Emails between the Hoover Institution’s Niall Ferguson and well-known Republican student activists John Rice-Cameron ’20 and Max Minshull ’20 reveal coordination on “opposition research” against progressive activist Michael Ocon ’20 — referenced as “Mr. O” — and efforts to shore up support among members of the Cardinal Conversations steering committee.
30 white male historians made up the body of speakers at the Applied History conference at Stanford earlier this month, stirring controversy regarding the event’s lack of diversity.
Controversial social scientist Charles Murray and Freeman Spogli Institute senior fellow Francis Fukuyama discussed inequality and populism at the Hoover Institute on Thursday night in the second of four Cardinal Conversations, a program that aims to promote open political discourse on campus.
The event had visibly low attendance, with most of the back segment — around 100 seats — of the 400-person auditorium unfilled. Towards the front of the room, multiple reserved seats were left empty, as were several in the first row.
Meanwhile, across the street at the History Corner, “Take Back The Mic” counter-programming protested Murray and statements he has made regarding the relationship between class, race and intelligence.
Cardinal Conversations, a recently-launched speaker series co-hosted by the Hoover Institution and Freeman Spogli Institute (FSI), has spurred campus-wide debate as some students have expressed discontent regarding the recent invitation of political scientist Charles Murray.
Peter Thiel and Reid Hoffman will kick off the new Cardinal Conversations speaker series on Jan. 31, when they will participate in a discussion on “Technology and Politics” hosted in Hauck Auditorium.
Continuing Stanford’s recent run of success in hires and appointments, award-winning Harvard University history professor Niall Ferguson is the latest academic to come to Stanford. Having already been an adjunct senior fellow at the Hoover Institution for the past 10 years, Ferguson will take up a full-time senior fellowship at the University-affiliated think tank.
It was very unfortunate that President Obama said in January that he didn’t need a George Kennan, because almost immediately it became clear that he did. He and his advisors did not read Putin right and they got themselves into a very weak position. I think most strikingly, an international agreement to uphold the sovereignty of the Ukraine from the 1990s was violated with no military downside, only financial. The annexation of Crimea has been achieved by Russia at tolerable cost. So what one has to recognize is that this is a pretty bad precedent, but I think it’s part of an ongoing process of American strategic failure that goes back to Syria and maybe back to the Arab Spring’s outbreak. Although Crimea doesn’t look like it’s of enormous importance to the United States as we sit here in Stanford, it’s important because it signals that, as in Syria, you can use military force in defiance of the United States and get away with it
Author’s note/correction: While the Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances (1994) include promises by Russia, the United States and the United Kingdom to refrain from the use or threat of force against Ukraine’s sovereignty, they do not explicitly compel the United States to protect Ukraine’s borders, as Budapest negotiator Steven Pifer explains. The piece below implies…