Translate

Monday, December 30, 2024

Introducing Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee, Prize-Winning author of "The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer" and "The Song of the Cell"

Friends:

I am a great admirer of Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee, the Pulitzer Prize–winning physician and author of several books, most notably "The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer." I highly recommend the audiobook version
. He needs no introduction in the field of oncology, meaning a focus on cancer prevention and treatment, but rather to those in my corner of the universe who might not yet be aware of this luminary.

What makes 
Mukherjee a rock star is that he is able to share his vast scientific knowledge and explorations about cells and cancer in language that is not only accessible but also very engaging. I appreciate how he intersperses history, storytelling, and classical literature into his accounts, showing how the liberal arts or humanities expand thought that we otherwise think of as "scientific" or "technical."

At the risk of sounding cheesy, I confess that reading 
The Emperor of All Maladies swept me off my feet.  His storytelling was so vivid and inspiring that, for fleeting moments, I found myself imagining a different life—one where I, too, might have pursued the path of a scientist with his blend of passion, brilliance, and the arts.

I caught myself fantasizing about what it might take to make such a career change now, captivated as I was by the beauty and purpose he brings to his meticulous pursuit of the science of healing. Somewhere, I read that he teaches his students to view each cell as a garden with its unique structure and singular beauty. Some, of course, get off the grid and cause harm. This is the stuff of greatness.

His latest book is "The Song of the Cell: An Exploration of Medicine and the New Human is the focus of this piece that came out a year ago in the Stanford Magazine. The story mentions how Mukherjee co-founded biotech ventures, advancing therapies like CAR-T in India to harness the immune system against cancer. His research is visionary and compassionate. I hope and trust that his explorations will ignite new generations of scientists equally desirous to unravel life's mysteries in ways so compelling and humane.

I hope that Dr. Mukherjee's research and writing are helpful to others as much as they've been to me. Happy New Year, everybody!

-Angela Valenzuela

Song of the Scientist

Photography by Bill Wadman | Dec. 2023 | Stanford Magazine

Begin at the beginning, inside a cell. That’s where the mystery starts. Float around in the protoplasm for a while, inspecting the nucleus, looking for broken cogs, rusty machinery. Squeeze through the membrane pores and inspect the surface proteins there. Cells tell stories if you look closely enough. If you know how to read them. 

“Cells speak to me, especially blood cells,” says Siddhartha Mukherjee, ’93, the Pulitzer Prize–winning physician-author. He’s seated at a microscope in his Columbia University oncology lab on a snowy winter morning, peering inside white blood cells—immune cells designed to fight off infections—in a smear of bone marrow on a glass slide. Cancer can hijack these cells, destroying the body’s ability to fight infection. He describes these mornings in his latest book, The Song of the Cell. 

“On Monday, I arrive much earlier than my patients, when the morning light is still aslant across the black slate of the lab benches. I close the shutters and peer through the microscope at blood smears,” he writes. “The slides are like previews of books, or movie trailers. The cells will begin to reveal the stories of the patients even before I see them in person.”

Mukherjee, both a hematologist and an oncologist, transforms the stories hidden within our cells into massive, bestselling books that explore what it means to be human in a world where cells define all life. His three best-known titles journey first through the history of cancer, then genes, and finally cells, building metaphors and asking weighty questions about the foundations of science and where it is headed. Then he takes what he learns from his explorations in writing and returns to the laboratory with new ideas for treating patients. Those explorations, in turn, feed his work with four biotech start-ups he co-founded—three in the United States and one in India—that are developing therapies for leukemias and other blood cancers. 

“Sid thinks big and sees big,” says Atul Gawande, ’87, himself the author of four bestselling books on medicine, a surgeon, and a friend of Mukherjee’s. “He’s able to see the entire landscape of cancer, the gene, and then the cell, and then on and on. He’s driven by understanding at the molecular level what our lives are like as an organism, and even at the societal level. That’s how he makes sense of the world.” 

‘Sid thinks big and sees big. He’s able to see the entire landscape of cancer, the gene, and then the cell, and then on and on.’

From the microscope room, Mukherjee walks down a hall, past the lab’s work benches, into his office. The phone rings. It’s his wife, the sculptor Sarah Sze, calling from across town, where she’s installing an exhibit at the Guggenheim Museum, to remind him to pick up one of their daughters after school—they have two, ages 13 and 18. (In 2016, Vogue magazine ran a photo of Mukherjee and Sze in her New York studio under the headline “Meet the Most Brilliant Couple in Town.”) The pair were recruited together to Columbia in 2009, where Mukherjee is an assistant professor of medicine and Sze is a professor of visual arts. 

