Oh, and another thing: Claudine Gay made a career out of taking down black male professors who were insufficiently leftist
Another aspect of Claudine Gay’s illustrious career as a Harvard administrator:
…[I]n the face of numerous mounting scandals, many are defending Gay by claiming that the attacks against her are racial in nature.
They are not. They are all well deserved.
The demand that Gay resign stems from the utter lack of moral competency she displayed in her testimony before Congress, in which she said that calling for the genocide of Jews is only against Harvard rules in certain contexts. She also failed to condemn the Hamas atrocities against Israel in real time on October 7, another reason she should resign. There is also now evidence of serial plagiarism. And did I mention Gay has published no books — an unprecedented feat for a Harvard President, unless one travels back in time to the year 1773? …
Did you know that Claudine Gay during her Harvard career has repeatedly targeted and disrupted the careers of prominent Black male professors?
As Dean of the College, Gay terminated Ronald S. Sullivan, Jr. as Faculty Dean of the Winthrop House. Professor Sullivan, Jr., a graduate of Morehouse College and Harvard Law School, was the first Black faculty dean of a house in the history of Harvard College.
What was Professor Sullivan’s offense? Sullivan deigned to represent the disgraced movie producer Harvey Weinstein — an act of moral conscience, since all are entitled to legal representation in our legal system.
… Economics Professor Roland G. Fryer, Jr. was next in the sights of Dean Gay. Fryer was a top Black professor at Harvard. After having overcome all sorts of hardship and childhood deprivation, Professor Fryer joined the faculty at Harvard to become the second-youngest professor ever to be awarded tenure at Harvard, and went on to blaze a trail of distinction, including winning the MacArthur Fellowship and the John Bates Clark Medal.
Yet when Fryer undertook research into the killings of unarmed Black men in Houston, Fryer’s research found no racial disparities. He made the mistake of undercutting the racial narrative that the Left has adopted, and as a result, Gay did her best to remove all of his academic privileges, coordinating a witch hunt against him. Fryer survived Gay’s crusade of discharge but Fryer’s lab was shut down, his reputation tarnished.
The author of the piece is a black male, a former law professor and a graduate of Harvard Law School.
It is worth mentioning that the mechanism by which Roland Fryer was semi-canceled was the accusation of sexual harassment. You can find the story in this documentary made long before Gay’s current travails:
She was quite an enthusiastic little Bolshevik.
She had helpers as the DEI mafia was strong at Harvard. Fryer was the most outrageous hit job. I have been posting comments about these cases everywhere I can.
If I recall correctly, the accusations against Fryer were not proved.
Ah yes, the Harvey Weinstein case. Lisa Bloom briefly represented Weinstein until her mother, Gloria Allred, got ahold of her. Probably told Lisa that not everyone is entitled to a defense, that’s just a quaint old notion that civil libertarians cling to.
Why is it that so much of what’s in the news these days reminds of Henry Kissinger’s old quip about the Iran-Iraq war: “it’s too bad they can’t both lose.”
Shes terrible all the way around they should give it fryer as compensation
Or dr sullivan one can pick either
Reportedly, Sullivan’s first reaction on X to Gay’s resignation was, “Karma.” He deleted it.
Somewhere I read that the Harvard Board was quite cognizant of Dr. Gay’s pedestrian publication record. It wanted her as President to enforce Wokeness, an ability she had readily shown before her ascendancy to the Presidency.
Harvard rated last in the most recent F.I.R.E. free speech ratings. If that doesn’t improve, Gay’s stepping down will have done nothing to improve the situation at Harvard.
I didn’t pay a lot of attention six months ago to Dr. Gay’s becoming President of Harvard, but from what little I read from non-MSM sources led me to the conclusion that she was an empty suit chosen more for her race and gender than for her stellar academic record. Looks like that conclusion was correct.
Gay was (and is) an empty suit. That emptiness is why she was picked. The Trustees wanted somebody who would do the “right thing.” And her record shows that she would do it. The message to the Harvard community and the public was clear: the Woke agenda is all that matters, get with the program or get out.
I am glad that Karma can still operate (sometimes) but I doubt her resignation will change anything. Maybe if she gets stripped of her professorship and that sweet $900K salary, I’ll begin to change my thinking.
The first and foremost requirement to be a ‘progressive’ activist for the Left is the willingness to embrace evil. Liberals are only required to either condone or ignore evil. Liberals like Elon Musk and Alan Dershowitz who question the narrative become persona non grata in the Party.
Very interesting video, Neo. Thank you for it. Prayers for
Professor Freyer.
She’s a woman of low character? A common type among higher ed administrators.
