Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
The politically correct rule at Harvard Law
The politically correct rule at Harvard Law
Jul 21, 2026 5:07 AM

What do President Donald J. Trump and Ronald Sullivan, a professor at Harvard Law School, have mon? At first glance, nothing. However, a careful reading of recent news reveals that these two men were victims of a political trend that has engulfed American society and has been turning the land of freedom into a grotesque experiment of authoritarianism.

Let us start with Sullivan. A black law professor occupying a senior position in one of the most prestigious law schools in the United States, he saw his life turned upside down when he agreed to defend the infamous Harvey Weinstein. You read it right! Sullivan decided to be a lawyer for the alleged criminal who triggered the #MeToo movement. Such action could not go unpunished on one of America’s most progressive campuses. Last week, due to the mobilization of snowflake students seeking safe spaces, Sullivan lost his post of residential dean — he was the first black to occupy such position.

In the Roman legal tradition — one of the pillars of Western civilization — the figure of the lawyer could never be mistaken by that of the defendant. In many Latin American dictatorships, lawyers munist terrorists and political prisoners without being victims of state persecution. In 2019, a bunch of Harvard students decided that it did not matter.

Lawyer Sullivan has been punished for being a lawyer.

Alan Dershowitz — who taught at the same university — said that McCarthyism e to Harvard. He’s wrong. Joe McCarthy was a patriot who fought the well-documented infiltration munist agents into the American government. The Harvard students are a bunch of hysterical teenagers, political fanatics in search of a cause, pyromaniacs eager to set fire to anyone who does not pray according to the politically correct creed. Things are indeed worse, but it is all quiet on the Harvard front.

The issue involving Trump is better known, but plicated. After two years of a criminal investigation that would make Comrade Beria proud, Robert Mueller found nothing, strictly nothing.

Mueller was appointed to decide whether to indict the president or not. He had only two options and ended up creating a third one entirely fanciful. To make matters worse, Mueller decided to throw a tantrum on Attorney General William Barr about the disclosure of the criminal investigation report. One report, by the way, that is a shame due to the lack of rigor in its conclusions. However, Mueller could not leave empty handed the very media that since 2016 has been falsely spreading the lie that the president of the United States is an agent of Vladimir Putin. So, as his last act before leaving the stage, Bob Mueller advanced a bogus theory of obstruction of justice, which in its bottom line implies that any action that defendants make that do not please prosecutors and investigators is obstruction of justice – plaining about the investigation itself.

Many prosecutors nowadays are behaving like Hollywood divas, 21th-century prima donnas. They do not see themselves as law enforcement agents — abide by the rule of law –, but as vigilantes.

And no, that is not Stalin’s Russia, it is America 2019.

These two cases are not an exception. For decades, an erosion of the rule of law has been orchestrated by bureaucrats, politicians, and interest groups who, through a spurious association, have expanded the power of the federal government and, consequently, their control as well.

Lawrence Stratton’s The Tyranny of Good Intentions (2000)– widely praised by Alan Dershowitz and Milton Friedman —gives a proper dimension of how prosecutors and bureaucrats abuse the law to oppress citizens without power – and resources – to defend themselves. Stratton’s book last edition is from 2008, but any careful observer of American political life can conclude that, ten years later, the situation is much worse.

This uncontrolled expansion of state power has been the most outstanding feature of the western world since at least the beginning of the last century as states historian Robert Higgs. This trend worsened in the 1960s considerably, when the ever-growing public administration decided to adopt a philosophy of its own, aiming to justify its existence and to ensure that the process of bureaucracies’ expansion of power vis-à-vis the citizens’ individual freedoms would never be in jeopardy. This ideology is political correctness, which since the 1960s began to monopolize the political debate in the United States and, at the end of the Cold War, became the dominant ideology.

Not so much Roosevelt’s New Deal, but Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and its ideological dimension, which empowered the federal bureaucracy to fight prejudice. And what is prejudice? As well as hate speech, prejudice is any thought or act that runs counter to the ruling class’s desire for power. The Frankfurt School’s politically correct ideology and the tendency of bureaucracies to never stop expanding have led to a more or less official policy that all those who do not follow in line with the ruling class need to be re-educated.

Republicans and Democrats alike have been plices of the transformation of America into a vast mental gulag, in which all dissenting thinking must be corrected, and all dissatisfied should bend to the knees before the enlightened elite. As Democrats push the country even further to the left, Republicans not only accept it but also promote a foreign policy based on the same principles. In other words, Democrats rule as Jacobins in internal affairs and Republicans, when they can, spread this ideology across the world.

In part, the hatred of the elites towards Trump is nurtured by his refusal to weaponize the American government as an agent of Jacobinism as known as neoconservatism.

Left-wingers such as Gabriel Kolko, William Appleman Williams, and Nomi Prins, and libertarians such as Murray Rothbard and Higgs agree that what drove the process of concentration of power in the federal bureaucracy was precisely the idea of transforming the United States into an imperial power. As Trump campaigned to throw away the ruling elites’ imperialist goals, he became the first existential threat the establishment had to deal with since the re-election of Richard Nixon in 1972. And, therefore, someone needed to tear him apart.