Mukherjee apologizes for his messy office, but it’s not messy, really, just a reflection of the many different directions his mind spins. Leaning back in his chair, he surveys the books and papers scattered across his desk, which is next to an overfilled bookshelf. History, medicine, science, literature—he quotes from across disciplines not only in his writing but also in his daily conversations. He has a particular fondness for the playwright Anton Chekhov, who, he likes to point out, was also a physician. “I read all the time,” he says. He reads in bed, at the kitchen table, in his lab, on planes. That’s how he writes, as well—whenever he gets a free moment. He nods toward what he calls “his famous red writing bed.” It’s a cot, now faded orange, covered with an old quilt. 

Mukherjee’s books, beginning with The Emperor of All Maladies, which tells a history of cancer and won the 2011 Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction, are talked about in the scientific community “with some kind of awe,” says Irving Weissman, a Stanford professor of pathology and of developmental biology who is renowned for his stem cell research. The Gene, Mukherjee’s 2016 bestseller, charts the discovery of the basic unit of heredity, from Gregor Mendel’s wrinkled peas to the genetic engineering tool CRISPR. And The Song of the Cell, published in 2022, is a 496-page crash course in cellular biology—one that helps readers understand the significance of medicine’s cellular therapies and the promise they hold for treating anything, or maybe everything, that ails us.

Book jacket for The Emperor of All Maladies

What’s special about Mukherjee, Weissman says, is that he thinks deeply about the world of science and medicine and can translate that to the public. “Being creative in two fields and having the desire to try to help people with your creativity—well, I think that encapsulates Sid.” 

Life’s Work

Mukherjee was fascinated with cells early on. But then he was interested in so many things. Born in Delhi in 1970, he trained as a singer of Indian classical music, learned languages easily, and explored everything from science to poetry to art to philosophy. He remembers a biology teacher who talked about the big unanswered questions in the field, like how do your cells take on different functions, since they all contain the same DNA? How do they form an organism?

As an undergraduate at Stanford, he worked in the lab of Nobel laureate Paul Berg, famous for his recombinant DNA research that led to gene splicing and helped launch the biotech industry. He liked how Berg’s career brokered the worlds inside and outside the lab. “Paul was one of the global leaders in what is now the field of the ethics of genetics,” Mukherjee says. “I was very interested in ethics.” After graduating, he moved to England to attend Oxford University on a Rhodes scholarship, where he lived the life of a scientist, immersed in the world of immune cells, T-cells, and cell surface proteins. His PhD in immunology provided some of the keys to unlocking future therapies. To truly understand medical science, though, he believed he needed to learn from patients as well, so he moved to Boston, where he enrolled in medical school at Harvard. 

During an oncology fellowship at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Mukherjee faced daily life-or-death decisions about patient treatments. That’s when he started keeping a journal, trying to make sense of so much suffering. The Emperor of All Maladies draws from those experiences—“an epic story that he seems compelled to tell, the way a passionate young priest might attempt a biography of Satan,” wrote Jonathan Weiner in a New York Times review of the book. 

“[As] I emerged from the strange desolation of those two fellowship years, the questions about the larger story of cancer emerged with urgency,” Mukherjee wrote in the book’s prologue. “How old is cancer? What are the roots of our battle against this disease? Or, as patients often asked me: Where are we in the ‘war’ on cancer? How did we get here? Is there an end? Can this war even be won?” Mukherjee spent five years reading scientific papers and history books, and interviewing physicians, scientists, and patients. Among his chapters are the stories of Atossa, the Persian queen whose Greek slave cut off her cancerous breast, and the primitive radiation and chemotherapy treatments of the early 20th century. 

“I was thinking, ‘Who is going to read 600 pages on cancer?’ ” Sze recalls. “ ‘It sounds like a real downer.’ ” She admits now that she couldn’t have been more wrong.