Can those that had their writings stolen by Gay sue her? Probably not.
On the bright side, any student that gets caught plagiarizing can use the Gay Defense. If they lose then sue, sue, sue.
I’m still struck by how much Gay looks like Obama in drag as a lesbian with the classic nutty “That’s not funny” feminist glasses.
Seriously. I wonder how much of Gay’s appearance worked subliminally in her favor while shinnying up the greasy DEI pole.
Critical Racists operate with the diversity taxonomic catalogue (e.g. color blocs). Hutu vs Tutsi is a myth. So is Mandela’s Xhosa vs Zulu, Kenyan elites vs deplorables, etc.
Dr. Carol Swain’s lawyer (Gay plagiarized Swain) has sent a letter to the Harvard Corporation “demanding answers” on Gay’s plagiarism.
https://tennesseestar.com/education/attorney-for-carol-swain-sends-letter-to-harvard-corporation-demanding-answers-for-plagiarism-by-disgraced-president/tpappert/2024/01/04/
The “horizontal violence” payback could get lit!
Can someone pop some more popcorn please?
Re: Hutu vs Tutsi
n.n.:
As I recall there was an interesting racial angle. Typical Tutsis were tall, slender and looked more like white people. Hutus were shorter and did not.
Tutsis may or may not have been favored by white people. I imagine they probably were. But in any event Hutus resented the Tutsis on this account and others.
Say what you will, but it was the glasses!
The persistent plagiarism aside, Gay deserved to be fired for her treatment of black male colleagues and for her refusal to stop actions against Jewish students on campus. And were there other scholars who were treated wrongly for ideological reasons?
Gay is/was a figurehead. When you come across highly-flawed figureheads, it can be a sign that other people are involved, the types that would exploit flaws as a way of controlling the subject and protecting their anonymity, while achieving their objectives. People with as little to offer as Gay, do not gain their lofty positions without help, or without reasons – but the two are sometimes not immediately obvious, or subject to discussion. Remind you of anyone?
Remind you of anyone?
Aggie:
Obama in drag as a lesbian with the classic nutty “That’s not funny” feminist glasses.
Yes, I know it is superficial, but what IS it with the ‘in your face’ glasses these people wear?
huxley:
That’s what I learned in anthro class, too, long ago. Turns out it wasn’t true. It was hard to tell the two groups apart through merely physical characteristics – the differences were more of class and occupation and clan lineage.
However, it was apparently the case that the colonists (first German, then Belgian) had initially favored the minority Tutsi (15% of the population) over the majority Hutu. Even before the genocide, there was a lot of violence and a very complicated history between Hutu and Tutsi including the fact that the Belgians decided to back a Hutu government.
The horrific history of the genocide in the 1990s is here. It is of note – and I recall this from newpapers at the time of the genocide – that most of the killings were carried out by “youths” who had been stirred up by anti-Tutsi propaganda, and organized, trained, and armed with machetes by the army, as well as directed by the army, which did some of the killing as well. The way they told the difference between Hutu and Tutsi was not appearance, but identity cards which included the designation of whether the person was Hutu or Tutsi. In more rural areas, the killers already knew who was who. Sometimes Hutu who refused to participate in the killings were themselves killed by other Hutu. There were probably between 500K and 600K people killed, about 2/3 of the Tutsi in Rwanda.
I had recalled hearing many terrible things about that genocide, but reading the Wiki entry now I have to say it was even worse than I recalled. It was like 100 days of October 7, plus.
2A, 2A, 2A.
The worse part is the rebel leader in charge then has been president for life till today
But it was a cleansing of greater scale in the 90s eclipsed only by the congo
Even without the plagarism, her record of scholarship was/is light. How can anyone believe that, on her record, she would have even made tenure at a local state school if she were a white man?
I read interesting commentary recently about how the woke reject the idea of merit altogether, believing that markers of merit (like scholarship) are influenced by systemic racism. By their logic, pointing out Gay’s lack of qualifications for her position really is racist because those with better qualifications (degrees, publications, etc.) possess those qualifications only because they are beneficiaries of racism. Gay’s lack of qualifications, on the other hand, simply reflect her status as a victim of racism. Accordingly the remedy, and the only available metric for juding whether an institution is racist, is racial bean counting.
I marvel that these otherwise quite intelligent people cannot recognize that they’re marching western civilization down the same path that the Soviet Union took in the second half of the 20th century, where ideological purity was valued over competence. But here we are. They completely control nearly every institution in the country, up to and including the most prestigious universities.
