From Casablanca:
Rick : How can you close me up? On what grounds?
Captain Renault : I'm shocked! Shocked to find that gambling is going on in here.
[a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]
Croupier : Your winnings, sir.
Captain Renault : [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much.
[aloud]
Captain Renault : Everybody out at once.
Please - with outrageous tuition, mysterious acceptance criteria, and endowment from questionable Wall Street types, this is what you complain about?
Heck - the Kennedy fortune comes from bootleggers, and their romantic life has a body count.
2
If Blavatnik "cut his teeth" during the aluminum wars where murders were commonplace, then how did he prosper so extravagantly and avoid complicity or even outright responsibility in those killings? Has Harvard asked that question? Do they care to know the answer given the largesse landing in their lap?
2
I have lost so much respect for institutions-- political, religious and academic. I do not support the wanton physical violence characterizing the yellow vest movement in France. But there is definitely something healthy for ordinary citizens to call into question convention.
My theory : Americans' deference towards academia is associated with America's lack of a monarchy. Silly overpriced diplomas, research centers, academic seats, etc. take the place of Europe's duchies and earldoms, something hollow ordinary mortals are expected to respect.
2
This is perfect proof that even nuclear-armed Russia was never anything more than a gritty third-world rathole.
Real countries change governments without having crooks steal all the energy resources and anything else lying around that can be sold easily.
But when the Soviet dream/nightmare collapsed there was no lawful structure remaining in their culture, so the country was basically looted, stem to stern.
Creeps like Mr. Blavatnik and Mr. Putin are all Russia is known for now.
6
Continued:
I was a poor kid from Flint Michigan that slipped into HBS (General Motors sponsorship) and sat a few seats over from Len in Section F for a couple years. I know his heart and have seen it first hand in action. I have received dozens and dozens of hugs with tears from Ukrainian farmers who have pleaded with me to thank the “unknown man” who has provided the capital for their greenhouses, transforming their lives and bringing fruits and vegetables to regions that otherwise would not have such. You have misjudged this man as did Ruth May earlier this year. I do hope that you will do more research and if you find that your assessment was wrong with whom you have selected to categorize him, I would hope that you would have the professional decency to write an apology and publish it.
Thank you for giving this your consideration,
Eric Jacobson
Charles Davidson left Hudson because it accepted 50K from Blavatnik. I would have done the same thing. It is insulting. A 250 million dollars donation, I will take it. Every one has his own price.
1
Continued:
Your opinion was well written and researched, similar to one in my view by Ruth May, Professor at University of Dallas, on the same topic in August in the Dallas Morning News where I live. I did not send Ruth a letter like this at the time, but I was equally disappointed by her commentary. History sadly shows that the Carnegies, Rockefellers, and Vanderbilts had a great bit of negative press also in their day.
I know Len Blavatnik and he is not the person you are attacking. I would encourage you to consider a different angle. If in fact Russia was certainly going to privatize metals and energy companies in a great sell off after the fall of the Soviet Union, thank goodness that in the midst of those “individuals with checkered pasts” that you write of, that an Ukrainian born Jew who had come to the US with nothing, became an American citizen, was educated in our best American schools, with an incredible giving, caring heart bestowed on him by his mother, could round up investors to support his efforts, and get in the mix and then change the world. Today, there is no other philanthropist on the face of the planet that does as much for technological innovation in medical science. Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffet would agree. Call them. Maybe you might reconsider the premise of your article and focus on the miracle that somebody as generous as Mr. Blavatnik worked his way into the Russian liquidation mix.
Eric
“One of the gates to Harvard Yard has a celebrated inscription: “Enter to grow in wisdom. Depart to serve better thy country and thy kind.”
I still remember that. I wonder if Harvard does.”
Answer. Yes. Harvard just more accurately recognizes “thy kind” than the author.
2
Blavatnik's gift should be named in honor of all the murdered Russian journalists who tried to expose oligarchic corruption in Russia, and they should name the Saudi gifts in honor of Khashoggi.
I presume that the Ethics class at Harvard is less than one semester
4
This is a letter I emailed Ann Marlowe this morning, asking her to call me:
Dear Ann,
I was a classmate of Len Blavatnik’s at Harvard Business School (also an MPP at the Harvard Kennedy School) and as a Jew, through a US non-profit, Len has strongly supported a Christian-based microloan initiative in Ukraine providing greenhouses for hundreds of impoverished farmers, and I am aware of many initiatives that his family foundation has done like this under the public radar. I know Len personally and wish to possibly see if I could arrange a time for you two to meet. When assets were liquidated and sold for pennies by Russia as Len was graduating from HBS, you are correct in stating that there were many bad characters involved. I think you have mistakenly lumped him in with them. I would hope that if you are to dig deeper and find zero wrong doings by Mr. Blavatnik, as your opinion conveys “he is not accused of any crimes, in the United States or in Russia”, and if you are to research what is involved in the Queen of England awarding a knighthood to him, you may be humbled by your efforts to attack the single greatest philanthropist in Russian history.
Eric
14
I have been wondering since all these Russians living in America have come to light, why do we admit them and even grant them citizenship? We’re their backgrounds in Russia known to immigration authorities? Why are we persecuting innocent women and children from Central America who want asylum here when we have allowed suspected criminals from Eastern Europe in?
1
I don't see why they wouldn't whitewash a Russian oligarch. They whitewashed Edwin Meese. Maybe the Russkies have realized they need to buy off a broader segment of our elite.
2
Did he donate any to Yale Law school?
2
No wonder why trump is putting Harvard grads into
his administration.
1
@jahnay
Like Mr Kushner?
Please spare us the self righteous scorn, the Kennedy's made their fortune gin running during the prohibition while in public office! Most billionaires are made running afoul of the law in one manner or the other, Russian oligarchs are simply more overtly criminal than others. Why do you think that Mafiosi and Cartel heads are so popular in their own backyards? Because of their lavish charitable donations!!!!!
2
The greatest threat to humanity is the totalitarian Communist Capitalist oligarchy called China. A million Muslims in 're education camps, 10,000's dissidents killed each year, a complete control over information and even words themselves being banned now in the internet ('Disagree' is now verboten as are allusions to 'Winnie the Pooh').
Building Islands to extend their Naval reach and control of neutral waters, investing in African Land (removing it from African ownership) as well as many things NOT reported in our media. But our politicians and business people do business with them no problem while the entire Western media is in a relentless absurd McCarthyist war on Russia.
It is a sickness and utterly stupid and destructive. Blaming literally everything on Russia, with no acknowledgement of OUR aggression, treaty breaking, Nation destruction, 'regime change', interference etc.
Yesterday the UK Guardian finally piped up that many of Europe's problems with refugees from the ME are due to US, UK, French and Israeli never ending drones, airstrikes etc on lands who have NOT attacked us (Syria). Yet in today's NYT Merkel gets the blame for immigrants echoing the obscene and useless advice from Hillary Clinton whose policies as SOS made the mess created by GW far worse.
What do we get? Printed comments by writers like me printed but then removed for mentioning that both the EU and UN found FOR Assange that he is the victim of a judicial lynching for TELLING THE TRUTH!
2
Essentially it is money laundering and the need for public affirmation. Harvard has many 'filthy rich' donors and sure as hell doesn't need a Blavatnik. Someone who may even face indictments in his future. His U.S. citizenship didn't automatically make him an honest man. His alliance with Putin may hang him too.
But pragmatism won out at Harvard and on the bright side his ill gotten gains will be for the good of mankind this time around.
Maybe he is worried about his soul as he ages, and is seeking redemption through good deeds. However, God is not for sale even if Harvard is.
Personally, I mostly agree with the author of this article and Harvard should have refused his money on principle and kept on seeking it elsewhere within its enormous list of wealthy donors.
1
I believe this piece by Ms. Marlowe is the most worthy op-ed I have read in this publication this year, possibly ever and made my online subscription and addiction to what you guys print and don't print, worth every penny. Thank you.
It seems difficult to believe that sums of this magnitude could ever come from a "nice/worthy" source.
3
Thanks for the article. As a fellow alum I am upset but not surprised, and will be making my objection known to the HMS alumni association. Anyone start a petition?
The most important attribute of a college president is his fundraising ability. It's been that way for years. Our society is focused on amassing money. Yes, even "nonprofits."
2
@tanstaafl
This is why US universities need to go undergo a full fledged revolution. Nothing justifies the extortionate debt rate for young US graduates. Anyway you slice it, universities are mendacious and corrupt -- their rate hikes largely exceed the inflation rate for other mandatory expenses in America.
1
Harvard also received huge funds from global climate change denying cheerleaders Koch brothers and their ilk.
"Science" coming out Harvard on wind turbines impact on the environment has been laughably naive. It proved there will be measurable impact on local warming if 100% of our energy came from wind. The Harvard "scientists" failed to compare, wind energy's impact that is only a trace contrasted with the GIGANTIC impact of removing fossil fuel combustion that would have been displaced if wind provided 100%. It makes you wonder if this failure has something to do with the success of the Kochs buying influence.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/2/27/koch-hks-donations/
So it is not only foreign oligarchs, but also domestic oligarchs buying influence at the expense of public interest.
1
"Behind every great fortune there's a crime." And some of the crimes didn't stop after the fortune's origin. America's willingness to take anybody's money and consequently be nothing but a clearing house for interests outside its borders will be its death knell. Trump's head turning from the Saudis in the dismembering of the journalist paved the way for selling out the last hope for any claim to moral authority on the world scale. Like so much today, you can use the words but when you pull back the curtain to reveal the Truth of it you fail to convince anyone but the most gullible. Maybe this is an indication of that Globalism is more than Free Trade and Scientific coalitions. I like the idea of no borders but then relieve us of the requirement to have a passport. Is the existence of oligarchs an indication that we're not an enlightened species? Is egalitarianism the only way of measuring arrival at enlightenment? I won't believe it until every man has to shovel his own driveway. Where's my swimming pool?
Come on readers! Do you believe that wealth just comes from hard work and a little luck? It comes from networking, non-stop. From purchasing your competitors at a price that makes them happy to go away. But, let's not pretend that most would like to be rich and many will do what it takes to get there. And stop bashing the United States! It has the least blemished history of them all even with slavery (which was rampant over the last 3000 years and is more than prevalent around the world today). Bottom line: Life isn't fair; deal with that one step at a time and do not lose sight of your personal goals and integrity for the sake of fame and fortune, or pay the consequence. It's the lack of consequence that is at issue - Blavatnik shouldn't be in a position to donate millions; he should be in jail. But I guess we'd rather put our resources on other trials. Again, not fair, get over it and don't send your kid to Harvard.
1
In principle, I don't think a Russian businessman should be giving Harvard millions of dollars. Why not give it to a Russian university?? Seriously! If he *really* wants to donate, do it anonymously. If he has to put his name on the donation, it seems like posturing, or worse.
1
Unless it can be determined that Harvard grants special consideration to Blavatnik, his money has no gravitas. As a previous Harvard president said after an underworld figure made a donation to the university, Harvard has an automatic cleaning process for all gifts.
The dream of entering through the gates of Harvard fired my imagination as a student in India, as it did for my two younger siblings. All three of us made it at different times. In retrospect, does it appear as a Faustian bargain?
In the early seventies, when I arrived in Boston as a graduate student, graduating Harvard undergraduates were zealously planning to pursue careers in public health, school teaching, the Peace Corps, anti-Vietnam activism, even vegetarian restaurants.
