwhile, FAS dean Bill Kirby refuses to take action on the Shleifer matter and sells Mass Hall to the president because, the Crimson says, he had "little choice."
Sometimes, I can understand why Larry Summers doesn't respect the professors who work for him.