This is why I am so depressed that our only alternative, for the third cycle in a row, is going to be Trump and the morons with which he surrounds himself. His lead lawyer the other day stated publicly that she expected Kavanaugh to “come through” for Trump because Trump fought for him. What knuckle-headed idiocy. Way to feed right into the leftist narrative that things like the merits of your case don’t matter and that judiciary is just a matter of will-to-power. This is what you get with a “they do it, so we need to do it too” mentality – total defeat. A total discrediting of the principles that have maintained the republic for 200+ years and a total vindication of leftist will-to-power ideology. In a competition based on will-to-power, with the country as it is right now, the left wins, even in the unlikely event that Trump prevails in November. A Trump victory in November will simply add another four years of chaotic idiocy, like we’re seeing now from his defense team. Between 2026 and 2028, Democrats will take all of the seats that they need to pack the Supreme Court, add additional states, and make sure that the right will never have power again in our lifetimes.
This is the sort of thing that has always made me wonder if Trump and his lackeys are actually double agents for the left. Trump’s political career is the best thing that has ever happened to the hard left.
I presume Sullivan and Fryer were sufficiently aware of how things stood that they didn’t expect racial solidarity and did expect lefty push back.
Good for Sullivan. No matter how guilty a defendant may appear, and be, the State must, MUST, be made to check all the boxes. Every time. The State cannot be trusted.
Brave men.
The Tutsi are Nilotic. Tall, finer features than the Hutu who are Bantu. Presumption is that the Nilotic types–see the Nuer–who make their living herding cattle do better with that frame while the Bantu who do heavy agriculture work need to be more heavily built and don’t need the height and stride. Evolution in action, if you presume enough time has passed to cull for the difference.
Manute Bol, was Nilotic.
Concerned Conservative™ once again starts off rational but The Great Orange Whale soon takes over his mind; Gay and the Left become a pretext to continue the hunt. For CC™, Trump is always there and must be destroyed.
It’s not that Trump has rented space in Concerned Conservative’s mind, it’s that he has constructed a vast galaxy. Everything is the Great Orange Whale! Avast there matey!
When an institution has a consistent policy applied consistently in a given situation long enough, it can be said to have an implicit contract on which a relevant individual or other entity may depend. Even if it’s not written down, nor signed, nor formally offered.
When I was in the insurance business, I was told that various administrative actions must be done 100% of the time or not at all, in certain situations. If something went wrong for a client and it turns out we didn’t do the thing we usually do–which may have been above and beyond normal practice but not a formal contract–the client might be in a position to claim he legitimately depended on us doing the above and beyond so he could ignore the usual. So it would be our fault. He’d lose in court, probably, but it would involve go-away money at best.
So, when a university, even informally, permits all kinds of speech, it seems to have at least a morally-binding contract to permit and facilitate the next guy who comes along.
On the other hand, if the university has a practice of shutting up anybody whose speech, even if it was about something else two years ago, is claimed to make one or another defined group feel bad, then it would seem there is at least a moral contract to continue the practice, even if the group claiming to feel threatened is Jewish. Don’t make an exception and claim First Amendment.
I think there is medication for that, there were of course qualified African American for that position, but they didn’t to this procrustean guidelines, which do nothing but impair useful endeavours, see the dialogue with boxing gloves that elon does to cuban, on the matter,
Those over 40 or 50 may recall as kids seeing a 1950 Technicolor release movie rerun on TV called “King Solomon’s Mines”
Although it has some serious defects the scenery is spectacular even today and I think it works way better than a piece of semi-crap like “Mogambo”.
Anyway if you are looking for an example of the archetypical representation (or idea of) of the Watutsi physiognomy watching that on a big screen TV nowadays will provide it.
Whatever the truth of it, the directors captured the notion thoroughly.
https://www.nytimes.com/1964/02/23/archives/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-watusi.html
I think the movie stands up well despite not liking any of the lead actors
For those with an interest in mechanical design and development, or firearms, there are some modest anachronisms on the order of seeing a Model 94 Winchester used as a prop in a 1870s western. This occurs when on the rescue safari, the lead actor seemingly uses sporterized model 98 large receiver ring Mausers with turned down bolt handles, which would not have been available until the early 20th Century to British gunsmiths for conversion.
On the other hand there is a very interesting scene or two where a supporting role actor is equipped with what is apparently a pre 1880 design tubular magazine American Remington Keene turn bolt rifle.
” Cool” as we used to say as kids.
yes the 1986 version with richard chamberlain and a screeching sharon stone was less impressive, although occasionally amusing,
of course the French and the Belgians including leading figures, in the former’s Security services, were heavily involved in the arming of the leading faction,
I don’t trust them.