It all changed in the late seventies, when graduating undergraduates seemed largely focused on the glorious life of Wall Street investment bankers.
Mephistopheles had triumphed.
6
As a recent Nobel laureate wrote several decades ago:
"They like to take all this money from sin,
build big universities to study in
and sing 'Amazing Grace' all the way to the Swiss bank"
4
Just look at that underachiever Kushner. Even he bought his way into Harvard
6
This sheds much needed light on the colleges and universities with buildings named for prominent slave owners and known-to-be-racist wealthy men. Our most liberal institutions have long served as guilt -launderers.
18
@mirucha right. Let's just destroy much of the planet's memorials, colleges, parks, and places of worship as all have, somewhere in their history, a rich slave owner.
2
Harvard has a long history of accepting gifts from unsavory wealthy people and dismissing allegations against its own faculty for crimes. Twenty years ago, they slapped Professor Andrei Shleifer on the wrist for obtaining inside information on the Russian stock market, making billions. He and his wife, Nancy, are now by far the richest couple on the Harvard Faculty.
More recently, Harvard has been selling naming rights to wealthy individuals for donations in the hundreds of millions. It now has the John A. Paulson School of Engineering and the T.T. Chan School of Public Health. Both donors received large tax-write offs for their donations, leaving the ordinary tax payer to pick up the difference.
Recently, the University has accepted millions of dollars from the accused pedophile, Jeffrey Epstein, who is being defended by another alleged pedophile, Professor Alan Dershowitz.
It is said that there is a great deal of ruin in a nation, which means that it takes a lot of rot to destroy it. The same is true of a university. Harvard should be careful of accepting a lot more ill-gained funds from the Blavatniks, the Epsteins, the Taubmans, and other men of poor character and morals.
9
"Asked for comment, a Harvard spokeswoman referred me to someone who handles media relations for the [Blavatnik] foundation."
This person just failed Media Relations 101 and should be relieved of their spineless duties.
5
While at it ,all those checks written by the Saudi royal family and their associates for these Ivy Leagues deserve a glance at least in the context of the Khashoggi murder.
4
Blavatnik isn't the first sleaze ball to give money to Harvard and he won't be the last. Harvard believes itself to be above the sleaze. But, in reality, they are a part of the sleaze.
8
In October, The Hollywood Reporter addressed Blavatnik's efforts to gain entry into the film industry. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/why-is-warner-music-group-owner-len-blavatnik-russia-probe-1150550
one could hardly wish for a better place to launder money than Hollywood.
except, perhaps, real estate.
1
Harvard Medical School? Didn't judicious folks there appoint Elizabeth Holmes to their Board of Fellows based on the hype (with a capital "H") around Theranos? So this isn't all that surprising.
2
“Charity is the humanitarian mask that hides the face of economic exploitation.” - Slavoj Žižek
4
@Bruce S. Post
That's why I feel fine contenting myself with paying my taxes for the common good. Even giving spare change to a beggar is a big no-do for me -- not going to fuel someone's alcoholism...
His kids need to go to college somewhere.
2
Dazzlingly devious! Not content with money laundering, political pollution, bribery and blackmail, the Kremlin oligarchs are now going directly for the long time jugular: intellectual brain cancer.
The gift that will keep on giving because it strikes youths on the verge of power and insidiously invades their brains.
Shame on Harvard and The Hoover. They have partaken of intellectual coolade.
1
Money, power buys influence and position. Just this week let's look at at it all---Len Blavatnik, Les Moonves, Jeffrey Epstein, Alex Acosta. Time for a really really really big change. This has gotta stop.
1
The ancient Romans used to say “pecunia non olet”.
“Money does not smell” wherever is coming from.
In New York, the largest hospital, New York Presbyterian just opened a new building named after David H. Koch, who arguably has done the most in the US, with his brother, to block affordable health care for all. Ironic right? And profoundly hypocritical. Memorial Sloan Kettering also is building a center with the same name/money.
These billionaires try to wash their money from the stench they are stained with, and unfortunately what used to be great institutions are, sadly, complicit.
“Pecunia non olet”.
What we can do is make sure they are remember for how they made their money and what they did, before their convenient “conversions”.
And, thankfully, Peter (or more likely Minos) will remember as well.
1
They don’t have to pay taxes but use fire, police and other services paid for by the taxes of the middle class and the poor. They’ll take money from anyone, including from the convicted felon Charles Kushner. In return Harvard admitted Charles’ son the less than sterling scholar Jared. I wonder if you pay them enough will they just give you the degree without bothering about attending classes.
2
Can you imagine? Harvard has accepted tainted money? I'm sure nothing remotely like this has happened before.
Continue on with your happy illusions.
2
Isnt' it called "money laundering", not "whitewashing"?
1
Harvard and other universities, museums, etc. don’t seem to be in the business of saying no to sketchy contributors. The Sacklers name is now ubiquituos, not for their vile contribution to the opioid epidemic, but for the institutions who reward their successful whitewashing campaign with naming rights.
1
The only thing that's changed in the elite Ivy League with respect to your well-grounded complaint is that Russian criminal-oligarchs are now in play. Heck, how many decades has it been since the American oligarch Fred Trump bought an MBA for his imbecile son at the prestigious Wharton School at UPENN?
5
Pretty sure tRump transferred in to Wharton’s undergrad program. Not the MBA program.
1
was it a graduate degree or a bachelor's? which is cheaper?
and whatever they teach over there, it's not worth knowing if their alumns are anything like our dear leader.
@Mike7
Trump didn't earn an MBA: after transferring from Fordham, he was granted an undergraduate (B.S.) degree in economics. Frankly, it's difficult to imagine that he ever read a textbook or wrote a research paper by himself, but I'm sure Penn was happy to get his tuition money and any other emoluments from Fred Trump that accompanied Donald's application for admission.
Carnegie, Mellon and the Rockefellers all laundered money through Harvard. Old WASP's meet new Russian oligarchs. Get over it.
3
Uh so you do know that Charles and David Koch have given hundreds of millions to MIT?
4
“That’s my Harvard tie...hee didn’t go to Harvard”
Louis Winthorpe III
"By now, most Americans are aware of the deep and disturbing connections between Russia’s oligarchs and the country’s president, Vladimir Putin, thanks to an onslaught of news coverage and a growing list of sanctions aimed at them and their business empires.
[But the even worse oligarchs, many of whom were basically Mafia thugs, who came before Putin are okay.]"
Yawn, some sleazeball gave money to Harvard.
Harvard Law has (now maybe had) a building named after a slave killing torturer from Haiti. And Harvard Law has a torture advocate as a "distinguished" semi-retired professor.
The New York Public Library's Main building (Astor Lenox Tildon Foundation--the real name on the 5th Avenue face) was renamed for an awful hedgefund manager who compared closing the "carried interest" tax loophole to the Nazi invasion of Poland. His name hasn't been removed. Oh, and the foundation of the Astor family fortune is largely running opium from Calcutta up the south coast of China--so not beaver pelts bought cheap from Natives and Frenchmen in Michigan circa 1800 CE.
There is ONE NAME--only recently added--on the front of the front of the Metropolitan Museum of Art (NYC): The David Koch Plaza. This despite a much longer history of the Rockefellers giving to that museum. And Fred Koch (father of Charles, David, Fred Jr, and Bill) made his first real fortune, which is the source of David's wealth, in BOTH Stalin's Soviet Union and Nazi Germany in the 1930s.
3
...exactly....I have nothing further to say.....
Looks like Harvard wants to keep pace with MIT, which accepted lots of money from the anti-democratic Koch brothers in exchange for putting their name on a cancer center. Next thing you know, Harvard will be taking money from the Sackler family that created and then profited masasively from the opioid epidemic currently plaguing our country. What's that you say? They already did??? No wonder their favorite letter is scarlet.
4
Why is the Hudson Institute surprised? Blavatnik has been a contributor to the Republican Party for a long time, as was revealed by the Dallas News some time ago. The fact is, Republicans will take dirty money from whatever source is willing to offer it. That is the criminal essense of the GOP. We see it in most recent form in the president's serving as accessory after the fact of the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, protecting the murderers in every way he can in return for the millions of dollars the Sauidis funnel into his pocket.
See https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/08/03/tangled-web-connects-russian-oligarch-money-gop-campaigns?fbclid=IwAR2sS_kFAjtvWHp6FbJTOjQD_nMTv40ZiP0iMzKsNJDKykRhX6UNxKLHzVQ
Certainly sounds like something Harvard would do.
That is just too funny. American "think tank" commentariat (you can't in all honesty call those characters "researchers") getting offended by the smell of money they are getting. LOL. Those bozos only have a (well-paying job) because some oligarchs want their ideas validated by "scholars" with Ph.D.s. American or Russian – what's the difference? Only the actual size of the corruption, with Russian one not even being close in size, scope and brazenness to the American version. Give me a break. Who ever heard of that Blavatnik dude? But I am sure he has nothing in terms on sheer evilness on any of the "titans" of US finance and industry.
3
This is a university that was happy to receive money from Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire pedophile. They love money, and they don't care where its been.
3
Harvard has always been known to take anyone's money. The self-righteous clowns who run the place and turn up at graduation ceremonies in their caps and gowns and their noses pointed skywards, are as amoral as their benefactors.
3
How much does the Federalist Society get?
2
I wonder if Harvard has a spot for Mr. Blavatnik's children or grandchildren? I mean based on merit along, of course!
2
It's called a "double standard".
Isn't this the same Kremlin connected oligarch who made a big $50K donation to conservative think tank Hudson Institute?
Len Blavatnik seems particularly repellent, and it would be nice if Harvard had found the wherewithal to tell him that it already has plenty of $$$, and does not need any of his ill-gotten gains. On the other hand, I am sure that Blavatnik's $200 million gift is not the only tainted $$$ ever contributed to Harvard's jaw-dropping $37 billion endowment.
1
"Is Harvard Whitewashing a Russian Oligarch's Fortune?"
YES!
It's not only about money. My alma mater, Columbia, gave a prestigious position to Mary Robinson, who as High Commissioner for Human Rights at the UN presided over the World Conference Against Racism (WCAR) in Durban, SC in 2001 which was the most public anti-Semitic event since Kristallnacht. 11 nations withdrew from the conference and NGOs like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, not known as friends of Israel, dissociated themselves from the conference.
Resolutions supporting the burning of Synagogues were debated and every NGO supporting Jewish causes was excluded. Ms. Robinson was soon removed from the UN in disgrace.
But...not at Columbia however where her stewardship over the return of vicious public anti-Semitism which spawned much of the developing world's current anti-Semitism in media and school curriculums was ignored. Her tenure at the WCAR was reported as a victory for "indigenous people". As if that led to her firing.
When I protested to Columbia I received some excuse that Ms. Robinson isn't perfect but everyone has faults and we can all do better. Perhaps Columbia should explain this to the victims of the Hyercacher attack in Paris.
Universities crave publicity and money and will sell their souls for it. There will be controversies, but when right wing figures such as Condeleeza Rice can't speak at Rutgers' graduation ceremony then universities have principles.
Universities today display a shocking lack of wisdom and principles.
2
Harvard, the classiest of money launderers.
Harvard took $5 million from the Kushners to admit unqualified Jared; along with other despotics' kids, including Xi Jinping's. Why not $250 million? It has always been amoral despite lofty slogans.
1
1964, I was in an East coast Prep school that promised it would get me into Harvard. 2 months into Form 4 I knew I had to get out of the insanity. Parents made me stay the year.