The book begins on May 21, 2004, just after Mukherjee’s patient Carla Reed was admitted to the cancer ward on the 14th floor of Massachusetts General Hospital. The 30-year-old kindergarten teacher and mother of three from Ipswich, Mass., was diagnosed as having acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). ALL grows out of the bone marrow, where it produces white blood cells that don’t look normal under a microscope. Reed’s were broken cells, unable to fight off infections. And they would multiply quickly, crowding out the healthy blood-forming cells needed for life. “Leukemia is cancer of the white blood cells—cancer in one of its most explosive, violent incarnations,” Mukherjee wrote. “Its pace, its acuity, its breathtaking, inexorable arc of growth forces rapid, often drastic decisions; it is terrifying to experience, terrifying to observe, and terrifying to treat.”

That first day in the hospital, Mukherjee told Reed her chances of survival were 30 percent and that chemotherapy would begin immediately. He would infuse toxic chemicals into her body repeatedly over the coming months. She slept poorly, her hair fell out, she couldn’t eat. Treatment after treatment, lying on a table, she told Mukherjee she often wondered whether she would ever wake up. 

“Walking across the hospital in the morning to draw yet another bone marrow biopsy, with the wintry light crosshatching the rooms, I felt a certain dread descend on me,” Mukherjee wrote, “a heaviness that bordered on sympathy but never quite achieved it.” It wasn’t the first time he’d realized the need to create space for himself, separate from his patients. In 2002, he’d attended an exhibition at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, where he met the artist. They fell in love, and after their wedding in 2004, Sze remembers her new husband being overcome by worry for his patients. But she also remembers how, even then, he continued to think on a grand scale. Late one night, she joined him for dinner at the hospital cafeteria.

“Everyone was in scrubs, looking worn out,” Sze remembers. “We were having something like mac and cheese, I don’t know, it was all looking very grim. He told me: ‘There are two things I want to do. I either want to write a book about cancer or start a hospital in India.’ I thought, ‘Great, sweetheart, there goes your beeper.’ ”

Reed would fully recover, rejoining the life of her family. For Mukherjee, watching such transformations were among the most “sublime moments of my clinical life.” He set out to recapture that feeling again and again.

Family Stories

The Gene elevated public discussion about genetic research, just as The Emperor had done for cancer. “First the idea of the gene had to be invented. Then the physical entity, present in each cell of our bodies, in every living thing, had to be discovered,” wrote James Gleick in a New York Times review. “The story of this invention and this discovery has been told, piecemeal, in different ways, but never before with the scope and grandeur that Siddhartha Mukherjee brings to his new history.”

Book jacket for The Gene

In the story, Mukherjee writes of family distress and mental illness as he explores the intersections of biological inheritance and historical trauma, of genetics versus the environment. “Madness has been among the Mukherjees for generations,” he writes. In Delhi, he and his older sister grew up in a home that included their paternal grandmother and an uncle, her adult son, who had schizophrenia. Another of his uncles had bipolar disorder. Mental illness was seen as a family affliction. In the book, he recalls his grandmother, Priyabala, with reverence. “She weathered the buffets of heredity with something more than resilience: a grace that we, as her descendants, can only hope to emulate.” He dedicated The Gene to his grandmother and to Carrie Buck, a young woman forcibly sterilized in 1927 under Virginia’s eugenics law.

A few years later, Mukherjee turned his writerly attentions from the gene to the cell. It happened during the COVID-19 pandemic, when he was immersed in broken cells and surrounded by sickness, the ambulance sirens a constant wail outside his New York office window. He was desperate for a world of cohesion and symmetry, so he wrote about the need for balance within cells. He probed how human health depends on cellular connection, much like it does on human connection. And that brought to mind how much he had missed his family during his first year at Stanford, a story he tells in The Song of the Cell

Through exchanging letters with his dad, he learned more about the migration journey he’d taken. Sibeswar, known as Shibu, had fled his home in East Bengal (now Bangladesh) with his mother and four brothers just before the partition of India in 1947. The upheaval was one of the most violent in world history. “Partition was the big story [that] loomed on our lives for a long time,” Mukherjee says. “It was such a traumatic event.” Through the letters, Mukherjee began to understand how hard his father had worked to build a new sense of belonging in Delhi. In the winter of Mukherjee’s frosh year, Shibu sent him a plane ticket home to India, knowing his son would need comforting. “My father was there, as he would be year after year, when I returned, with a white shawl draped around himself, and an extra one to wrap around me,” Mukherjee writes.  “Coming back. Belonging.”

The Song of the Cell follows the history of scientific inquiry that eventually discovered life was built out of the microscopic units we call cells. Mukherjee’s narration keeps readers swimming through protoplasm, the living part of a cell, with its nucleus, cytoplasm, and organelles. Mukherjee discusses the ethical debates that have surrounded novel technologies such as in vitro fertilization, stem cell transplants, and gene cloning. And he explores the concerns surrounding modern-day advances in genetic manipulation, urging caution in the new world of CRISPR, a power­ful gene-editing technique that he and other scientists use in their labs but that also could be used in the creation of designer babies. 

“He’s very artful in telling stories that make you feel the humanity behind the science stories,” says Tyler Johnson, a Stanford clinical assistant professor of medicine in oncology and a science writer. “He’s able to demystify the inner workings of DNA and cellular metabolism in a way that is faithful to the science but comprehensible to people who are not scientists.”

Making Therapies

Mukherjee, dressed in a blue plaid suit and a black collarless shirt, with a gold ring on each hand, gets up out of his chair and strides through his office door, headed down the hall to the heart of his lab, the benchwork rooms with beakers and centrifuges and jeans-clad scientists growing cancer cells and creating therapies.

Mukherjee’s lab studies the biology of blood development in premalignant and malignant diseases such as myelodysplasia, which often advances to acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), a cancer characterized by an overproduction of immature blood cells that take over the bone marrow and pour into the bloodstream. About half a dozen projects in the lab aim to fight these diseases by using new gene-editing approaches such as base editing, which helps scientists more precisely target small, cancer-linked mutations. Most of the projects are focused on improving treatments for AML, the deadliest form of leukemia. 

Abdullah Mahmood Ali, an assistant professor of medical sciences at Columbia who collaborates with Mukherjee, updates him on the progress of an experimental therapy to treat AML—a variation on bone marrow transplants that protects healthy cells from the toxicity of treatments that can kill not only cancerous cells but also healthy ones. Using CRISPR, the scientists took blood stem cells from a bone marrow donor and tweaked the cell surface proteins, which communicate with other cells, to make them “invisible” to targeted immunotherapy. Think of it as an invisibility cloak, Ali explains. The therapy is undergoing human testing at Vor Bio in Boston, a biotech start-up that Mukherjee founded.

Mukherjee in the lab

‘My primary interest is human therapy. I like to make medicines. It’s the most exciting thing you could ever do.’

“My primary interest is human therapy,” Mukherjee says. “I like to make medicines. It’s the most exciting thing you could ever do.” When he’s in the clinic, Mukherjee treats the “sickest of the sick”—patients who have undergone chemotherapy and bone marrow transplants and still relapsed, says Azra Raza, a physician-scientist who researches blood cancers at Columbia. He then brings his motivation to cure them into the lab. “Someone like Sid comes around once in a generation,” Raza says. “He has an incredible mass of information in his head. He thinks quantum leaps ahead of other people.”

Returning Home

It’s late afternoon, and the light in Mukherjee’s office begins to fade. But Mukherjee is still thinking and talking and making plans. He talks about the art scene in New York City, visiting museums on weekends. He admits, a bit sheepishly, that he also has artistic talents. In fact, some of his obsessive doodling of molecules appears in his books. He grins. Sure, he’s obsessive about his work, but he loves his life outside the office. He and Sze throw elaborate dinner parties in their Manhattan apartment, for which he cooks. Sze describes how, when her husband likes a dish at a restaurant, he dissects it, smelling it, tasting it, talking to the chef if he can’t figure out how it was made—and then re-creates it at home. “It’s a good metaphor for how he looks at life,” Sze says. “He’s always kind of sniffing out good ideas. Always on the prowl for things to be cracked open and solved.” 

The family travels every year to New Delhi. Mukherjee’s father and grandmother have passed, but his mother still lives in the home where he grew up. He also makes regular trips to Bengaluru, where his start-up Immuneel Therapeutics treats leukemia patients who have relapsed with chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, an approach that uses the body’s own immune system to ambush cancer cells. CAR-T therapies have been available in the United States for about a decade, treating certain blood cancers—though not AML—at a cost of around $400,000 per patient, but weren’t available in India. The first clinical trial at Immuneel plans to include up to 24 pediatric and adult patients.

“This is the first child that we treated,” Mukherjee says. He’s looking at a photo of a 9-year-old boy in India attached to an IV bag. “This is me opening his therapy line,” Mukherjee says proudly. “He was very, very sick, close to dying.” One year out from his CAR-T therapy, his cancer was in remission. 

