They All Signed the “Harper’s” Letter. Where Are They Now?

It’s been 5 years since Harper’s revealed “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate,” a cri de coeur signed by 153 public intellectuals that warned towards threats to freedom of expression from each the proper and the left. “The free change of data and concepts, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is day by day turning into extra constricted,” the letter proclaimed. Whereas it acknowledged that such threats have usually emanated from “the novel proper,” it targeted the majority of its concern on censorious campaigns from inside liberal cultural establishments: “Editors are fired for working controversial items; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity; journalists are barred from writing on sure matters; professors are investigated for quoting works of literature at school; a researcher is fired for circulating a peer-reviewed tutorial examine; and the heads of organizations are ousted for what are generally simply clumsy errors.”

Reginald Dwayne Betts, one of many letter’s signatories, informed The New York Times that he had been significantly troubled by the compelled resignation of the paper’s opinion editor, James Bennet, a month earlier, a choice many different signatories had additionally criticized. The summer season of 2020 was outlined by the George Floyd uprisings—the high-water mark of social justice activism throughout Donald Trump’s first time period—and Bennet’s sacking was arguably the highest-profile instance of what the signatories of the letter, and lots of to their proper, may name “cancel tradition.” In hindsight, the letter signaled a serious shift in mental discourse: Lower than a decade into the “Nice Awokening” that signatory Matthew Yglesias recognized as having begun round 2014, a swath of largely liberal writers had been declaring en masse that wokeness had already gone too far.

Just a few months later, Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump. The elite tradition of the Biden years could be notably extra unfriendly to “woke” speech-policing than that of the earlier decade. This “vibe shift” might be seen within the fascism-­curious downtown Manhattan arts scene often called Dimes Square; within the profitable anti-woke Substack empires constructed by previously mainstream journalists (together with Harper’s letter signatory Bari Weiss, who left the Instances in protest of the Bennet firing); and within the rise of a “popularist” wing of the Democratic Get together that cautioned towards identification politics and radical positions like “defund the police.” Cultural elites to varying extents embraced the backlash towards Black Lives Matter, #MeToo, and trans activism—a backlash pioneered by right-wing activists like Christopher Rufo and generously backed by the Silicon Valley oligarchs who would go on to fund Trump’s 2024 marketing campaign. The Harper’s letter wasn’t the primary instance of this backlash, however the sheer vary of its signatories—together with some revered voices on the left, like Noam Chomsky—and the seeming reasonableness of the textual content itself marked what would turn into a sturdy shift.

Flash-forward to 2025. The backlash towards wokeness is the core of Trump’s second administration, and it’s getting used to justify an assault on free speech unequaled for the reason that McCarthy period. Trump has banned diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives all through the federal authorities; has used the levers of the state to compel universities and different elite establishments to do the identical; and has repeatedly jailed legal residents for engaging in what was once protected speech—often speech in protection of the human rights of Palestinians. However as In These Times famous in April, just under a quarter of the Harper’s letter signatories have spoken up for the detained Columbia scholar Mahmoud Khalil and different victims of Trump’s unconstitutional crackdown. (Those that have embody progressives like my fellow Nation columnists Jeet Heer, Katha Pollitt, and Zephyr Teachout.) For the massive majority—notably together with Weiss, a number one champion of Israel’s battle on Gaza—Trump’s reign of terror has apparently been much less objectionable than the irritating undergraduate and entry-level scolds of the 2010s.

If these erstwhile free speech champions had been solely responsible of hypocrisy—or unhealthy religion—they might hardly be price writing about now, however in some ways they helped lay the groundwork for Trump’s second time period. Take into account the column for which Bennet was ousted, which was among the many inspirations for the Harper’s letter: a Republican senator, Tom Cotton, calling for the use of military force to violently suppress free meeting (in protest of deadly police violence, no much less). Cotton just lately described Khalil as “a pro-Hamas foreigner” and scoffed at the concept that he has any rights price defending. From the beginning, the speech being defended was advocating the violent, top-down protection of current social hierarchies—which in 2025 is just not in the slightest degree summary.

A few of the Harper’s letter signatories who spent a lot of the Biden period bemoaning the excesses of the woke left, amongst them Anne Applebaum, Jesse Singal, and Thomas Chatterton Williams, have additionally condemned Trump’s assaults on free speech. Whereas that is honorable and definitely preferable to the choice, all of them ought to look at their position in serving to to construct a broad elite consensus that has functioned primarily to legitimize Trump’s actions. Across the similar time because the Harper’s letter, a preferred meme began circulating on-line wherein the comic Tim Robinson, wearing a preposterous scorching canine costume, insists he’s “looking for the man” who crashed a hot-dog-shaped automotive. In the present day, amid the wreckage of America’s tutorial and cultural establishments, far too many intellectuals are nonetheless looking for that man.