I am very glad I avoided Harvard and returned to the Midwest.
Harvard and the entire 'boys' club that it embodies is a poor choice for any rational person.
Money has been a God for way too long.
Now where is my yellow vest...
1
Ann -- Didn't Harvard teach you that we are to be presumed innocent until proven guilty? Perhaps not . . .
2
When has the color of money ever been a problem fir Harvard or other supposed Ivy League schools. Someone should do the math on how much money they have collectively taken from Saudi Arabia.
For anyone who's interested, The October 18th issue of The Hollywood Reporter contains a lengthy piece on Blavatnik's attempts to establish himself in the film industry and his connections to Putin.
A couple more things left out of this article that creates a false picture. Mr. Blavatnik came to the "United States in 1978, and he received a masters in computer science from Columbia University and an MBA from Harvard Business School in 1989."-Wikipedia
He was a Soviet but he was born in Ukraine and is Jewish.
There is no indication anywhere that Mr. Blavatnik is "a Kremlin insider" any more than Mikhail Khodorkovsky who was at one time one of the richest men in Russia until Putin put him in prison and took his company away from him.
From Mr. Blavatnik's biography he happened to know many of the other oligarchs doing business in Russia, having gone to Harvard with one.
If Mr. Blavatnik is a Kremlin insider, then proof should be presented to support such a claim.
One of the things that has annoyed me about the investigation concerning Russia's interference with the US elections and possible cooperation with the Trump campaign is the use of the vague "has ties to" and "is linked to" when describing an individual. Well, you know someone has ties with their mailman, since he actually comes to your house every day, but that doesn't mean you and the mailman have some nefarious scheme planned. There are many ways to imply some nefarious connection when none exists.
Just for perspective here, does anyone here recall who the robber barons were? And how many public institutions are now named after them? Think about it.
1
"Behind every great fortune there is a great crime" - Balzac
2
Academia loves a sugar daddy who can bestow largess upon them. They would be rapt if America still had a king, who could issue a royal charter and grants.
1
This is silly. We are in Trump's America. Money is more important than anything. Anything.
1
Harvard's been whitewashing Arab money for years, in return for tweaking the curriculum. Why would they stop at Russian oligarchs?
2
This pattern is very old but still being used extensively even today.
During British rule in India, those prestigious British universities used to get a lot of money from highly corrupt and traitor Indian businessmen and politicians who were more than happy to help the British rules anyway possible. British universities like Oxford, Cambridge and many more used to admit children of those rich, influential pro-British Indians in hordes as a gift by the ruling British Government in India. That served many purposes for the Brits. Those pro-Brit Indians were more than dedicated to strengthen and prolong British rule over India. Besides other issues related to Indian freedom movement against the Brits, these opportunist and hypocrite but more than British "Brown Sahibs" soon changed their outfit and started wearing "Nehru coat", kurta and Nehru cap to become the most patriotic Indians and joined Congress (if not an active member of the party before). They nicely keep on doing what they were doing during British rule- enjoying power, money and sending children and grandchildren to British universities (using Indian Govt & tax payer paid scholarships/fellowships, legacy quota, and donation).
Now these utter corrupt billionaires from Russia, China, India type countries are doing the same and many prestigious American and other western universities like Harvard or Oxbridge are more than happy to oblige them.
1
I'm curious as to why Ms. Marlowe failed to mention that Columbia University’s Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science accepted a $10 million grant from the Blavatnik Family Foundation to fund innovative research.
Is this money any "cleaner" than the funds given to Harvard?
More important, what sort of "strings" are attached to how this money is used?
I would think finding large-scale donors whose money was made without blemish is very difficult. Business success at this scale frequently includes acts of ethical and moral murkiness.
Hold your nose and take the money. Do some good to counter the evil involved in its creation.
Money talks, ethics walks.
1
In the US any crime can now be laundered if you have enough money to give. Take the case of MBS who is being absolved at the highest level of the American government of his murder of a Washington Post columnist and US resident. What next- the Muhammad Bin Salman Al-Saud Institute for Human Rights at Harvard?
Blavatnik's two gifts amount to about .7% of Harvard's endowment. Harvard's reputation, a few hundred years in the making, is (further) torched for what amounts to chump change. A sign of the times.
I am not sure why anyone would be surprised that Harvard is full of dirty money. I am sure you could find this at Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and others.
Harvard is not exactly the shining pinnacle of ethics and meritocracy the author imagines.
1
Blavatnik can give me all the money that he wishes, and I shall not complain one bit. Would you?
Wait, so every WASP dollar donated to Harvard before the oligarch was clean as a whistle. No child labor, no toxic waste, no e coli, no planned obsolescence, no gargantuan carbon footprint, no wife beating C.E.O's, no sexually harassing bosses? I hate the idea of a Russian robber baron getting feted by one of our most predigested institutions, but the Russians know the hypocrisy that's being hidden on our side. So Harvard takes the money because they, at least, will do better with it than the Russians who would spend it on a $50M penthouse.
1
A window into how criminal oligarchs form Russia are using their ill-gotten billions to permeate the upper echelons of our "intellectual" and political circles -- that will undermine further our democratic republic. The "deplorables" -- who cheer Trump at his rallies -- have no clue.
1
The Hudson Institute is sullied with or without Blavatnik's money, as they host all manner of Republican war criminals there, who are guilty of far worse.
1
The color of money is green. It's the same for liberals as it is for conservatives. Harvard is the richest university.
1
Well, they MUST need the money badly. Can't think of another reason to allow today's Marlboro Man access to your school, students or family.
But then, it really can't be called "higher" education anymore, can it?
Today's lesson kiddies: "Greed is good."
Harvard I imagine has the richest endowment of any university in America if not the world. Yet they are willing to take money from anybody it seems. The1%ers, 10%ers go to Harvard and they are the greediest bunch I've seen yet. I often wonder if MBA programs teach ethics and principles that are beyond making vast amounts of money. Obviously Harvard doesn't. Protecting your good name is so yesterday...now it only has commercial value to the institution, its students and graduates.
Whitewashing ill gotten fortunes is an American tradition. Michael Milliken served jail time for his crimes associated with the fortune he earned trading bonds. Yet, he has given millions to estimated medical research institutions and there are institutes that bear his name. His crimes are no different than the Rusdian oligarchs, and it’s hippocritical to pretend otherwise. Many great American fortunes were acquired through greed, deceit and exploitation, and yet many museums and cultural institutions bear the names of the robber barons of their times.
1
In university charities, as in so many other places, the rich get richer, and the poor get bupkus. Harvard ($200m in new blood-aluminum money), Johns Hopkins ($1.8b in '18) . Stanford ($400m in '16). Are there any other U.S. universities that actually need some serious money? I'm just askin'.
1
Harvard is in good company. Blavatnick--the Kremlin insider--contributed ~$400K to the Republican National Committee in 2016 and $1 million to the Trump Inauguration Committee. Some of that money has been used to pay Trump's legal fees. So, Trump is defending himself against charges of collusion with Russia with funds from a Russian oligarch.
"To be clear, Mr. Blavatnik is not accused of any crimes, in the United States or in Russia. But he is undoubtedly a Kremlin insider, someone who has made an enormous fortune trading on his political connections to a deeply corrupt circle of oligarchs and a criminal Russian state."
Explain to me what the difference is between Blavatnik and hundreds if not thousands of Americans who trade on their political connections to deeply corrupt American "oligarchs" and our federal, state and local governments.
Any ordinary American is well aware of the corruption amongst our political/business powerful including donations to academia, institutes, non profits, etc.
Just read about who owns the two for profit businesses providing prisons and detention centers for illegal immigrants which have 70% of the federal contracts - who have contributed millions to Trump's campaign - and which are against passing the criminal reform bill.
3
This is only to be expected. Harvard has been described—with a touch of hyperbole but not entirely without justification—as a group of hedge funds with a university attached for purposes of freedom from taxation. Its preeminent position tends to assure it of a fair amount of hostile scrutiny so that it always seems worse than its near peers. It probably isn't—nut much, anyway.
Every time I see the Koch name as in the David H. Koch Theater, the home of the New York City Ballet at Lincoln Center I have the same feeling. The Kochs, whose political lineage descends directly from John Birch, have been instrumental in undermining American democracy through their secretive networks of pseudo-non-profits. The Kochs nominally aren't fans of Trump, but they have smoothly enabled the Republican anti-democracy movement that produced him and his kleptocracy. They numbed public awareness along the way through their association with "unassailable" goods like ballet and universities such as George Mason, where their money has fostered a right-wing judiciary, including Brett Kavanaugh.
4
"Who'll protect their interests from the owners yet to be
the cartels, the monopolies, the bureaucratic thieves.
That's always been so hard for them, they've never done it well.
Tell me who'll protect the Russians from themselves."
This is a verse from a song called "Russians" set to the melody of Korobeiniki, a Russian folk song familiar to Tetris players. This verse goes with the second half of the tune. I wrote it in 1994, shortly after the Soviet Union dissolved. Russia has a history of lousy governance, and this example is no exception.
It has long been known that admission to Harvard can be bought outright. For the right price, you can get in. That's how Jared Kushner, and countless other unremarkable children of rich folks have got in.
Anyone who expects Harvard or any of the other Ivys to act on principle or virtue - or to live up to the grand sayings sprinkled around their lofty buildings - is simply living in a fantasy world.
so let's get something straight. When self-interest and doing the right thing come into conflict, the former almost always prevails.True for individuals so obvious for institutions. The Clinton foundation welcomes Saudi money despite their despicable record on human rights (let alone murder) and Harvard welcomes donations from those who stole the Russian people's assets. Too many of us find it comfortable to look in the mirror following such behavior. Since the only "mirror "for collective organizations is their reputation, it is critical that such behavior not only is exposed but has consequences. Time for honorable individuals and entities to withdraw support rather than keep company with thieves and murderers.
Western governments and universities, mainly in USA, UK, and Canada, must not patronize those utter corrupt politicians and businessmen from developing countries like Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Saudi, Iran etc. That appeasement of these criminals must stop if western democracies really want to have a more peaceful and democratic world where corruption would be minimum and rule of law can be enforced.
Giving admission due to lofty donation of blood money and/or political influence (directly or via state sponsored scholarship/fellowship where selection is totally based on nepotism and corruption) does have very long term and devastating consequences not only for the general peopel in those countries but also in our own society as many of these corrupt people climb sociopolitical hierarchy by doing that, start dictating public policies to benefit them more than anything else. And western Governments seem to be very content by getting short term benefits. But the same practice strengthen such rogue regimes and empower their equally corrupt children to continue the cycle of corruption and misgovernence either in private companies they join or as a politician in thier native countries.
1
The old academic adage about administration and money: "All deans have round heels."
And here in Baltimore Johns Hopkins has accepted millions from the Saudis. I think these great US universities think that such monies, though sullied, are being put to good use, funding AI and science and medicine and benefits will ultimately accrue to, not so wealthy scientists and their acolytes as well as to ordinary people. But ethics begins at home. Blood monies and corrupt monies should not be laundered through charity. We are forgiving, encouraging and endorsing the oligarchs who have pillaged and plundered the ordinary people of their countries. I've heard it said, if Harvard or Johns Hopkins did not accept these tainted monies, they would not go back to the people. The monies would be spent somewhere else worthless. By accepting the monies, the universities are circumventing such frivolous spending. They are making the best of a bad situation rescuing goodness and benefit for the masses out of ill gotten gains. I disagree with that logic and I agree with the writer. No. It is as clear as black and white to me. Cannot and must not take those monies. Our great institutions must have that much gumption and that much morality.
