Stupski Foundation president Glen Galaich removed a Substack post on March 3 that had previously engaged with criticism of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation’s influence in American higher education, according to an essay originally published at The Giving Review.
The topic is significant because it addresses how large philanthropic organizations can shape academic and cultural priorities, sparking debate about the role and power of such foundations in society.
Galaich’s original February 26 Substack response was prompted by Tyler Austin Harper’s article in The Atlantic, which examined the Mellon Foundation’s concentrated impact on humanities studies. While Galaich disagreed with much of Harper’s analysis, he acknowledged that Harper “stumbled onto” something “genuinely important” and found “a nugget of gold.” He further wrote that dismissing Harper would mean “we will have missed something,” and stated, “Harper is right to be concerned about outsized influence,” noting this issue applies “regardless of ideology.” Galaich also said that even if Harper “found gold, but missed the mine,” it was still valuable to recognize what had been discovered.
However, Galaich later retracted his post. In a March Substack update announcing its withdrawal, he referred to Harper only as “The Author” and did not link to the original Atlantic article. Galaich explained his reasoning: “I wanted to broaden the topic from one foundation to the foundation sector, but in promoting that link, I amplified negative impact on a colleague whom I deeply respect.” He questioned Harper’s motives for writing the Atlantic piece and argued that racial- and social-justice grantmaking should not be equated with other forms of philanthropy due to systemic inequities: “But, due to the historical, structural, and systemic inequities embedded in American society, there really is no equivalent. I should have known better.” He added: “I failed to properly vet the material I was amplifying…and I regret the negative impact that failure had. … I am grateful that several people I so admire were willing to share their feedback with me…and offer me the opportunity to learn about my own gap in awareness.”
Galaich’s actions highlight ongoing tensions within philanthropy over self-critique and open discussion regarding social justice funding priorities.
The incident reflects broader questions about whether discussions around racial- or social-justice initiatives are open for critique—even from those working within philanthropic organizations.
