Paul Waldman writes for the New Republic that the Right's real target is Harvard President Claudine Gay. That's why they're leveling all of those plagiarism charges against her. Those charges are "mostly bogus" and being used as a blunt weapon by the Right.
Why Gay?
But Gay’s is the scalp the right’s newly self-appointed protectors of America’s Jews would really love to get. In part that’s because Gay is Black and can therefore be tagged as an unqualified affirmative action hire, but mostly because it’s Harvard, America’s oldest, richest, and most prestigious university. If you want to thrust a dagger into the heart of the academy, Cambridge is where you aim.
But what about the plagiarism charges? About half of her total academic output has been found to include plagiarized passages. It wasn't intellectual theft — it was just sloppiness.
There’s no question that the accusations against Gay are being offered in utter bad faith, and the charges are inseparable from the political context in which they’re being made. Nevertheless, the right-wing critics could have a case regardless of their motives. A fair reading of the passages they’ve presented suggests that while some of their claims are bogus, others do show problematic issues in a few of Gay’s writings. But they amount to academic misdemeanors—real, but evidence of occasional sloppiness rather than malicious theft.
Wait, the subheading said they were "mostly bogus," but now it's just suggested that "some of their claims are bogus." But those "problematic" passages can be excused as "occasional sloppiness."
Waldman singles out Christopher Rufo in his piece, of whom he's definitely not a fan.
The new "mostly peaceful protest" has arrived. pic.twitter.com/zrCvhOLN75
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) December 15, 2023
Recommended
Mostly bogus aka definitely real
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 16, 2023
Every damn time.
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) December 16, 2023
Gay's keeping her job despite all of the plagiarism charges, all of which have been documented.
You have to admire their dedication to the narrative. It's amazing.
— Eldee Stephens (@eldeestephens) December 15, 2023
"Mostly bogus plagiarism charges"?
— The Sarcasticat (@TheSarcasticist) December 15, 2023
How much plagiarism is acceptable at @Harvard?
Wait, let me guess. It depends on the context, right?!
It's telling how the Left doesn't think Gay's plagiarizing of her Ph.D. thesis is a bad thing. "Problematic," maybe. So conservatives care about academic integrity but liberals don't.
If I thought the people writing or reading this were capable of rational thought, I'd ask: what about the subset of plagiarism charges that even you're conceding by implication aren't "mostly bogus"? Is this like being 'a little bit pregnant'? A little bit plagiarist?
— Erich M. Schwarz (@ErichMSchwarz) December 15, 2023
I swear it seems like there is a lab behind how they phrase things
— Ed Goode – e/acc (@edsgoode) December 15, 2023
Just subtle enough to be persuasive to people asleep at the wheel
At this point we understand there won’t be anything done and the wagons are circling left to protect her. The narrative and agenda are greater than any adherence to their own morals.
— John Hyde (@The_DrJ3ckyll) December 15, 2023
Higher education has been telling kids for the better part of a decade they have interalized racism and socialism under the guise of communism is a good thing and "the right" is poisoning kids minds saying plagiarism is bad pic.twitter.com/HeNYlW3cMW
— Blackest Night (@BrotherReverend) December 16, 2023
They are SO good at twisting language…
— Nico the Free 🕯️🔥 (@nicothefree) December 15, 2023
“mostly bogus”
so… partly true plagiarism? What are you saying? The president of Harvard was shown to be an intellectual fraud as well as morally bankrupt
So it’s “mostly bogus” to point out that her thesis would get a zero if she was held to the same standard that my work would be held to because of my demographics. Got it.
— Clifton J. (@cliftonjmusic) December 15, 2023
From "mostly bogus" to "problematic." Why is the New Republic defending this woman when she's so obviously guilty? Because Harvard must be protected from "the Right."
We already think Harvard is a cesspool because Harvard's done the damage to its own reputation. It is a poisoner of young people's minds.
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member