Econ 10 Professors Debate, Juggle Latkes and Hamantaschen at Comical Harvard Hillel Event

A debate between the two professors leading Harvard’s introductory Economics course descended into a circus as they weighed whether hamentaschen or latkes are the superior Jewish holiday food.

Economics professors Jason Furman ’92 and David I. Laibson ’88 — who co-teach Economics 10, “Principles of Economics” — took the stage at Harvard Hillel, the University’s Jewish center, to weigh in on the time-honored debate between the two traditional Jewish foods.

Furman, the hamentaschen spokesperson who previously served as Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, donned a white t-shirt emblazoned with a large hamentaschen and juggled the triangular Jewish cookie in front of a crowd of fellow professors and students.

“I have been preparing for this for not my whole life, but about the last 45 years,” Furman said.

Laibson, who enthusiastically argued in support of latkes, reasoned that using a “standard economic unit of pastry,” latkes were both more accessible and more popular than hamentaschen.

“Good luck finding hamentaschen even during Purim, forget about the rest of the year,” he challenged.

The event, moderated by Harvard Hillel President Nathan B. Gershengorn ’26 and Yona T. Sperling-Milner ’27, called on the two professors to address what Sperling-Milner, a Crimson Editorial editor, called “one of the most pressing matters in the Jewish culinary world.”

Hamentaschen, triangular cookies filled with jam, are popularly consumed around the Jewish holiday of Purim, which started the day after the Hillel event. Latkes, fried potato pancakes that are traditionally consumed with applesauce or sour cream, are frequently associated with Hanukkah.

Using a looser definition of the popular potato dish, Laibson said the latke was, by another name, a hash brown or a french fry. Laibson, however, explicitly distanced himself from the latkes served at the event.

Still, Laibson insisted that he fiercely supported latkes in the abstract.

“Latkes are a great miracle,” he concluded.

Furman began his rebuttal to Laibson with a pointed observation.

“This is a topic in which, yes, you can argue, as my respected opponent did, in favor of french fries, maybe even in favor of hash browns,” Furman said. “But I didn’t hear him say very much about latkes.”

To make his case, Furman argued that the nutritional value and versatility of the hamentaschen — which is traditionally filled with poppy seed, dates, prunes, or other fruit jams — made it superior.

“You can live on these for years,” Furman said, pointing to the plate of hamentaschen before him.

“Try living on these for a year,” he added, pointing to his opponent’s greasy product.

Both competitors supported their cases with references to Harvard professors or family members that had privately weighed in on the matter. But Furman argued that taste was not the only thing hamentaschen had going for it.

Furman said that because the dish is triangular and resembles dark matter, it bears some connection to both structural integrity and the center of the universe.

“If you want something nutritious and delicious, you want something that’s interior or corner, you want something that holds buildings up, keeps the universe together, and has been discussed in the most important book — hamentaschen,” he said.

“And if you want french fries, you have no business taking part in this debate,” Furman added.

While fraudulently listed as the 398th annual hamentaschen-latke debate, the Hillel event is part of a long-standing tradition in American higher education of debating the foods’ merits on Purim.

University of Chicago Hillel has hosted a version of the debate since 1946, and in 2007, Harvard professors Steven A. Pinker and Alan M. Dershowitz faced off on the same question.

Furman’s more theatrical approach, which included juggling the triangular cookies, appeared to be unprecedented.

Laibson declined to match Furman’s juggling abilities, but said the performance had distracted viewers from “the fundamental issues of the day.”

“If this were a juggling contest, I would vote for him. If we were trying out for a circus act, I would probably hire him but then look for someone else,” Laibson said.

“But we’re here to talk about humanistic issues,” he added. “We’re here to talk about social justice. We’re here to talk about Jewish food and Jewish identity.”

The winner of Friday's debate was judged by audience applause, though Sperling-Milner said the results were too close to call.

Instead, Sperling-Milner declared Jewish unity the winner.

—Staff writer Cam E. Kettles can be reached at cam.kettles@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @cam_kettles or on Threads @camkettles.