Now here is a man of courage:
"On Tuesday, the founder, director and sole funder of the Hudson Institute’s Kleptocracy Initiative, Charles Davidson, announced that he was leaving his position at the head of the initiative because Hudson had accepted a $50,000 donation for a table at its annual gala from Leonard Blavatnik, a Soviet-born dual British-American citizen who made his money in the rough and tumble of Russia’s commodities privatizations during the 1990s and now owns, among other properties, Warner Music Group." Thank you, sir.
Thanks to Ms. Marlowe for showing how The International Mafia democracy-destroyers use their stolen/inherited wealth to try to destroy institutions and governments around the world.
As to Harvard, Yale, Hudson and other supposed "elite" organizations I am beginning to think they have always been "how to steal, cheat, lie and get away with it' educators for so the supposed "elite" can try to retain power. "One of the gates to Harvard Yard has a celebrated inscription: “Enter (Harvard) to grow in wisdom. Depart to serve better thy country and thy kind.” It should say depart to better serve thyself.
Disgusting. No more of OUR hard-earned taxpayer money for any of them.
5
The further challenge with accepting 'gifts' from alleged RICO felons is the return policy. In the present case, Harvard would be called into question if the tax receipt from illicit proceeds of crime were used to off-set U.S. income and taxes through a charitable donation tax credit.
Harvard appears to act as a 'fence' - it is laundering Mr. Blavatnik's proceeds of alleged crime by accepting the money.
I wonder why Mr. Blavatnik did not donate the $200 million to Russia’s 'Harvard' instead? I would think that Moscow State University would accept the funds and issue an tax credit receipt if required under Russian law, to obtain a tax credit.
One possible answer is that a profit from U.S. sourced income may need tax planning to reduce U.S. income taxes. Charitable donations are the common method to receive a scalable tax donation credit that most wealthy families use within their financial plans.
And charitable donation, generally, offers peer-group prestige and acceptance within circles of elites that 'give back' to prestigious non-profit institutions of, in this case, higher learning.
1
Blavatnik's company LyondellBasell filed one of the biggest bankruptcies of all time in the late 2000's. When the NY banks, who were on the hook for Billions, asked him to kick in more to save the company he refused saying he was also "a victim." The banks put in another 5 billion to keep it solvent but per Ch. 11 all the suppliers/creditors before the date were stiffed as were many employees who were let go and/or lost their pensions. When he could see the ship was re-floated, with characteristic chutzpah he wanted back in, but the banks told him he had his chance and to get to the back of the line.
Fast forward to now and he's just fine financially with homes around the world and happy burnishing his reputation at places like Harvard but the people caught up in his greed and who lost their shirts were simply collateral damage.
4
During the 1978-79 academic year, the Harvard campus was roiling with anti-apartheid fervor. At the beginning of that year, the Kennedy School was inaugurating a brand new building, and the building's library was to be named for Charles Englehard as a result of a substantial gift from the Englehard Foundation.
The incoming class at the Kennedy School, of which I was a member, soon learned that Mr. Englehard had made a large part of his fortune through ownership of various mines in South Africa and that he was a supporter of the apartheid government.
This revelation spawned months of student activism, of which I was a participant, opposed to the naming of the library in his honor, including a temporary boycott of the school.
As a result, we were eventually able to convince the school's administrators and the Foundation to withdraw the naming proposal. While the school kept the donation, Mr. Englehard was honored simply with a plaque placed in the library.
The situation stimulated a vigorous debate about the proper receipt and use of tainted donations, with strong arguments on both sides. It's clear from this article that that the debate continues.
1
I don't know many people or organizations that turn down free money even if there are strings attached. Harvard like everyone else has their price. And Mr. Blavatnik happened to finds Harvard's at the tune of 200 million dollars.
14
@damon walton, Yes... and the fact that people shrug their shoulders and accept as a matter of course something that, in truth, presents a serious ethical problem, says a great deal about the current state of American culture. We have lost our moral compass.
4
Ms. Marlowe, where have you been? Len B. has been making huge gifts to Carnegie Hall, Lincoln Center, Yale University, Mount Sinai Health System...I could go on and on.
You also make associations without making an actual criminal charge. And is Len B. so different than some of the other big donors to Harvard University? People whose fortunes were based on exploiting labor, breaking laws, etc. Our country created Donald Trump, for goodness sake.
Yes Len B. made billions in Russia. And he has ties to Vekselberg, who has ties to Putin. But Len doesn't seem to be very close to Putin anymore. And he isn't the only billionaire who gave money to Trump's campaign.
To me he seems like another billionaire interested in doing some good with his money and burnishing his reputation. And if you're going to criticize Harvard, why don't you criticize all these other institutions that are welcoming Len's money? I believe some members from the founding families of the NYT sit on some of the same boards that Len does.
3
"To be clear, Mr. Blavatnik is not accused of any crimes, in the United States or in Russia."
Well if he cannot be tried in a court of law, then why not try him and convict him him in an op-ed?
"Accepting gifts — especially naming gifts — from people with dubious sources of funds or close ties to despotic regimes encourages the view that dirty money can be cleansed by charity. What lessons does that teach Harvard students?"
What does this teach the Harvard students? It teaches them that that is the way of the world. It teaches them that the enormous Harvard endowment and that their coddled academic lives, not to belittle academic demands, would not exist if it were not for the Mr. Blavatnik's.
2
Wow. No good news is ever embraed with gratitude by the cynical moralists - on the left or the right. Amazon is 'bad' for accepting tax breaks for beringing 25,000 jobs to New York. Now it's guilt by association. The writer states that no charges were ever brought against Mr. Blavatnik in any country. He has been a loyal American citizen ever since he immigrated penniless as a Jewish refugee from the Soviet Union. He bootstrapped himself - through education - by his own talents and determination to become an inspirational success. He saw opportunities and and leveraged them with genius. He is the epitome of the American dream. And now he is giving back to the country that welcomed him. He deserves our admiration and gratitude.
1
When Trump puts a "For Sale" sign on the White House lawn, the Russians, Saudis and others seeking to buy influence in a wide range of American institutions get down to business. Health care, education, think tanks are all businesses in our country and thus open to foreign "investors." And if our own president is willing to do business with Russian oligarchs, why should the money-hungry Ivies say no?
3
Harvard is a problem and has been one since its inception. It should not be the basis for anything of value.
Didn't a graduate student from UMASS Amherst point out that Harvard economists who determined austerity measures didn't do correct formulas in their Excel spreadsheets. https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/umass-student-exposes-serious-flaws-harvard-economists-influential-study/316138/
Wasn't this the place where its president said women couldn't do math and science because of their brains? https://www.theguardian.com/science/2005/jan/18/educationsgendergap.genderissues
Same institution (founded in 1636) just added a tenured Native American in history for the first time. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/02/harvard-welcomes-first-tenured-professor-in-native-american-history/
Same institution has cheating issues every few years. https://www.cnn.com/2013/02/01/us/massachusetts-harvard-cheating-scandal/index.html
Same institution matriculates most of our sociopathic government.
1
As an alumna of Harvard-Radcliffe, this university appalls me almost daily. It has become a place of the avaricious, by the avaricious, for the avaricious. To continue to refer to it as “elite” is laughable.
10
@Landy. Thank you for being brave enough to speak about this most unfortunate situation.
It's not surprising. Money talks even at Harvard.
But's it's not just dictatorial/oligarchic Russia. Many of these elite institutions of higher learning have outposts in the Middle East in countries that are affluent and friendly enough (Qatar and UAE) but try to be a homosexual, minority, or indentured worker there. Simply put, these places lack civil rights or a foundational document of civil rights that they can live up to.
I cant' understand it as these places should be leading the way for a classically liberal education and for us to see the truth.
What Harvard is saying is that "Use your connections to a brutal dictator and buy essential metals on the cheap and then privatize them at ridiculous gains and then give to our university. Hard work pays off!"
3
To me, this all turned into an issue between Chernukhin vs Deripaska and Danilina. As the ex deputy minister disclaims Danilina’s ownership rights, he digs himself into a deeper hole.
Absolutely on point. Harvard is accepting dirty money. It proves yet again money is king no matter how obtained.
1
"Great" Universities, Museums, and other cultural institution have washed money turning sinners into saints for decades from Robber Barons to convicted criminals, Stanford, Vanderbilt and Mike Milken, etc. As someone told me years ago, "Get rich, Get honest, Get Honor"
1
@Chris
Let’s not forget all the money from slavery that nourished so many of our most ancient and revered institutions. No point in being too prissy about money. Dirty, clean, it’s all the same. Refusing dirty money will not discourage thieves rogues and pirates from making more.
Congratulations to Ms. Marlowe for using the correct form of the word 'alumna' in her column.
Most writers are unaware of the correct gender or declension of many words derived from the early origins of English - e.g .Latin or Greek.
From Webster's dictionary;
Many people are comfortable using the word alumni to refer to someone who was a student of a particular school. However, others feel quite strongly that this is an error and that the following forms should be used: alumnus (for one male), alumni (for multiple males, or for a mix of males and females), alumna (for one female), and alumnae (for multiple females). The shortened form alum and its plural form alums began to be used in the 19th century. Initially, alum was widely viewed as highly colloquial or informal, but is increasing in use as a gender-neutral alternative.
1
I had run across a past scandal that should get some airing now.
"Who Taught Crony Capitalism to Russia?". The Wall Street Journal Europe. March 19, 2001.
Harvard professors and economists, including Lawrence Summers, were helping to convert the Soviet Union to a market economy based on private property.
And private profit.
See “How Harvard Lost Russia.” Institutional Investor. David McClintick January 13, 2006
“The best and brightest of America's premier university came to Moscow in the 1990s to teach Russians how to be capitalists. This is the inside story of how their efforts led to scandal and disgrace.
In 2005, Harvard and the Justice Department reached an agreement ---the university paid $26.5 million to settle the five-year-old lawsuit.”
3
@Meredith
I’ve heard that there are also teams of Harvard zoologists working in Africa to get leopards to change their spots.
Why wouldn’t they? The university I teach at sweeps sexual assault under the carpet even when guilt is not in dispute. Upset, young victims coerced into letting the university “handle it” and signing NDAs and then the perpetrator continues as if there was no problem. Victim can never speak publicly about her ( it’s overwhelming women) ordeal or treatment by the university. And just last week it was in every Canadian newspaper that an admitted rapist who plea bargained to assault, was invited back to give a lecture to MBAs!!! The excuse was that... it was an honest mistake!!! My storied institution presents itself with the same veneer of ethics as Harvard. I know a lot of professors disgusted by the administration but it seems to be just what administrators do everywhere.
1
Wow. Well written piece that has made me think and casts a negative light on Harvard.
1
Take a look at the Hudson Institute’s past recipients. That should tell you a whole lotta stuff....
Murdoch? Et. Al.? Informative list. Given the current shifting sands of morality, what’s one Russian billionaire benefactor in the scheme of things?
That’s sarcasm BTW.
Take a look. Not exactly a “fair and balanced” portfolio of honorees.
2
Nothing new here with Harvard's association with redolent people. It awarded Mark Zuckerberg an honorary degree in 2017.