The illegal activities of the FBI, CIA, NSA, et tutti quanti, on the one hand, and the hysterics of the #MeToo movement, on the other, represent two faces of the same problems: the rise of an authoritarian regime which, contrary to Fascism, promises to crush freedom in the name of love, of humanity and of everything that is good. The Conservatives have slept for too long, and it is likely that the tipping point has already been reached. The profound transformations that have annihilated the old constitutional order seem to me all but reversible.

Homepage picture: WikiCommons.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Are you more rational than the market?
Note: This is post #96 in a weekly video series on basic economics. The stock market is prone to certain anomalies. There’s the Monday Effect (where stocks fall more on Mondays), the January Effect (which says that stocks surge higher in that month), and the Momentum Effect (where past stock performance predicts future performance, at least a bit). Can’t a savvy investor take advantage of these anomalies to “beat” the market? Probably not. “Despite its flaws, the market is still...
Listen: The Christian case for capitalism
The Institute of Economic Affairs explores the ethical argument for a free economy – and why Christians are not making it. In the latest episode of its podcast, an Anglican priest and a Catholic scholar discuss that question, as well as Archbishop Justin Welby’s homily against Amazon, Jesus’ supposed condemnation of wealth, and why clergy tend to support government intervention into the economy. Fr. Marcus Walker, Rector of St. Bartholomew’s Church (COE) in London, speaks with Religion & Liberty Transatlantic...
Watch Samuel Gregg’s 10 minute defense of religion and freedom
Let me take a moment to brag about my colleagueSamuel Gregg, the Director of Research here at the Acton Institute. Almost every week we post an article or video by Gregg here on the PowerBlog, and yes, that’s partiallybecause he’s one of us. But we’d be promoting his work even if he wasn’t a part of Acton for the simple reason that Gregg is one of the most articulate defenders of ordered liberty in the world. Don’t just take my...
The suffering of Cardinal Zen
This article is written by Moris Polanco, originally published by Instituto Fe y Libertad and republished with permission. The elderly cardinal Zen Ze-kiun, bishop emeritus of Hong Kong, said in his blog on February 5, 2018, “The brothers and sisters of mainland China are not afraid of being reduced to poverty, of being put into prison, of shedding their blood. Their greatest suffering is to see themselves betrayed by ‘family.’” He’s right. For a moment let’s put ourselves in the...
Victory for Christian bakers, religion and property rights at UK Supreme Court
This morning, the UK Supreme Court ruled on behalf of Ashers Baking Company, a Christian-run family bakery in Belfast that refused to bake a cake with the message, “Support Gay Marriage.” The court found that its owners, the McArthur family, have the right to refuse to proclaim messages they oppose, as do all UK citizens whether on in favour of or against same-sex marriage. Rev. Richard Turnbull, a trustee of the organization that represented the family, reveals the details and...
The Romer Nobel cheers human potential
“Just last week I was telling a colleague that I hoped Paul Romer would finally win the Nobel prize in economics,” says Victor V. Claar in this week’s Acton Commentary. “And then he did.” I’ve been a Paul Romer fan since I started teaching intermediate macroeconomics more than a decade ago—the “macro” course college students might take following the introductory one. Because most economics teaching involves good storytelling, I’ve thought a lot about how Romer fits into the story of...
From ideology to imagination: How Russell Kirk brought me back to conservatism
This is the third in a series celebrating the work of Russell Kirk in honor of his 100th birthday this October. Read more from the serieshere. As a young college student entering the fray of campus debates, I became enthralled with a particular variety of libertarian thought. Though once a conservative, I began to pack my brain with the likes of Bastiat, Mises, Hayek, and Rothbard. I grew confident in my opinions about policy and was proud of the ideological...
Radio Free Acton: The debasement of human rights; Econ quiz on USMCA
On this episode of Radio Free Acton, John Couretas, Director of Communications at Acton, speaks with Aaron Rhodes, a human rights activist based out of Hamburg, Germany, about Aaron’s new book “The Debasement of Human Rights.” Where does the notion of human e from and how can we better defend it? Then Caroline Roberts, Producer of Radio Free Acton, talks to Stephen Smith, Professor of Economics at Hope College, about the new North American trade agreement, the USMCA. They discuss...
Why now is the time to fight the evil of unemployment
Last Friday the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the unemployment rate dropped to 3.7 percent in September, a low not seen since 1969. Many of us (including me, I was born in 1969) have never seen the unemployment rate this low in our entire lives. This is great news for America. But it’s also a problem—and an opportunity. The problem is that we may think we don’t need to be concerned about unemployment. In a sense, this is true....
Philip Booth: How we can reclaim ‘social justice’
The term “social justice” has a richly developed history in Christian thought, with application for every level of society. However, activists with less-than-heavenly aims have invoked the phrase to justify their activism, from Fr. Charles Coughlin to modern-day antifa rioters. AtReligion & Liberty Transatlantictoday, Philip Booth, says the misapplication of this term impoverishes all of society – both literally by inspiring counterproductive economic policies and figuratively by depriving citizens of their proper role in bringing about social justice. Booth, a...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved