New World, Same Indy

What’s the use of a college newspaper if it doesn’t actually represent the student body? Discourse in a democratic society can rarely survive with only one source of news, and the microcosm of the world that is Harvard’s campus is no exception. 

In 1969, Morris Abram, Jr. ’71, Roland Cole ’70, Richard Paisner ’70, and Mark Shields ’70 founded the “Harvard Independent,” intending to challenge prevailing campus narratives, ideological homogeneity, and the dominance of “The Harvard Crimson.” The convictions of the Indy’s founders had a tremendous influence on the philosophy of the paper—the unofficial motto “We Belong to No One but Ourselves” exists for a reason—and continues to be just as important more than 56 years after the first issue of “The Independent” ran. Yet while the circumstances are very different from those of the 1960s, today’s political climate is possibly even more complex, making the “Independent’s” contributions all the more important. 

The late 1960s marked the height of student upheaval regarding the Vietnam War on university campuses across America. On Harvard’s campus, anti-war protests were spearheaded by Harvard’s chapter of Students for a Democratic Society, a major New Left student activist organization. Anti-war sentiment was certainly not uncommon on campus, but the student protesters were far from a monolith; in Nov. 1966, for instance, around 800 students forced then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara out of his car as he attempted to leave campus. Yet just days later, nearly 3,000 Harvard students signed a letter apologizing for this treatment. Harvard student protests escalated in Apr. 1969, when between 30 and 70 students occupied University Hall and forcibly expelled faculty from the building to demand reforms.

At the time of such extreme turmoil at Harvard, “The Harvard Crimson” was the main source of campus news. However, the paper had acquired a reputation for writing with a political slant—it was, as former paper President James M. Fallows ’70 described to “The Harvard Crimson,” “kind of lefty.” Abram, Cole, Paisner, and Shields understood it was time for a public forum rooted in contradiction and diverse discourse. 

The Vietnam War protests that inspired the “Independent’s” founding are often cited as one of the most—if not the most—chaotic eras of American college life. It’s unsurprising that under these circumstances, the founders of this publication believed it necessary to dissent from the loudest voices among their peers and devote space to contradicting the mainstream. 

The “Independent’s” inaugural issue, published on Thursday, Oct. 9, 1969, made no secret of its goal to platform dissident perspectives. The cover of the first issue alone includes an overview of different opinions on student participation in University policy reform: “Student Participation Disastrous?—Brewster;” an interview that engages with “The Emerging Republican Majority,” a book by Nixon political strategist Kevin Phillips—“Lowenstein Calls for Renewal;” and a collaboration between two students to provide different opinions on SDS activism—“SDS Activism – Three Fronts.”  

Over 50 years since the upheaval surrounding its founding moments concluded, the “Independent” continues to carry on its original purpose and the legacy of its founders. 

The first article in the most recent Pop Culture issue, published Feb. 26, reported on the administration’s subpar treatment of over 2,000 essential workers during the recent blizzard. The Wellness issue, which ran the week prior, covered the discourse surrounding the Institute of Politics’ Spring 2026 Visiting Fellows from opposing political parties—contrasting with a “The Harvard Crimson” sarcastic op-ed criticizing Visiting Fellow and former Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy. The “Independent” also enshrines subversion with its annual Weed and Sex issues, published in Apr. and Nov. 

But in keeping with the “Independent’s” founding, on-campus controversies are not the only topics of concern within this publication’s paragraphs. Today, Harvard students are confronted with a very different type of disruption; instead of a divide between factions of the student body, the Trump administration has launched a review of higher education and academic independence from the outside.

Harvard and the Trump administration have traded legal blows as the administration has sought to revoke billions of dollars of federal grants, interfere with admissions practices, and bar admitted international students from attending. Members of the Class of 2029, 2028, and 2027 do not know a version of Harvard that is not under speculation by the federal government.

Though recent tumult with the White House has united the student body in representing their home institution, the ability of University affiliates expressing dissatisfaction with Harvard or American political leadership has become particularly precarious—especially because the larger cultural zeitgeist seems to have adopted, intentionally or otherwise, the Trump administration’s resistance toward Harvard’s policies. Now, everything from guest speakers to student concerns about prospective grade policy overhauls falls under national scrutiny, and may very well show up as a “New York Times” headline.

In this new reality, it becomes all the more important that the “Independent” remains steadfast in its values and continues to provide a platform for dissent of all kinds. The “Independent” would do well to continue to remember its roots, even as changing circumstances and university politics force constant adaptation and growth.

Téa Shouldice ’29 (teashouldice@college.harvard.edu) would like to stay out of the news.