5
There is little to wonder that the cause of humanity suffers daily when facing decisions involving money. We, as a species, have come to realize that there are two gods among the 7 billion inhabitants of this earth as part of a universe. One god's name is "money" and the other god's name that is equally recognized, but not as egregiously flaunted, is simply called God or Allah or The Supreme Being or The Omnipitant One.
We must seem like a poor excuse for a species when we give high status to those who take on the mantle of gods with their money while at the same time ignoring or excusing the God that is always written with a first letter capitalized which is about the only honor and attention we give to the God who has no money at all.
1
Isn’t this the same hallowed institution that reportedly admitted Kushner as an undergraduate after his father made a multimillion dollar gift to it? As they say, $$$ are not only fungible but can strategically open all doors. Harvard, apparently, has a “price” like any other organization.
4
Maybe the money should have been used to promote higher education in Russia instead, since the Russian people, who originally "owned" the assets of the Russian State after Communism, basically made this guy rich.
4
Hmmm... Harvard, the greatest university on earth? Hardly.
I don’t say that to be mean or snarky to those with the right to drop the H bomb, but because I see Harvard scrabbling around in the gutters looking for pennies. A 30 billion dollar endowment should be enough money to buy a little dignity.
I think back on some of the well connected dimwits upon whom Harvard has conferred degrees. Two immediately spring to mind: George W Bush, who can barely finish a coherent sentence and Jared Kushner, who, as far as I know, has never uttered a sentence, at least not in public.
Were these, truly, the greatest students on earth? Or were they exactly the limp product to be expected when a university is willing to put its brand on the spawn of whatever donor pays the most?
The Ivies in general have this problem. Was Donald Trump really “Ivy material?” Well his father was rich...
The Ivy brand has been sullied by this wholesale retailing of their schools’ souls. Most folks know that Ivies aren’t destination schools because you will be with the smartest students, but with the best connected. I guess thats what really makes the sky high tuition worth it.
1
I don't think that this Russian money is the first dirty money Harvard ever collected. Not by a long shot.
My guess is Harvard has had both hands, and, feet in dirty money for a long, long time.
When does Harvard's "MBS Center for Criminal Justice and Civil Rights"- funded by MBS- break ground?
Harvard will see its star fall soon enough.
What with the affirmative action trial, medical researchers found to have manipulated data, and the ever present Harvard MBAs of the world in awkward positions of power (say no more, ahem George W Bush or Jared Kushner), their reputation will surely be eclipsed by institutions with more integrity and true merit.
1
And, while it's an American institution, Stanford...
1
The fortunes of Saudi Arabia and its crown princes including MBS are being "whitewashed" at Harvard as well. Like Mr. Blavatnik, they should be told thanks, but no thanks.
35
It isn’t charity that is cleansing the money.
It is using some of the money to launder the rest of the money that cleanses the money.
Leave charity out of it.
But no one affilated with the Hudson Institute would be expected to grasp this basic. It would undo the Hudson Institute.
And Harvard is doing what Harvard does. It is an acess to power factory. Harvard sells acess to power to smart people who want to get power and sells to people with power an insurance policy on that power. It spreads its bets just like Vegas. One reason it can’t go whole Asian. It has a portoflio to manage. All Asian would ruin the portfolio hedge.
2
Harvard is a business and has been one for a very long time. You can be a convicted federal felon, but if you donate enough money you can buy a seat for your academically-unqualified son. Just ask the President's son in-law. (To be fair, the father's $1.5m donation did pre-date his federal conviction).
Drew Faust, the ex-President of Harvard, constantly lamented the number of Harvard graduates going into fimance, chiding them by saying "You didn't come to Harvard to get rich." But when hedge fund titan Ken Griffin, Class of 1989, made a $150 million gift, Faust commented on his "extraordinary philanthropy." I guess you do go to Harvard to get rich, after all. (Again, to be fair, Griffin's gift went to support financial aid for undergraduates so it was for the greater good.)
Perhaps the greatest lesson to be learned comes not from Harvard's magnificent libraries or its grand lecture halls. Rather, the Wu-Tang Clan (whose menbers probably did not graduate from Harvard) made the astute observation that "Cash Rules Everything Around Me"--at Harvard and everywhere else in Donald Trump's America 2018.
4
A leading American university selling out its reputation for a few bucks? Say it ain't so!! As Mark Twain, an author with whom Harvard's administration and the luminaries that comprise its Board of Directors appear woefully unfamiliar, stated years ago:
Twain: Madam, would you sleep with me for $2,000?
[Feel free to make that $200 million if you like.]
Lady: Why, yes, sir, I would.
Twain: Madam, would you sleep with me for $2?
Lady: No! What type of woman [university] do you take me for?
Twain: Madam, we've already established that. Now we're just dickering price.
Veritas
11
Bernard Shaw, actually
Should we call it money laundering (or something else) instead of whitewashing?
3
Blavatnik has been funding science in various ways for a while now. See for example the "Blavatnik Award for Young Scientists"
http://blavatnikawards.org/
He is following the lead of Yuri Milner, another Kremlin connected rich guy who funds various prizes and institutes.
From the perspective of "bad" guys who fund good things, they are not so unique - the Sacklers, Mellons, Alfred Nobel, going all the way back in time this has happened. We should not be too surprised.
My interesting personal experience. I have been twice invited to fancy science award dinners, one by Blavatnik and one by Milner. In each case, the event featured fine dining with crystal, caviar and champagne. There were plenty of young Russian ladies and old famous scientists and artists around to add color to the events. I was personally repelled by it all. But I was fascinated to see scientists, even ones who I thought were above it all be so happy to act like a rich guy/gal for a night. I realized then that it is rather cheap for Blavatnik or Milner to cultivate friends in the science or art world. Friends who are powerful precisely because they are "not in it for the money".
If it were up to me, I would take big donations like what Blavatnik just made. BUT: the condition is that they should be anonymous. No quid pro quo. That would separate those who care for art and science from those who are promoting themselves. Will never happen, I know. But I will be an idealist for as long as I can be.
34
@Postdoc
Thanks for the eyewitness account. I see questionable donations all over academia (our very own Kochs and Sacklers among them) and in our capitalist system, the money isn't going away. However, I don't think the donations should be anonymous. I want to know who is funding the science professor who maintains that burning coal doesn't hurt the environment, etc.
7
@Postdoc: Your idea for anonymous donations would work well for elections too. It would satisfy the Constitutional argument for free speech while protecting candidates from the quid pro quo types. Like you say, it will never happen.
@Postdoc
Hey I don't care if it is anonymous or not. Blood money is blood money. If I am a poor person in Moscow and this guy has robbed my country hollow and now he's giving to Harvard anonymously and Harvard is laundering that money for science and you say anonymous as a requirement to the donation would satisfy your idealism, I out of a dingy apartment without heat in Moscow would call your stand immoral not idealistic.
15
And don't forget the Blavanik School of Government at Oxford University, whose self-described mission is "to inspire and support better government and public policy around the world."
22
If all dodgy foreign money was banned from universities many would bankrupt. It's not secret that donating huge amounts to sacred institutions is a good way to legitimize one's past. The recent mixed reaction to a Saudi Arabian leader killing a journalist is a recent and disturbing example. One hesitates to bite the hand that feeds it. And Saudi money permeates American institutions.
Good luck limiting it especially after electing a president who brings in all his rich cronies, none are strangers to foreign money.
Where are the conspiracy theorists when you need them? They choose climate change as hoax but not dirty money coming in, makes you wonder who pays their salary.
1
"Accepting gifts — especially naming gifts — from people with dubious sources of funds or close ties to despotic regimes encourages the view that dirty money can be cleansed by charity. What lessons does that teach Harvard students? And what message does it send to citizens of countries troubled by kleptocracy and corruption?" You might not mean that to be as naive as it sounds. ALL the money that comes to universities is of dubious source --there is no honorable way to make the kind of money that floats universities. Yes, dirty money can be cleansed by charity --sometimes. The trick is not to come up with an aphorism but with some kind of working rule. Probably flagrant violators of law and public morality (which leaves a whole lot of dishonorable billionaires who can at least partly ameliorate themselves through charity) need to be sent away. Certainly, Blavatnik does. Harvard is shameful here but the lesson should not be that we delude ourselves into thinking that some mountains of money are honorable. There are just degrees of dishonor.
1
Generally, as the size of the check gets bigger, the quality of the whitewash gets better.
1
Harvard has accepted donations before from people who acquired the money by questionable means. But the Russian oligarchs are another level when it comes to evil, corruption and exploitation. Harvard should take a second look at the wisdom of accepting this donation.
1
Considering Harvard's past leader, Larry Summers, helped pave the way for him to make his billions, it's nice to see him repay the favor.
2
While you're objecting to Harvard's acceptance of gifts from a Russian oligarch with a checkered past and a reputation for corruption, how about throwing Saudi Arabia in there which, through Crown Prince MBS and others, has donated millions of dollars to the University?
4
John Paulson made a fortune by devising unsustainable financial products for Goldman Sachs and then shorting them. A bit like designing a cruise ship guaranteed to sink and then taking out life insurance on the passengers. Yet when he gave $100 million to the Central Park Conservancy, the Times never noted the source of his wealth. Then he gave $400 million to Harvard for a school of engineering and applied science. I always liked Malcolm Gladwell’s idea to name it the John Paulson School of Financial Engineering,
5
Vast fortunes made within a short time are ripe for corruption, certainly within Putin's kleptocracy...while Russian people are going through a deeply unequal poverty, as the goods are not shared equitably. And Harvard is no dummy, fully cognizant that the Blavatnik type funds are tainted. And those funds are not 'entered to grow in wisdom', greed instead. The question is, can Harvard allow itself be considered less than truthful, while looking the other way?
“...What lessons does that teach Harvard students...
For one – if they can only afford to be there on a need-blind basis, to be a bit more circumspect about how the world around them really operates...
For another – Harvard is so potent a life’s springboard that one doesn’t even need to graduate to take over the world while still not even eligible for Elizabeth Warren’s job...
It’s no coincidence that Trump – a mere Wharton man – aspires only to evil nationalism and not to evil globalism...
And – even looking beyond mind-controlling apps – theirs is an august crowd...
While money laundering has been going on for as long as there has been money, it was a pair of Harvard alumni who invented the coin-operated money laundromat...
Gore’s invention of the Internet absolutely pales in comparison...
"As a Harvard alumna, I find this appalling"
I wonder which planet the author lives on? I suppose its the planet in which the 1% live; that hermetically sealed bubble where Ivy league school alumni can only be the best and do the best. Hasn't she observed how 1000s of graduates from Harvard, Yale and Princeton end up as water carriers for American Oligarchs and the reigning Plutocracy? Consider the Ivy league Economics departments. How many of the worthies there peddle Von Mises and Hayek and neoliberal deregulation claptrap? America today is a failed state precisely because of its Ivy Leaguers. 'Brilliant' men like Alan Greenspan, Larry Summers, Sandy Weil and most Bankers on Wall Street not to mention the Supremo of con artists, Bill Clinton and his partner in deception Hillary. If our Ivy League schools are indeed great, then they would have made America great in the last 40 years. Instead they have made a few men billionaires and the rest of us paupers in comparison. The other worthy achievements are, our sprinting towards Third World status with yawning income inequality, a rapidly metastasizing plutocracy, market oligopolies in every industry and a rapidly vanishing middle class. Someone needs to tell the author that outside of her Ivy League bubble very few of us consider Harvard or any other Ivy League school admirable. In the last 30 years or so they have excelled in teaching only one thing, how to enrich oneself with zero regard to anything else.