Today I am not speaking about academia but rather about the R party leadership. I attended a meeting recently in which one of the political strategists from the top level of the R party was the speaker. This man is very well educated, well traveled and a fine-tuned thinker. A quick summary of his 45-minute speech is that it’s all good; the R party is going to pick up seats in the senate and the house. The D senator from our state will be thrown out after serving three terms. Donald Trump will win by a good sized margin in states where he barely lost in 2020. In other words, this VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE, speaker from the top ranking R office is absolutely positive that everything will be rosy in 2024.
I have heard this guy speak before and I like him–might even trust him a little. But, I woke up this morning with an answer to my dissatisfaction with his recent speech. You know when something is eating away at your inner thoughts and you can’t figure out what it is? I think I have a pretty good answer to that nagginess (new word). THE SPEECH–THE PREDICTIONS–IT WAS ALL TOO TOO POSITIVE!
I think what he is really trying to do is tamp down the brewing insurrection, especially in states where the D party was powerful. In particular a state where one senatorial seat is up for grabs.
Most importantly, this guy was trying to calm the troops! Here in my state, I don’t know anyone who believes the 2020 election was clean! The whisper is growing into a roar and I think this guy came to try to calm that down, so the faithful will donate, and get out to work the 2024 election with door hangers, phone calls, etc.
I think the party leadership is very fearful of 2024 and it’s not about who will get elected. I think they are “collaborating” with the D party to maintain the calm.
ostensibly shes on our side, but there is a decade of choices, that say otherwise,
https://twitter.com/AJDelgado13/status/1743014433935262016
“I’m still struck by how much Gay looks like Obama in drag as a lesbian with the classic nutty “That’s not funny” feminist glasses”
Urkel, or whatever that kid’s name was
The sad and infuriating thing about what was done to Roland Fryer is that he was a genuine academic star. No need for that thumb on the scale or affirmative action. The book “The Bell Curve” shows that there is a right “tail” on the distribution of IQ and these DEI zealots are determined to control black scholars, even if they themselves are a cluster of losers like Gay.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2vbP8znESU
and these DEI zealots are determined to control black scholars
==
Glenn Loury remarked on this a generation ago. AA worked to ‘socialize a person’s success’, therefore removing ‘the autonomy to deviate from group consensus’.
I attended a meeting recently in which one of the political strategists from the top level of the R party was the speaker.
==
You don’t need to keep his name confidential.
Pingback:Links and Comments | Rockport Conservatives
And now for something completely different, two white women leftists bitching on CNN about plagiarist Gay while Chris Wallace approves and Joana Goldberg and a National Review editor try to point out essential truths.
The white women resort to blaming white men. One of the women has the “hispanic” race card, and uses it, but looks to be from Spain or Argentina (?) (pretty fair skinned it seems).
CNN Panel Catfight Ensues Over DEI, Claudine Gay, Then Someone From the Right Scores a Win
Anyway here is the link,
https://redstate.com/mike_miller/2024/01/06/cnn-catfight-panel-throws-down-over-dei-disgraced-former-harvard-president-claudine-gay-n2168386
DNW — With all due respect, Mogambo is a much better movie than King Solomon’s Mines. It is a remake of “Red Dust”, which also starred Clark Gable. But then opinions on movies are like opinions on politics…
Pingback:Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup - Pirate's Cove » Pirate's Cove
om
Try as they might, the two lefties fail to convince anyone not already convinced. Some lefty viewers might nod in satisfaction at having picked up one or two useful phrases–validity not an issue–for their own arguments.
LOL Most people would agree with you.
And Mogambo has some redeeming features which is why I called it “semi-crap”, knowing that many including the blog proprietor would share your take.
Why, or what I liked about King Soloman’s Mines: Yeah, it is kind of stale now, but the criticism it received for being 70% travelogue, is what I liked about it. And for my money, the scenes portraying the struggling survivors of the expedition working their way through in a sea of hostile tribesmen ready to pounce, is more effective than anything in Mogambo.
And there is just enough of the ten year old boy left in me to complain, “Why do they have to have that romance crud in there?” Even though I know full well why the economics of the project demand it.
Mogambo is more or less nothing but a romance where the crazy eyed actress portraying a sexual adventuress, competes with the fake good girl to see whose hook-up with the white hunter will win out.
Gable is of course a more compelling adventure movie lead actor than that wide hipped Englishman with the hairless arms and chest. But you know, it is Hollywood and you just have to look away at the cringe scenes meant to appeal to women.
As far as the female leads go, well, I guess they could not have used Eleanor Parker from the Naked Jungle in all the roles. But maybe one, at least. You know for something good to look at, rather than Crazy Eyes and her inconsistently padded bosom.