Again, Mukherjee’s cell phone starts ringing. When he hangs up, he’s strangely still. The constantly moving fingers, combing through his hair, twiddling pens, touching items on his desk, riffling papers, doodling, suddenly cease moving.

“I just heard about a friend who is dying,” he says. (Author and historian Patrick French died the next day in London.) Slouching low in his chair, Mukherjee discards his shoes, and rests his stockinged feet on the quilt-covered writing bed. He’s a great compartmentalizer, he says. That’s how he does so many things. But sometimes worlds collide, like this moment in this lab where he makes medicines and learns about a friend he can’t save. He looks at his feet resting on the cot, then touches the quilt, lovingly.

“It’s hand-blocked,” he says. “It’s special, from India, a work of art.” 


Tracie White is a senior writer at Stanford. Email her at traciew@stanford.edu.


Tuesday, December 24, 2024

The Beginning of the End of the Public University, by Rodolfo "Rudy" Acuña, Ph.D.

This historical perspective reflecting on the student movement of the 1960s and early 70s by Dr. Rudy Acuña is helpful as we deconstruct the political moment we're in with respect to civil rights and higher education. I would definitely read this in tandem with a recent historical and important post titled, "The Free Speech Movement at Sixty and Today’s Unfree Universities" by Robert Cohen, AAUP. One of more insightful comments from Dr. Acuña's piece is the following:
"Tom Hayden in an article on Mario Savio argued that “The current era of privatization and neoliberalism was born in Berkeley as a countermovement to the ’60s.” We did not see what was on the horizon, too caught up with our perceived victories perhaps to see a reaction building that would change higher education."
We need a new student movement to reign in neoliberalism that envisions and works toward a more equitable and sustainable future, prioritizing social justice, diversity and inclusion, environmental stewardship, and collective well-being over profit and exploitation. To move in this direction, we must consider what a caring university and economy might be, both of which exist in reciprocal relationship to Mother Earth. On that note,
Merry Christmas! Feliz Navidad! Joyeux Noël, Buon Natale, Feliz Natal, 圣诞快乐 (Shèngdàn Kuàilè), С Рождеством (S Rozhdestvom), Nollaig Shona, मैरी क्रिसमस (Meri Christmas), Mutlu Noeller, Весела Коледа (Vesela Koleda), Frohe, Weihnachten, Happy Hanukkah, & Happy Kwanzaa!!! 
-Angela Valenzuela

"They tried to bury us, but they didn’t know we were seeds."

-Chicana/Chicano/Indigenous Proverb

The Beginning of the End of the Public University
Rudy Acuña: We were too young, naive or preoccupied with the Vietnam War, campus turmoil and the excitement of times to recognize the significance of the changes.
by Rodolfo F. Acuña | Jan 19, 2015 LA Progressive

“The best of times …the worst of times.”
The 1960s were “the best of times …the worst of times.” As one author put it, a backlash was underway that marked the “Slow Death of Public Higher Education.” In less than a decade California went from Master Plan to No Plan. The ill wind was ushered in by Ronald Reagan’s election as governor of California in 1966.

It should have been no surprise; Reagan had vowed to “clean up that mess in Berkeley,” harping about “sexual orgies so vile that I cannot describe them to you.” Reagan proposed tuition to make the bums work so they would be too tired to carry picket signs.

In office, Reagan reduced state funding for higher education, and laid the foundation for a shift to a tuition-based funding model. When students protested Reagan called the National Guard and crushed them.

Reagan shifted the political debate over the meaning and purpose of public higher education in America. He declared war on the poor, proposing to throw the “bums” off welfare. According to Reagan, universities along with an expensive welfare program were a problem and they took California dangerously close to socialism.

Tom Hayden in an article on Mario Savio argued that “The current era of privatization and neoliberalism was born in Berkeley as a countermovement to the ’60s.” We did not see what was on the horizon, too caught up with our perceived victories perhaps to see a reaction building that would change higher education.

At the time, however, we were too young, naive or preoccupied with the Vietnam War, campus turmoil and the excitement of times to recognize the significance of the changes. They were slow in coming – by 1970 the fees had increased to $50 a semester, which was affordable.

