Though Claudine Gay resigned as president of Harvard because of her plagiarism, she will stay at the university as a professor.
But as a dog returns to its vomit, Gay can return to what she was doing before: anti-white activism and discrimination.
Before becoming Harvard’s headmistress, Gay appears to have spent more time promoting anti-white “diversity,” “equity,” and “inclusion” than she did teaching, reported Christopher Rufo, who helped uncover almost 50 instances of plagiarism.
Writing for City Journal, Rufo explained that Gay was a woman on a mission. Job No. 1 was shoving “racialist ideology” down the throats of students.
DEI on Steroids
That ideology “has driven her scholarship, administrative priorities, and rise through the institution,” Rufo wrote:
Over the course of her career, Gay quietly built a “diversity” empire that influenced every facet of university life. Between 2018 and the summer of 2023, as the dean of the largest faculty on campus, Gay oversaw the university’s racially discriminatory admissions program, which the Supreme Court found unconstitutional. Even after the court issued its ruling earlier this year, Gay said that it was a “hard day” and defended the university’s policies, which were deemed discriminatory against Asian and white applicants. Gay promised to comply with the letter of the law, while remaining “steadfast” in her commitment to producing “diversity” — a not-so-subtle message that Harvard would find a way, as the University of California has done, to evade the law in practice.
The ruling that Gay promised to evade came down from the U.S. Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, a decision that sent leftists into a furious tantrum.
Indeed, Rufo continued, Gay’s “diversity empire” poisoned “every facet of university life.” It was Gay, not surprisingly, who supervised Harvard’s discrimination against Asians and whites that SCOTUS ruled against.
Of course, Gay had no intention of listening to the court and stop discriminating. She vowed to stand strong, “a not-so-subtle message that Harvard would find a way, as the University of California has done, to evade the law in practice.”
Yet Gay that wasn’t all Gay did:
Following the death of George Floyd in 2020, Gay commissioned a Task Force on Visual Culture and Signage, which released a series of recommendations the following year for engaging in the “historical reckoning with racial injustice.” The recommendations included a mandate to change “spaces whose visual culture is dominated by homogenous portraiture of white men.” In particular, the report maintained, administrators should “refresh” the walls of Annenberg Hall, which “prominently display a series of 23 portraits, none of [which] depict women, and all but three of [which] depict white men.” Who were these white men and why were they honored in the first place? The report does not say — their race and sex alone provided sufficient justification for their banishment.
Gay wanted to “denname” anything on campus that she and her DEI racialist gang decided was “‘abhorrent’ in the context of current values.”
Oddly, that disgust with “abhorrent” individuals of the past did not include Martin Luther King, Jr., who plagiarized his way to a doctorate from Boston University. Harvard is big, really big, on rape accomplice King.
Fellow plagiarist King aside, Gay wrote an email that promised “to address the situation ‘through the lens of reckoning.’”
Thus, putting Gay in charge would mean Harvard became even more obsessed with stomping on whites. “As president, Gay leads a sprawling DEI bureaucracy — officially, the Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging — that seeks to influence how students speak, think, and behave in relation to race,” Rufo wrote:
Though the university deleted nearly all DEI materials from its website following President Gay’s disastrous congressional testimony related to the Hamas terror attack, I have recovered some of these documents through an Internet archive. Harvard’s DEI administrators encourage students to internalize the basic narrative of critical race theory: America is a nation defined by “systemic racism,” “police brutality,” “white supremacist violence,” and the “weaponization of whiteness.” In another resource, students were invited to “unpack” their “white privilege” and “male privilege,” and to consider their “white fragility,” which stems from “the privilege that accrues to white people living in a society that protects and insulates them from race-based stress.”
Asians, of course, didn’t fare well under that totalitarian regime, and so participated in the Students for Fair Admissions case.
Post Floyd Hoax Hire
In other words, despite Harvard’s motto, Veritas, Gay’s mission wasn’t educating students to seek truth. It was making white students feel unwelcome, and brainwashing them into hating themselves for the sins of the past, real and imagined.
But that should be no surprise. Gay was a DEI hire when she became president. She was, as SCOTUS Justice Sonia Sotomayor called herself, an “affirmative action baby.” Harvard hired her because it swallowed the Floyd Hoax, like every other major institution.
“Gay was, in fact, somewhat inevitable,” Rufo wrote. “In the long season of racial guilt and animus that followed George Floyd’s death, the university was desperate to recruit a ‘first,’ as Gay put it in her inaugural address, and disrupt the university’s nearly 400 years of whiteness.”
But now Harvard is dealing with the consequences of hiring a president because she is black, not because she is competent, or knows the first things about presiding over a university with $6.1 billion in revenue.
Continued Rufo:
As Harvard is now learning, however, naming as president someone who sees race and sex not as incidental human attributes but as ideological constructions that must be imposed on the institution comes with a significant downside. Consequently, Harvard’s trustees find themselves in a bind: they hired Gay in large part for her identity and cannot fire her for the same reason. They seem resigned to muddling through the “racial reckoning,” however long it lasts and whatever further damage it inflicts on America’s oldest university.
And, as The New American reported, keeping Gay on the faculty despite her literary larceny means that its guidelines on academic integrity, notably those plagiarism, are in shreds.
Its honor code is no more.