3
I have also given money to my alma mater in the United States of America. And for those who do not know, Len Blavatnik actually went to Harvard. He got his education there. And just so you know and do not get confused, most of Russia's current elite has gone to college in the US. An elite education in the US is the way to ensure that your kid will do very well in life, hence in years time and my daughter is going to the same elite college in the US that I went to.
2
Of course they are white washing Blavatnik's money. The Blavatnick Institute and Blavatnik Harvard Life Lab, will study what, exactly? Like the Koch's theory climate change will create longer agricultural seasons and feed more people while ignoring the violent weather and intolerable heat, the drying up and disappearance of lakes and waterways globally. Hiding behind their "philanthropy" they have created "institutes" a law schools, like Yale, to "persuade" that the free market and no regulations is the way to prosperity. For the Kochs and others in the fossil fuel mafia, not for "the people". Kavanaugh is a product of a Koch Institute. He's their boy on SCOTUS. The Kochs have long hated democracy, like their father, and have used their incredible fossil fuel fortune to "persuade" the GOP to their view. No coincidence most GOP den;y climate change. It's all about the money. And trump's space force may be a plot for the 1% to escape planet earth when it goes up in flames because the russians, the kochs, the trumps, will keep fossil fuels burning with no consequence to them. They have an exit plan for their fellow1%ers.
1
I am a Harvard affiliate, and I was also appalled when I saw that Blavatnik was a prominent donor. Blavatnik's name is currently plastered all over an innovation institute that he funded for somewhere between dozens and hundreds of millions of dollars, I believe. A generation of young innovators and entrepreneurs who interact with that institute will see Blavatnik's egregious acts whitewashed and tacitly approved. It's loathsome. What makes it especially loathsome and stomach turning is the impression it will leave on young entrepreneurs.
1
Unfortunately, Harvard is not alone in the game of accepting dubiously-earned money.
Name any institution of higher (l)earning and you’ll get “philanthropists” trying to clean their name with a building or lab or initiative.
Meanwhile, we can all continue our noble work trying to treat cancer, analyze which country to infiltrate next, and end poverty/ racism/ sexism/ you name it...
1
I too am a Harvard alum and see this as shameful, but typical, for Harvard. There’s a lot of dark money that has infiltrated various initiatives, and infrastructure, on campus-both foreign and domestic. Let’s face it, Harvard’s prestige is for sale to those who can afford it. The more light is shined on these dubious relationships, the better.
44
@Ellen
Yup. And you would be right. But remember Harvard is a hatchery for the oligarchs and "oiligarchs" of the world. Corporations are people too when it is convenient and corporations don't have consciences when it is also convenient. Morality is endangered or should I say obsolete.
The super-empowerment of wealth, even that nominally for good works, distorts our society for the worse.
3
It is called capitalism. There is no morality.
1
When Russians gave money (and other things) to Trump, they came to own Trump.
When Len gives money to American institutions, he will come to own them. If not entirely, then in part.
Because these institutions (I am assuming) do things that help Americans, I can see how accepting money will lead them to either withhold, or subvert things that otherwise help Americans.
Only an unhinged person thinks money comes with no strings attached.
3
Frankly, a little naive. As others have commented, no institution is innocent of taking dirty money. It is a shame that over time these institutions give legitimacy and prestige to crooks - helping them fill the gap in their egos. For example Andrew Carnegie had only a grade school education. As a wealthy man, did he fund poverty programs? No; he endowed libraries to establish himself as a learned man. But how many people have benefitted from those contributions.... ?
2
Duke University is named after a cigarette magnate, Rhodes Scholarships are funded by a diamond magnate who exploited native workers and whose legitimacy to own the mine at all as a European invader is questionable, and of course Alfred Nobel's fortune came from the invention of explosives. The list of people who made fortunes in ways that we now feel are inappropriate is long and exhaustive.
Our disapproval of how someone made his money will not change his wealth by a single penny. But turning up your nose at donations that can do good is the height of foolishness and disdainful pride. A $25,000 scholarship from Blavatnik does just as much good as one provided by Mother Theresa. What would you prefer he do with the money, buy another yacht and a few overpriced Monets?
18
@Whatalongstrangetrip
How about accepting money with the provision that your institution will tweak the curriculum to suit the donor? Arab money tweaks the Harvard curriculum, the Kochs choose the faculty at George Mason.
3
@Whatalongstrangetrip ... so if this gift is assisting the Russian to launder his dirty money, that's okay?
So the Rockefeller fortune was made without trampling on others? Or is it that Russians are genetically more pre-disposed to the sort of rough business practices that are typical in early forms of capitalism? And furthermore, what Ms. Marlowe is alleging in the article is mostly innuendo. There are also questions about how Mikhail Khodorkovsky built his fortune, but his long imprisonment has converted him from Saul to Paul.
1
One of Harvard's main roles has been and is to apply a pseudo meritocratic fig leaf on what is essentially currently a corrupt plutocratic nepotistic system riven with cronyism. I wonder what the moral equivalent of a "gentleman's C" is? Let's give the old boys and girls at Harvard one and move on. We all know this is going nowhere.
1
Apparently with some institutions tainted money ‘taint enough.
2
Len Blavatnik giving money to Harvard Med is nowheres near as corrupting of science as the stuff that goes on within the National Institute of Health. Nor is it materially more corrupt than some of Harvard's recent endeavors. But NIH has all the establishment science journalists on a leash; nor would their bosses welcome harsh, anti-establishment commentary on such sacred cows as the Federal health agencies have made themselves. Has to Harvard's recent endeavors ...watch this space.
Clearly we need to put personal accountability and progressive taxation back into the corporate world.
It is obscene and bad for society to have huge portions of GDP dispersed as the pet projects of totally amoral individuals.
3
When will civic-minded and clear thinking Americans rise to call for an end to the hegemony of the Ivy League Mafia ? These old East Coast private institutions are awash in dirty cash which has often served as nothing but bribe money to allow mediocre candidates and students to matriculate as long as Ma and Pa write seven-figure donations.
Take a cue from the indignant French today. Take measures to commence the peaceful dismantling of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. in the name of true egalitarian values which are obscenely absent in the United States today.
I've never understood this holier than thou attitude. I run a small non-profit, where we have to write grant after grant for small amounts, to hope to come to something like break-even. If Mr. Blavatnik wants to give us a contribution, trust me--I'm going to say "Thank you!".
11
@VHZ
You are part of what makes the corruption problem so intractable.
I grieve that so many of my fellow Americans think it is perfectly okay for the end to justify the means, when it comes to money or short-term gratification.
If you don’t want to take philosophy or religions’ word for it, take a look at history. The corrupt road nevers ends well.
8
Russia has spoiled everything good in this country. Hindsight shows that it wasn’t a nuclear weapon that we needed to prepare against, it was old fashioned greed from our fellow Americans that did us in. I wonder if their is a way to defend against just plain malignancy from within?
4
Unfortunately, dirty money is still green.
2
No collusion.
1
I attended my daughters college graduation a while back. It was a joyous occasion. But with many hundreds of graduates and half a gigantic stadium filled with family and well wishers I couldn’t get over the unbelievable business model I was witnessing.
Think about it. Their pricing goes up every year. Their endowments are huge. The government backstops loans for their tuition that even bankruptcy doesn't change. Student loans now exceed credit credit debt in this country and follow tuition payers to their graves.
Like everything else just follow the money. Harvard has the best business model of all. Its not surprising at all they take big checks from shady sources. Of course they do. They may wrap their model in virtue but what they really are is one great commercial business. Follow the money.
4
I'm sure Harvard feels they can put his money to better use.
I would agree. Nothing new, either.
2
Thank you, Ms. Marlowe. As a Harvard alum I have been appalled at the relationship the university is pursuing with Blavatnik. I get endless requests for donations, signed by PhD students at Harvard, begging me to support them in their studies so they can go forth and "help humanity." [Apparently the Blavatnik gifts are not enough.] I will not give to Harvard, as since 2013 it amounts to partnering with Blavatnik.
What lessons are learned? The university is obviously endorsing Blavatkin's use of the skills taught at Harvard Business School (where he got an MBA) to appropriate natural resources that belonged to the Russian people. Their country and economy in ruins, they could not defend their patrimony from the bottom feeders that poured in after a brutal 70-year erosion of their society called the Soviet system.
We are waiting for the university to share with us what due diligence they did when Blavatnik offered them his first millions. Did they get answers to the questions posed by the New Yorker in 2014 in their article "The Billionaire's Playlist": (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/01/20/the-billionaires-playlist).
Or did they simply drool uncontrolledly? We need answers and openness on the part of the university to rejecting these gifts.
9
I remember arriving to Harvard College for my freshman year and being introduced to a student who shared the name of one of the subjects of my work the summer before. At my work, I helped uncover violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which led to our team investigating a man named Omar Bongo, the former president of Gabon. This is a man who embezzled tens of millions of dollars from his country’s government, while most of his population lived on less than $2 a day. Omar Bongo lived a life of utter opulence while the people of Gabon suffered in poverty. The student, his son, shared the same name. He was the president of the most prestigious final club and seemed to be a star on campus. The son walked around campus wearing a mink fur.
I couldn’t believe that the son of one of the most egregious kleptocrats was bold enough to share his name, let alone that other people thought he (and his money) were cool. I learned all I needed to know about Harvard and its values that day.
21
"Yet a surprising number of respected American institutions don’t seem to get...the Hudson Institute and Harvard."
The Hudson Institute? It's an ideological think-tank that shredded what bit of credibility that it might have had by offering a home to the likes of Betsy McCaughey. I'm not sure it qualifies as "respected."
So many fortunes have been made in dubious ways and donated to charity or awards or universities. The Nobel peace prize is built upon explosive chemistry. The University of Chicago endowed from The Standard Oil fortune. Rhodes scholars from brutal mining in Africa. Well, it is hard to find a major institution that doesn’t have some funds from less than ideal sources.
6
@Ben P
Hard to know whether you are just genuinely naive or something else. Different time, different standards. We no longer think it appropriate to push children up chimneys or deny women the vote. Likewise with educational endowments.
4
In this type of situation Harvard should take the money only if there are absolutely no strings attached (naming rights, etc.) and should promptly donate 20% of the funds to programs aimed at fighting kleptocracy here and around the world.
5
The answer is no, they don’t know what it says. They sold out decades ago.
4
Can you think of a better use for the money? Do all charitable donations imply some level of corruption? Can bad people do good things?
3
Oh, I feel like I am watching a thrilling detective story. I can’t wait when Chernukhins’ source of income will be dragged to light.
2
What does it teach the students? It teaches, if you earn money through illegal and criminal activities, rinse your hands clean by donating the money for a good cause like education. Nothing prevents people do good things in later life.
2
@Kodali
So by your reckoning, you would have no problem with Harvard having an MBS Center for Criminal Justice and Civil Rights- funded by MBS?
I would be last on the list to entertain any affinity to the Russian government or those in cahoots with it.
But Mr. Blavatnik is an American citizen and despite the insinuations in this article there is no charge against him except that he was part of the wild west capitalism in the 90s in Russia.
That in itself should not condemn someone.
May I remind you that one of Mr. Putin's staunchest foes, Bill Browder, who Shepherded the Magnitsky Act through the US Congress and other countries, was at one time one of those who also went to Russia to make a fortune in those wild will west type days.