Berkeley was temporarily galvanized by the firing of Clark Kerr. In response to student protests, Reagan ordered 2200 national guardsmen onto the Berkeley campus. Because of the prestige of Berkeley and UCLA for all intents and purposes privatization began earlier there with the admission of significant numbers of out-of-state and international students and an avalanche of lucrative private and public grants.

Meanwhile, by 1959, San Fernando Valley State was no longer a satellite of Los Angeles State College. It was situated in a moderately conservative and overwhelmingly white suburbia. Spurred by freeways, it grew tremendously during the 1960s, and by June 1972 the college officially named itself California State University, Northridge.

My first student teaching assignment was in 1957 at SFVSC through LA State College. Over the years, I taught junior high, high school and at Pierce College in the Valley. Active in theLatin American Civic Association and the Mexican American Political Association, we lobbied SFVSC for programs. There were a few sympathetic professors such as Betty Brady and of course, Julian Nava.


Valley State was a Mormon institution, controlled by a Mormon hierarchy. The professors wore white shirts, ties and coats. There was a faculty dining hall (cafeteria). At the time I did not realize it, but although we were a cow college, there was a feeling of tradition. Most faculty members respected the liberal traditions of a university education, and consequently reacted toward any threat to these traditions. Governance was part of that mindset and it was defended by the faculty senate.

The selection of James Cleary in 1969 marked a transition from Mormon rule. Cleary was regarded as a genuine scholar, although his publications largely rested on his editorship of Robert’s Rules of Law. He had been a professor and administrator at the University of Wisconsin/Madison. He was Catholic and looked presidential, always with his pipe in hand.

He led CSUN to 1992. Cleary, for all of his warts, respected faculty governance and fought for the autonomy of the university. I cannot remember an instance during his tenure when he overturned the decision of the faculty senate. However, changes were taking place during the 1970s like the draconian Proposition 13. He and other administrators unlike today’s managers used their moral authority to slow down encroachments.
The decline in the traditions of the liberal university and the protection of faculty of the principle of faculty governance in all probability was facilitated by the decline of tenured track faculty and the rise in the number of part-time faculty.

By 1977, enrollment at CSUN cost $95. Eleven years later it rose to a $342 tuition fee. Until the early 1990s, tuition and fees remained low. Nevertheless, tuition and fees more than doubled from the late 1980s to early 1990s. By fall 2006, the University had tuition of $1,260. Spurred by the 2008 recession it went to $2,000 per year. By 2011–12, it rose to over $6,000 per year at CSU. ($3,272.00 in the spring 2015).

It is merely speculative, but the decline in the traditions of the liberal university and the protection of faculty of the principle of faculty governance in all probability was facilitated by the decline of tenured track faculty and the rise in the number of part-time faculty. There were also structural changes; full time faculty was only required to be on campus two days a week. Today, many professors lack a sense of place; it is a job rather than an institution.

Administrators have also changed. They are not cut in the image of the pipe smoking Cleary, and not one since his departure can be called a scholar. They are what the neoliberal-privatized university require, overseers. Under their rule, faculty governance has declined and even the department chairs are today part of the administrative staff.

In a recent address to the faculty, Provost Harry Hellenbrand titled “Molting Season” defended the privatization of CSUN and rationalized the increase in tuition: “Yes, CSUN Charges students more than they paid fifty years ago. But factor in $150,000,000 more in aid.”

This echoes CSUN President Dianne Harrison who told members of Chicana/o Studies that students could afford high tuition and dorm costs because they were getting Pell Grants. It is cynical and it is important to note that even the conservative Chancellor Glenn S. Dumke had opposed the notion of tuition.

The “slow death of Public Higher Education” has come about from within. The managers have benefitted handsomely in terms of salaries, staff increases and slush funds. When a president comes in many of her housing perks are paid by non-state funds that do not have the restraints or scrutiny of state funds. Administrators have slush funds from which they can pay off cronies.

On the CSUN campus we have a private university that “molted” from the public institution. Privatization has contributed to the escalation of student costs with less and less public funds expended on education.

Privatization and neoliberalism that began in Berkeley as a countermovement to the ’60s is today in full swing. They are bringing about changes that will end public higher education and limit access to public higher Ed to the upper 50 percent.

Meanwhile, academicians will put together the narrative of the privatization and death of the public university. The patterns are easily discerned. More difficult will be to recognize and describe the changes that they have brought about in we the people.


Rudy Acuña

The opinions expressed here are solely the author's and do not reflect the opinions or beliefs of the LA Progressive.