Backlash at Yale to its negotiations with Trump shine a light on the danger of smaller authoritarian structures in civil society

As news started to spread of Yale’s leadership negotiating a deal with the Trump administration, the university’s faculty, students and alumni sprang into action to oppose any settlement. What the president and lawyers intend remains unclear. In the case of Harvard, it appears that Trumpists – and Trump himself, for that matter – might have been leaking about concessions being imminent partly to put pressure on the university. What is clear is that the Trump administration has embarked on a wide-ranging investigation of Yale, accusing it of discriminating against white and Asian students. But in any case, the battle over Yale’s response reveals a troubling pattern. Many of us had thought that the US possessed a robust civil society that could act as a counterweight to an overbearing government and resist authoritarian encroachments. What few reckoned with: its institutions themselves can be run in a fairly authoritarian fashion – universities being a prime example, with deleterious consequences for democracy as a whole.

The argument for the freedom-preserving role of civil society has been known at least since a French aristocrat travelled the US in the early 19th century in order to uncover why American mass democracy, unlike democracy in his native country, appeared stable and peaceful. Alexis de Tocqueville ended up singing the praises of how Americans are always associating with each other to discover and, if necessary, defend common interests. That wisdom still resonates in lived experience today, starting with birdwatchers and the PTA.

Jan-Werner Müller is a Guardian US columnist and a professor of politics at Princeton University

Continue reading…