We don't condemn Mr. Browder for going to Russia and investing there to reap profits , so Mr. Blavatnik should be given the same consideration unless some concrete and specific acts of wrongdoing on his part are discovered.
This article is just a subtle attempt at a smear campaign against someone who has done nothing to deserve it.
We are better than that.
4
Whitewashing? Is that what we're calling money-laundering for purposes of foreign political influence in our elections now? During the 2015-2016 election season, Ukrainian-born billionaire Leonard "Len" Blavatnik contributed $6.35 million to leading Republican candidates and incumbent senators. Mitch McConnell was the top recipient of Blavatnik's donations, collecting $2.5 million for his GOP Senate Leadership Fund under the names of two of Blavatnik's holding companies, Access Industries and AI Altep Holdings, according to Federal Election Commission documents and OpenSecrets.org.
12
I don’t understand why one is surprised with the likes of Harvard taking in ‘dirty money’ as a donation . We see it time and time again that money is all that matters in today’s world . Be it in politics , society, corporations or institutions such as these, basic ethics are failing . It’s a world of ‘doublespeak ‘ and crass materialistic values we live in , and nothing else matters.
3
State-owned Rusian industries and worker collectives were sold off to select friends of Putin to the tune of $300 billion. Blavatnik's money was taken from the people of Russia. Putin used the state's powers as a tool of corruption. This week the MI GOP used the state legislature to gut a losing midterm outcome. My local water utility was not sold off, but my state clawed my vote back and gave it away to very rich people.
10
I agree that Harvard accepting a "naming" gift from this guy seems like too much of a moral compromise. On the other hand, most great fortunes are tainted, starting with America's own Robber Barons,and if their ill-gotten gains trickle back to more acceptable institutions, so much the better. But I'd agree, keep the names off the buildings, since in decades hence they will be chiseled off anyway (Trump Taj Mahal, anyone?).
4
THIS EXPOSE Gives us a future vision of generations from now when students will be rebelling against the naming of their institutions of higher learning to the highest bidder. Donations made from blood money earned by cutthroat plutocrats? Could someone kindly explain to me how that is less corrupt than maintaining the names of slaveholders in today's universities? I think it not to fine a point to question the morality involved in accepting donations from a person alleged to have been associated with one death every three days in the industry where his fortune was made. For me that does not even remotely approach passing the smell test. Our children, grandchildren and other future generations, who survive the destroyed planet we're leaving them, will question whether we had any ethical or moral standards. And rightly so. At very least (and I hold my nose while writing this--not a mean feat while typing), universities could demand that anonymous donations be made by those who are funding universities with ill-gotten gains from unscrupulous, amoral, monsters. As Metternich said, he who loves sausages and the law must never watch either being made. Well the same goes for observing the blood and guts of donations from the very rich who are bereft of any sense of basic morality, decency and fairness.
Immigration has many benefits for our nation and society, but there are clearly dangers, too. The NY Post is quoted as having written of concerns about "the importation of corrupt Russian business practices and values.” This appears to be happening right now.
There are some nations in the world, and Russia should be considered a prime suspect in this regard, where corruption is the ordinary means of doing business and deep corruption, including violent intimidation and even murder, are well known tools of business rulers. When people leave those nations, they don't necessarily leave those practices behind unless it becomes clear to them that they can't operate in the same way elsewhere. If corruption is all you have known, then corruption can seem ordinary, necessary.
It is shocking to consider that those who stole billions in Russia should be honored here as philanthropists. Tainted money, stolen money, cannot be cleaned up with the appearance of good deeds.
6
The author left out that Blavatnik is also a Harvard alum. He arrived in the U.S. in the late 1970s as a penniless refugee from Russia and was able to put himself through Harvard Business School, after having graduated from Columbia University.
While I don't condone or condemn how he made his money, it's important to remember that philanthropists like Carnegie, Rockefeller, Morgan, Frick, Gould, Duke, and Vanderbilt, all made their fortunes in often ugly and rough-and-tumble ways... and no one questioned their largess when they became philanthropists.
Today, no one seems too concerned at Lincoln Center or MIT over the massive donations of the Koch Brothers, and they are arguably one of the worst political influences in America. Or the Mercer family, who backed Steve Bannon and Breitbart. Is the Tisch School at NYU going to return that money from the Tisch family because they owned Lorillard, a huge tobacco company? One that knew it was selling death? Is the author also calling for Harvard return the Tisch Family's large donations? Or the Met, or the Central Park Zoo?
If the man is willing to use his money to help others, let him. Sure he could keep his $200 million and buy another yacht or a few more houses, but he chooses to give it away and other people benefit. Call it penance. Is the author's high-minded worry about the repair to his reputation worth robbing all of the recipients of his largess (he gives away a ton of money) of money that could help others?
6
@Jack It may be pertinent to point out that the Koch family fortune was made in Russia, marketing our oil technology to Stalin. Corruption seems to be the common denominator
1
Raises profoundly puzzling (at least to me) philosophical issues - as does money in general (e.g.: today's Edsall op-ed piece about Citizens United and money's role in undermining our democracy [or what's left of it] ). What if Blavatnik gave just to medical research? Would that be ok? Perhaps this gift indirectly does (since Harvard's money is 'fungible') How responsible was Blavatnik for those many Russian deaths in his journey to wealth? Should we care? The question of charitable contributions and non-taxable orgs is always iffy (as when administrators of non-taxable hospitals get paid millions in salary). Could even an omniscient deity figure it all out?
4
Now you don’t have to wait until you actually start practicing law or enter the political realm because you can start experiencing the benefit of foreign influence and money in your Harvard education! Maybe that could be a selling point in their brochure for those that are interested in that route.
Fascinating from a prestigious school that has turned out the most US Presidents and Supreme Court justices than any other.
10
As a friend and former colleague of Len Blavatnik during the 1990’s, and as minor participant in the privatization process and consolidation of state assets, it’s fair to note that process was essentially state sanctioned in Russia and encouraged by the American government, and western multinational institutions such as the IFC. The thought process in the west was that distributing state assets as quickly as possible, albeit clumsily and unfairly, would encourage capitalism to take root, protecting against the return of a state-run, command economy. In fact, there was no practical alternative to a fire-sale approach as there was no state institution impervious to the forces pushing for the immediate monetization of those assets. To call the process corrupt is not quite correct because there was no rule-set that was being contravened. If Len Blavatnik behaved amorally in Russia in the 1990’s, an important mitigating factor is that moral compasses had no bearings to take at that moment in time. If he's now using his fortune to buy a bit of absolution along the way, well that's certainly nothing new in the world of philanthropy.
14
@jsweetbaum
The article is more about Harvard's craven venality in accepting the money than about Blavatnik himself. Oligarchs attempting to buy a stairway to heaven are a dime a dozen.
3
@jsweetbaum
Oh, I think moral compasses have bearings at all times and in all places, even in the Russia in the 1990s.
@Cornflower Rhys I'll relate an anecdote for your consideration. In 1993 I borrowed a number of privatization vouchers, as it happened from Len Blavatnik, in order to invest in a wood processing facility a few hours from Moscow. When I arrived to tender the vouchers, officials at the privatisation centre determined that many of the vouchers were invalid as the rubber stamps on the back were illegible (a ruse). They then offered to exchange the invalid vouchers for valid ones, of course for a "fee". These were government employees mind you. In the end, I determined to drive to Moscow and exchange the vouchers with a friendly investment bank in order to avoid paying anything. Had the option not been available, would I have paid them their "fee"? My moral compass wasn't indicating, pay-bribe or don't-pay-bribe, particularly based on anything I knew from back home; this was another playing field with its own rules. Of course, I could have jumped on a plane back to NY to avoid the situation entirely, but the truth is I would have paid them. Does the end justify the means? Are some bribes moral and others immoral? I don't know. I do know there were a lot of grey areas in Russia in the nineties and you just had to hope you were doing the right thing.
What Mueller is working to discover is whether money corrupted this Administration -whether there was an implied or direct quid pro quo that demonstrated that America was for sale.
What does taking the spoils of pillage show? It shows that pillage is normal and after a year or two, acceptable.
But we know that already, right? Or we'd not be almost broken from the fatigue of trying to fight for clean water and the preservation of the environment in the face of an energy industry freed from restraint.
We would not have sold our children's future by promoting climate change so that we could rake in an executive bonuw in the net three months.
We would not have sold privacy and security down the river, allowing Equifax to collect data, not requiring that they secure it, and not even requiring that it be accurate when they use it to raise your interest rate.
And there are so many more examples from he overuse of civil forfeiture, the abuse of arbitration clauses, the way the loan industry is set to sink people in permanent debt, both student and payday.
What does taking whitewashed cash tell us? Absolutely nothing new.
10
Money is fungible. As you state in the article, this individual has not been charged with any crime in any country. Unless he is trying to influence the activities or policies of the university, his money is just as good as anyone else’s. If Harvard can use the funds to make life better for others, it should accept the money. If those affiliated with Harvard disagree they are free to sever their relationship with the University.
5
@clayton this disagreement is more than personal from the author. The author is lamenting the stain on the institution of Harvard - clearly by giving naming rights to donors the Institution is putting the name of the individual in play for generations to come. Had the author known beforehand that Harvard would accept money from such a dubious source they might have chosen a different place to get their education.
1
How much money has Harvard whitewashed? Community colleges are funded by ordinary citizens through their taxes, and state universities used to be. Harvard and similar institutions with large endowments have been funded by robber barons and financial tricksters. Their economics and business departments are unlikely to emphasize theories and understandings that irritate large donors and potential donors.
Harvard whitewashes the whole system. It perpetuates the American aristocratic establishment and class system. Worrying about Russian oligarchs is straining at gnats so that camels can be swallowed unnoticed.
35
Great piece. As someone who resigned after years of proudly working for and representing a venerable U.S. nonprofit over just such an issue, I believe there are degrees of venality and red lines that should not be crossed. The Lincoln Center’s decision to accept Koch funding—which cost it some trustees—falls into a grey area. It’s a performing arts center—not a climate change institute.
I have great respect for the director who resigned from an institute dedicated to fighting kleptocracy for accepting an oligarch’s donation and nothing but contempt for the board who accepted it. In this case you have to walk the talk or you corrode both the mission and values of the organization and most importantly the spirit of staff who are dedicating their lives to see it fulfilled.
What next the Trump Institute for Social Cohesion and Ethics in Governance?
51
It's not new for wealthy folks to buy out what were once charitable or public service entities. And surely no one believes that universities are going to pass up money, regardless of who is making the donation. Everything is for sale. Everything has a price.
18
I also went to Harvard and unfortunately even the greatest university on earth cannot afford to say no to $200 million from a person who isn't even accused of (let alone charge with) a crime. I understand the sentiment of this piece, but think about the lives that might be saved from medical research paid for by the gift.
12
@Prescott
You mean think about the modern day Taj Mahals which are constructed with this windfall. Campuses resembling five star spas, coaches recruited with seven figure salaries, etc. As venal as any absolutist monarchy.
23
@AE Disagree. Funding buildings is going to happen. What gets hurt when funding dries up is scholarships, research funds, etc... buildings always go up so the university remains at the top. You may not like it, but we're capitalists hre in America.
5
@Prescott
'We're capitalists here in America'.
All the more reason why Harvard's disgusting and feckless greed is unethical! Education and research are SERVICE careers-- if you want to make a killing , go work for Wall Street, not the hallowed halls of ivy !!!!
