Feeling like a medieval messenger, Abraham Verghese said, the distinguished physician and writer had “slipped into the besieged community” of Harvard University Thursday to deliver the school’s commencement address.

Any other year, such a metaphor would have been absurd. Even a year ago at Harvard, the very notion of community was stretching the definition of the word, with students and faculty at odds over the school’s response to the conflict in the Middle East. A matter of weeks ago, twin internal Harvard reports had found both a rise in “Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli bias” and in “Anti-Muslim, Anti-Arab, and Anti-Palestinian bias.” No wonder the university’s President Alan Garber called the 2023-24 academic year “disappointing and painful.”

But nothing squelches internal fighting like a common enemy. This week, Harvard finally got its act together to defend itself, and by extension, all American universities, against extraordinary governmental attacks by articulating a defense resting on three granite pillars: freedom of speech, the importance of the rule of law and the value of America educating the world.

Such, of course, are traditional Republican values as well as Democratic positions, arguably more so, given Democrats queasiness over at least the first two during the COVID era.

Finally, a higher education sector that had fallen under the thrall of extremists and thus removed itself from the lives of most Americans has figured out that it can explain its importance if it does so in language core to the founding and essence of this republic. Such a defense was a long time coming but was balm for the ears once it arrived at what must surely have been just about the most politically charged graduation in Harvard’s long history, given that contemporaneous news of a court putting a hold on the Trump administration’s intent to prevent Harvard from enrolling international students became part of the ceremony.

After all, what American argument could possibly be made for prohibiting international students, at least beyond the tiny percentage employed as some kind of spy? The benefits flow both ways: loyalty to America from such graduates has long been a major source of U.S. soft power and, of course, their full tuition, typically, boosts the local economy and often subsidizes low-income domestic students. And who beyond a xenophobe could possibly believe that one’s education is not enhanced by a classmate from elsewhere in the world, a truth that applies to kindergarten just as much as at Harvard?

Garber was greeted by a long, standing ovation at Harvard on Thursday, reflective of broad appreciation of his stand against the Trump administration. But Verghese, of Stanford University, a physician who spoke of compassion, healing and of life’s brevity, was the chief messenger of sanity.

“The outrage you must feel, the outrage so many feel,” he said, “also must surely lead us to a new appreciation. Appreciation for the rule of law and due process, which till now we took for granted — because this is America after all!”

Verghese noted it was “a reflex of so-called strong men to attack the places where truth and reason prevail.” An immigrant himself, he captured the fundamental optimism of the aspirational arriver on American shores: “Who believes in America more than the immigrant who runs down the gangplank and kisses the ground?”

He said the values of a university fighting against “a cascade of draconian government measures” represent the values of the entire nation and he did so with optimism, this being a graduation and all.

“I know,” he said, “that we will find our way back to an America whose attributes I admired from afar.”

We know that too. And we also know that the students who graduated in recent weeks from many fine universities, including those matriculating next weekend at the University of Chicago, will be among those charged with that return.

“Though many would be loath to admit it,” Garber said Thursday at Harvard, “absolute certainty and willful ignorance are two sides of the same coin, a coin with no value but costs beyond measure.”

Here was a clever, even a passive-aggressive metaphor of a meme, along the same lines as Verghese saying that immigrants can and will “keep America great.” “The world,” Garber said, “tempts us with the lure of what one might generously call comfortable thinking, a habit of mind that readily convinces us of the merits of our own assumptions, the veracity of our own arguments, and the soundness of our own opinions, positions, and perspectives — so committed to our beliefs that we seek information that confirms them as we discredit evidence that refutes them.”

It was inspiring to hear such strong minds focus not on dogma or the grievances of identity politics but on the importance of critical thinking, of staying open to the world, of challenging one’s own certainties, of being led not as sheep scared to go against the majority and determined to filter all facts through personal biases but as Americans open to being flat wrong. It is not only Harvard’s best defense — or any university’s best defense — against an authoritarian government. It is this country’s best defense.

The next step, though, is to better understand why those attacks on free academic speech and openness to the world are arriving from a legitimately elected administration with the backing of so many fellow Americans, including so many of those who value freedom above all else.

That’s the most important charge to the Class of 2025.

___

©2025 Chicago Tribune. Visit at chicagotribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.