1,249 words

It would appear that the saga of black female Harvard President Claudine Gay has come to an end with her resignation on January 2. The tale ended as it began: as a farce.

One of the reasons that I find myself incapable of getting too emotionally invested in the matter is the sneaking suspicion that if the President of Harvard is all that important, they never would have appointed a black woman to the position. I imagine that the elite universities have their own equivalent of a Deep State behind the scenes that allows them to keep functioning even if the figurehead at the top is an affirmative action mediocrity.

The other reason I can’t get too emotional about the debacle is my belief that the university system is a lost cause that is impervious to reform. The whole thing is rotten from ground up: from the lowliest teacher’s assistants to all the department heads. I imagine that even the university janitors and landscapers are also hired based on their anti-white credentials. Would appointing David Duke the President of Harvard thus really make that much of a difference?

It goes without saying that promoting a black woman to be President of Harvard is only marginally less ridiculous than when Caligula appoint his horse to the Roman Senate. No one believes that a black woman who earned their reputation as a Professor of Blackety-Black Studies was the most qualified person in a country of 331 million people to lead America’s most prestigious educational institution. Her appointment was a slap in the face to white people to begin with.

Nevertheless, Claudine Gay earned some good will on the dissident Right when she was called before Congress for a special session on anti-Semitism on college campuses. She was asked whether calls for the genocide of the Jewish people are against Harvard’s code of conduct. This was, of course, a trick question, as Jews believe that any critical statement about themselves is a call for genocide. In particular, Jews claim that the pro-Palestine slogan “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is a call for genocide, even though that is not how it is intended by those who use it.

On top of this, it put Gay in the position of having to choose between either putting herself in hot water with the Zionist lobby or becoming a race traitor to her fellow brown people, who by and large support Palestine. Gay, being black, chose black solidarity. “It can be, depending on the context,” she said. “Anti-Semitic rhetoric, when it crosses into conduct that amounts to bullying, harassment, intimidation — that is actionable conduct and we do take action.”

On the surface, this could be seen as a statement of support for free speech, but one wonders how she might have responded if questioned about pro-white statements. There was an incident in 2017 where some “It’s OK to be white” stickers were put up around the Harvard campus which triggered the predictable faculty meltdown. The Law School’s Dean of Students, Marcia L. Sells, addressed the matter in an e-mail to Harvard law students:

It seems likely that these anonymous postings, made in the middle of the night, were provocations intended to divide us from one another. HLS will not let that happen here. We live, work, teach, and learn together in a community that is stronger, better, and deeper because of our diversity and because we encourage open, respectful, and constructive discourse.

That was during the tenure of a previous Harvard President, however. Would Gay have responded differently? Maybe, but if I were a betting man, probably not. My suspicion is that rather than standing up for free speech, Claudine Gay was trying to protect black people.

This tale became even more farcical when it came out shortly after the Congressional hearing that conservative activists, along with the New York Post, had found 27 instances of plagiarism in Gay’s work, including her doctoral thesis. Granted, I generally assume that there is always going to be a lot of smoke and mirrors behind any high-achieving black person. There’s going to be some plagiarism, ghost writers, favoritism, affirmative action, and grading on a curve. It’s like when you hear about such-and-such black rapper who is also a successful businessman and whose companies have made hundreds of millions. What you’re supposed to think is that when the guy is not making ooga-booga music about bitches and hoez, he is a Randian superman straight out of Atlas Shrugged who pours over complex financial statements in between studio sessions. The reality is that some Jew simply gave him a lot of money and a piece of his company in exchange for putting his name on a product someone else made.

Of course, the usual Blackety-Black activists claimed that the accusations of plagiarism were bogus and motivated by racism. This sounds ridiculous on the face of it, but wading into this mess, it gets even murkier. Some of the alleged instances of plagiarism were in fact mere paraphrasing, while others were technical definitions. Some examples merely needed quotation marks. Nevertheless, some of the people Gay is accused of plagiarizing have said that they think what she did constituted plagiarism. Others have claimed that it is an open secret that all academics plagiarize a little, and that here it is being selectively enforced against Gay.

At that point the whole situation looked like a lose-lose for whites. It was going to be a slap in the face to white people if she kept her job and a win for Zionists if she was fired or resigned. She resigned, so that’s a win for Zionism.

I can believe the narrative that Jewish power was looking for any excuse to push her out and that no would have cared about the plagiarism had she not stood up to the Zionists. One hopes that at least the Zionists will get some bad public relations out of the mess. Maybe the blacks will get angry with the Jews for taking down one their own.

Alas, it is looking as if we might not even get that consolation prize. Ibram X. Kendi appears to be the go-to commentator for the opposition, and the narrative he’s running with is that she was fired for being black, not for standing up to Jews. In a Twitter/X thread, Kendi explained:

When a racist mob attacks a Black [sic] person, it finds a seemingly legitimate reason for the attack that allows for it to accrue popular support and credibility, and which allows the growing mob to deny they are attacking the person in this way because the person is Black [sic]. That’s how anti-Black [sic] racist attacks have been justified. The seemingly legitimate reason, in this latest case at Harvard, is primarily academic misconduct or plagiarism. The question to assess whether this was a racist attack isn’t whether Dr. Gay engaged in any misconduct. The question is whether all these people would have investigated, surveilled, harassed, written about, and attacked her in the same way if the Harvard president in this case would have been White [sic]. I. Think. Not. It isn’t hard to figure out why the racist mob is cheering right now and saying “go woke go broke” and President Gay wasn’t qualified and the “tide is turning against woke and DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion]” and “this is the beginning of the end of woke.”

The Jew always trumps the black — and they blame the white.