Profit has NO PLACE in education, you should be ashamed of your position.
Thank you for writing this, it is an important topic and question of integrity. For Harvard to accept his funds condones the corrupt basis on which the funds were accumulated. It's a closer link than many would like to admit, from accepting funds derived from corrupt business, to condoning the corrupt autocrat who presides over the kleptocratic Russian oligarchs, to condoning and normalizing the behavior of his friend, the Saudi Arabia dictator, who murders Washington Post journalists. It is past time for individuals and institutions to understand the times that we are in, and that corruption will ultimately not sustain, but rather destroy, the best of American institutions, lives, and institutions.
27
Harvard for a while now, has become part of the cess pool. Its ethical standards are non existent...
In addition, it does not excel at providing a superlative well rounded education. It is more a brand than real substance....
70
It’s part of the cycle of life to give back what you’ve gained over time - and a particularly well-worn path for the ruthlessly powerful - at a point in their lives they realize large donations will immortalize them, preferably with a building in their name, and perhaps even pay off some of their guilt over the ill-gotten gains, should they ever feel any.
Sometimes the younger generations might even perform public service, perhaps out of a sense of noblesse oblige.
As other commenters have noted, we have our very own Carnegies and Kennedys (Bushes too, for that matter).
Meanwhile the recipient is only too happy to engage in the same rationalisation - it’s not ‘whitewashing’, just getting back well-deserved funds from someone paying their debt to society.
6
Interesting point about 'paying their debts' - as for some US and Russian oligarchs this must surely include time in prison
1
"Hello, Harvard? I have a couple of shirts I want cleaned. Oh, you don't do that kind of laundering. So sorry to bother you."
64
@mancuroc
It's not money laundering if you don't get the money back, it's charity with ill gotten gains.
1
@LibertyLover
That would assume there is no quid pro quo here. It would beggar belief that Blavatnik, after thieving all this money from the impoverished Russian populace, donated the money to Harvard out of a pure heart. Even if it is "just" influence peddling (it probably is), it still is essentially a form of money laundering.
1
@LibertyLover
Hey, if you think the Russian gets nothing "back" for this gift, you're not really awake today.
1
It's sad because the purpose of such an education should be to create a society that is critical about such wealth gains. But remember so many colleges have outposts in the Middle East in regions where even civil rights are not respected. The point of a liberal education should be to change, protest, shine light upon such wrongs -- not get wealthy from it.
53
The fraction of research proposals funded by the NSF (National Science Foundation)
Funding Rate (percent of research proposals submitted)
2016 21%
2018 19%
Data https://www.nsf.gov/about/budget/fy2018/pdf/04_fy2018.pdf
It takes months to prepare a proposal but less than 1 in 5 is accepted for funding. Back to writing more proposal
Grant writing, rather than doing research has become the #1 activity of my colleagues - at an Ivy League University
The US has either too many University researches or too little funding - you decide.
The mismatch has attracted foreign Nations interested in acquiring more control over US Universities. Saudi Arabia is one example. China is another.
Colleagues of mine are funded by Saudi Arabia. Another college , after turned down by the NSF 5 times, NOT Asian applied to a Chinese funding agency. Promptly funded.
26
@Talesofgenji At NIH, the award rate is roughly 17%, down from ~30% in 2000. Unfortunately, grants often describe research already done or close to completion. Of course, marketable research gets siphoned off to the private sector after initially being funded by public money.
1
Institutions like Harvard do not stand for the ethical pursuit of knowledge. They have long stood for the unbridled pursuit of power, fame, and wealth, and so have their graduates. If knowledge is a path to power, fame, and wealth, they will pursue that too. And they have long taken the money of robber barons, whether in the 19th, 20th, or 21st centuries.
136
@Dean
When I was a freshman, I worked Dorm Crew, custodial work in student dorms. It was billed a "Harvard tradition" in the orientation package mailed to me over the summer. The bait is working reunion, when you could make thousands serving alumni at graduation.
Now mind you, I don't think cleaning toilets is beneath me. But for my fellow Harvard students? That was humiliating.
If you "won" the toilet-cleaning game, you moved up to management (of sorts) supervising other Harvard students cleaning toilets the following year. It seemed a sick game. So why, I asked myself, would Harvard do such a thing?
Over time, I came to the conclusion that Harvard took neurotic and smart overachievers and made them more neurotic, adding a heavy dollop of spitefulness to the mix.
The hope was to produce graduates who would go out into the "real" world and exploit others as much as possible, thereby earning vast sums for themselves. Harvard later cashes in during alumni donation drives (a finely-tuned machine, as you might imagine). Graduates are expected to tithe back to Mother Harvard. And this strategy has proven highly effective.
Harvard is a big business, like any other around the globe. Always follow the money.
Harvard is teaching its students exactly what it wants them to learn.
PS Harvard is not going to leave $200 million on the table. That's a lot, even to Harvard. And what's dirty about it? Isn't it dirtier letting sick people die? Have fun with that argument.
5
@Dean
They share the same non-values -- unbridled greed and a Hobbesian vision of human relations.
1
@Dean 17th and 18th, too...
Steal a loaf of bread and you're a thief. Steal a fortune and you're a titan of finance. Steal a crown and you're royalty.
Harvard, with its endowment of 30 billion dollars or so, has no need of $200 million. But, institutional greed is no different than individual greed, more is never enough.
262
@MEM
Yup.
And I've yet to see a huge fortune that didn't begin in, or get considerably advanced by, activities that weren't legal.
6
The rule of oligarchs is already operational in the US. Politics is governed by the rich and the super-rich who bankroll whichever politician sings their hymn. Some may believe they are being altruistic but these giant sums of donated money should be dispensed through democratic institutions.
In Australia we also have oligarchs who weaponise their money to pursue political goals. For example we have Gina Reinhart who uses her money to pursue giant coal-mining interests in Queensland to the detriment of the Great Barrier Reef and the environment.
Who pays the piper calls the tune and that tune is almost always climate change denialism for the needs of the greedy are endless. We can't afford this any more!
96
Mr. Blavatnik’s chemical company in a Texas filed one of the largest bankruptcies in US history. How is it that he had so much money to give to Harvard,
93
@Nb, because the company was a separate entity that had to make money on its own. If someone owns several companies, he/she/they don't usually put them into one big company. That's because every business has different risks. By your interpretation, if a company is doing poorly, the owner should take money from a successful company and put it the poorly performing company. But that may not fix the problem, and if so, that money would be a losing investment.
8
@NR
It's OK when a corporation files bankruptcy but shame on you if you file bankruptcy. I'll have a round of double standards please!
1
@NR. He should at least pay ALL its debts.
Ann, I don’t disagree and I wish some of our institutions lived by a higher moral code, but consider for example the Kennedys and Bronfmans who may not have been too dissimilar many years ago.
27
@Mike Someone once said by the third generation all money is legitimate. This is no doubt how it's done.
3
@Mike Following this thought, I shudder to think this guy’s kid could be President someday...
@Mike Whataboutism isn't really a defense (in point of fact it's a type of fallacy). Lets stick with the here and now and the subject actually under discussion.
1
One reason that US colleges and universities like foreign students is that many pay full freight, or even more more in this guy's case. But they are looking the other way on the source of the funds. Many students from a large country near here are children of government officials. How did Mom fly you around the US to see ten colleges on her $300/mo salary at the city planning department? Must be a good saver.
94
Really tough thing ... when "bad people" (and sometimes, it's far from clear just how "bad" they may [or may not] be) either by way of penance or image enhancement or ?
do something GOOD for a change.
I remember how Lincoln Center "grappled" (probably took them 10-15 minutes at a Board Meeting, given the "resolution") with the "issue" of Koch putting his name on - arguably - the most visible available spot in the complex.
Again, I wasn't at the meeting, but I'd bet my life that the toughest question was "blowback" - just how many wealthy LIBERAL New Yorkers would revise their giving plans in light of LC's craven-ness.
Ditto, the Museum I love more than most, "the Brooklyn," who had to ask whether Sackler/Oxycotin/opioid money had too much blood on it.
I get it how a politician almost HAS TO return contributions from pariahs.... But maybe, needy non-profits should follow the unappealing don't ask/don't tell model.
As for Harvard, when you're accepting funds that have no discernible use - short of Armageddon - a century or more into the future, maybe there should be an ethicist on the relevant committee or committees.
57
@edtownes about a decade ago the CEO of United Health Group went on a giving spree in Minneapolis. When a professor of forensic accounting in Iowa discovered that the source of his largess was derived from back-dating stock options, it caused turmoil throughout the nonprofit community. At least one arts organization returned the money which had been used to put his name on a theater and the short-fall had to be absorbed by the board. Several other groups were under pressure to do likewise.
23
@edtownes Harvard certainly uses all of their endowment income. You might think that the research and education that they do isn't the best way to spend it, but they definitely do spend it!
6
@David desJardins
Harvard's endowment hovers around $36 billion. In fiscal 2018 they contributed $1.8 billion to the University's budget, around 35% of the school's operating budget for the year. With an average annual return of 12.2% in fiscal 2017 the endowment earned almost $4.5 billion. That doesn't appear to equate with their using all of their endowment income. At the same time a year at Harvard will run you more than $60k, if you can get in.
25
Well, Andrew Carnegie endowed hundreds of libraries, the Carnegie Foundations, and generally contributed to laudable institutions in America. We wouldn’t be better off if he hadn’t tried to clean his money. The larger question is whether, as the recent book Winners Take All asserts, private philanthropy should determine what gets supported.
39
@Susan It's not the same, though. The Carnegies and Rockefellers kept their (ill-gotten) money in America...
2
@Susan....Blavatnik is a murdering Russian oligarch. Carnegie wasn't..at least as far as I know....so why are you comparing the two?
1
thank you for this great piece. I was so sad to see the same Blavatnik spoliating the V & A museum here in London. Not to mention Oxford stretching the meaning of the word Irony with its Blavatnik School of Government. Gross. Coming up next: Harvard's new Kushner Institute for Ethics
261
@matt Only if Harvard accepts promissory notes, or underwater mortgages.
3
Slowly, surely, insidiously.... the entire rancid world is deteriorating into a third-world Russian-Republican oligarchy trickling down their ill-gotten gains onto the peasant classes from their gilded balconies.
Such charitable criminals...
244
@Socrates That's why our political and business elite is willing to get in bed with them. They are capitalists now. Ruthless, authoritarian capitalists but capitalists nevertheless. As long as they are not commies, I guess it's OK to ally yourself with Russia now.
1
@DAS
Meet the new bosses - same as the old bosses.
A lot of them were Soviet apparatchiks who became capitalists overnight when the opportunity to loot state assets presented itself - by courtesy of Chicago School advisers. It's no accident that the big boss is a KGB alum.
Harvard has a whole unit that is dedicated to understanding the true source of the wealth behind their major international donors. It can be difficult in many cases, but this doesn't sound like a tough call.
I'm surprised they took the money.
129
@Cousy
One problem for non-profits is the shortage of large sums of money that are clean.
56
This is a good point, and it speaks directly to the issue of large institutions’ having abandoned the idea of campaigns, in which a large number of relatively small gifts allow the funding of valuable initiatives, in favor of wooing the very wealthy to make these marquee grants. A Yale fund-raiser once confessed that her office only really cared about 150-200 people, among all the university’s alumni.
43
@Cousy Foreign students and donors have long propped up our elite universities.
1