Harvard President resigns

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

Oh, please. Wealthy "elites" (you guys love that word) have been hiring their relatives, friends, and friends' relatives for eons, regardless of merit. White men have hired other men over equally qualified women for eons as well. Thin people get hired over equally qualified fat people and so on and so forth. People often hire the people they identify with the most. There is inherent bias in many/most hires. Is that a "pattern of corruption" as well?

And surely you are trying to be humorous when referring to the hiring of "some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees." What, exactly, were Jared and Ivanka's qualifications to serve as senior advisors to the president? Or those of the many misfits and cray-crays that Trump hired?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

Oh, please. Wealthy "elites" (you guys love that word) have been hiring their relatives, friends, and friends' relatives for eons, regardless of merit. White men have hired other men over equally qualified women for eons as well. Thin people get hired over equally qualified fat people and so on and so forth. People often hire the people they identify with the most. There is inherent bias in many/most hires. Is that a "pattern of corruption" as well?

And surely you are trying to be humorous when referring to the hiring of "some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees." What, exactly, were Jared and Ivanka's qualifications to serve as senior advisors to the president? Or those of the many misfits and cray-crays that Trump hired?

DP.

Two wrongs make a right?

But agree that conservatives are grossly hypocritical on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

Great points there.

Let's hope lessons are learned fast...not after decades of corruption and abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tik-tok has been so effective at brainwashing people on this. I am truly afraid for the next election, with so many low-information people willing to become chines/iranian/terrorist-loving puppets.

I'm amazed at how many people truly know nothing about the Israeli government or their systematic human rights violations for nearly a century. Do you honestly not know or refuse to educate yourself on it? Have you read any of the UN reports, foundational documents, seen any of the documentaries or eye witness accounts from the ground?

It's crazy to me how many of you guys live with blinders on. Or it's just plain racism. You hate Arabs and Muslims so much that you're able to swallow the propaganda hook, line and sinker.

DP. I’ve read a lot of UN reports about alleged human rights violations by Israel but after watching how the UN reacted to the 10/7 atrocities I no longer trust the UN.

You don't have to trust the UN. There are thousands of video documentations by numerous different sources. You just don't watch them, and that is the problem with most Americans. They have inherent bias against Arabs because they have been fed media to believe that everyone is a terrorist. Sort of how they believe that all AA are criminals. It is this bias that allows Israel to continue its apartheid practices with zero intervention.

This sort of over-the-top accusatory and frankly ridiculous response makes your entire position weak.

The fact is that many Americans have seen many, many videos. Some are indeed videos from Israel that are awful. Some are the videos that Hamas uploads to its own Telegram channels, or other videos from radical Islamists. You seem to want us to only believe the first group and ignore the second group, and that’s not going to happen for rational people.

Out of curiosity, how many videos have you watched from 2000? or 2014? or 2018? How many Palestinians have you spoken with who suffered administrative detention with zero charges and zero wrong doing? And have you read the ICJ charging docs filed by South Africa regarding genocide and ethnic cleansing? The thing is for any rational human the knowledge of the facts contained in the ICJ case would move you to call for a ceasefire and end to the occupation. How anyone could ignore Israel's actions is beyond me. Unless of course you do not see Arabs as human. And that really could be the only answer.

Please stop blaming this woman's resignation on the Jews

Why?

It is obvious they switched sides on her, prompting her fall.

WAsn't it Bill Ackman (Jewish and married to an Israeli) who led the charge for her removal? I don't understand. Jewish resentment and Gay's failure to align with zionist beliefs is the direct cause for her removal. Why are we pretending that it wasn't?

Gay's shortcomings were acceptable, perhaps even preferable, so long as she supported the "right things." Let this be a lesson to everyone clambering up the greasy pole to an elite position: its not your ability that will get you to the top, but your willingness to support Zionism that will get you there.

Fair point, but we need to realize that's an inherent weakness of affirmative action/ dei initiatives.

So what about white male leaders who have been caught plagiarizing? Is there an inherent weakness in hiring white male leadership as well?

You do know Stanford's white president had to resign when it was discovered some of his articles contained manipulated data. That was just last July btw.

Exactly. So why is PP attributing these " inherent weaknesses " in leadership hiring to DEI?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does plagiarism have to do with assaulting Jewish students?

She is a famous anti-Semite.

This country just hates Jews so much that even being a raging anti-Semite who went into the House floor to spew her anti-Semitic and anti-Israel message wasn’t enough to get her rightfully fired and/or arrested. It took plagiarism charges.

Yes! During her time she over saw the decline of Jewish enrollment at Harvard from 23% to 10%. This is totally unacceptable! The next President will be a lot more pro Israeli and get these number up by removing DEI and wokeness in the admissions process.

Say what now?
Jews are 2% of the US population but 23% of Harvard? That can’t be right.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/admissions/2023/05/08/jewish-student-enrollment-down-many-ivies

Defeating the university quota system was one of the most celebrated civil-rights battles of the 20th Century. These quotas were usually around 10%, and were implemented after they reached 20% of the population at some schools.

Take that into account when talking about diversity at these schools.

Are you talking about Jews or about Asian Americans?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

So because she plagaraized, she was a bad candidate. I agree. Will you say the same thing about Justice Alito, who also plagarized?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

Oh, please. Wealthy "elites" (you guys love that word) have been hiring their relatives, friends, and friends' relatives for eons, regardless of merit. White men have hired other men over equally qualified women for eons as well. Thin people get hired over equally qualified fat people and so on and so forth. People often hire the people they identify with the most. There is inherent bias in many/most hires. Is that a "pattern of corruption" as well?

And surely you are trying to be humorous when referring to the hiring of "some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees." What, exactly, were Jared and Ivanka's qualifications to serve as senior advisors to the president? Or those of the many misfits and cray-crays that Trump hired?

Based on your logic, unqualified DEI hires are acceptable as some sort of retribution for past nepotism by the wealthy?

And your allusions clearly implicate republicans, as if democrat politicians have not engaged in the same nepotism. Perhaps you should study history of the “machine towns,” which were all run by democrats, leading right up to Bowser and linked to Nancy Pelosi.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tik-tok has been so effective at brainwashing people on this. I am truly afraid for the next election, with so many low-information people willing to become chines/iranian/terrorist-loving puppets.

I'm amazed at how many people truly know nothing about the Israeli government or their systematic human rights violations for nearly a century. Do you honestly not know or refuse to educate yourself on it? Have you read any of the UN reports, foundational documents, seen any of the documentaries or eye witness accounts from the ground?

It's crazy to me how many of you guys live with blinders on. Or it's just plain racism. You hate Arabs and Muslims so much that you're able to swallow the propaganda hook, line and sinker.

DP. I’ve read a lot of UN reports about alleged human rights violations by Israel but after watching how the UN reacted to the 10/7 atrocities I no longer trust the UN.

You don't have to trust the UN. There are thousands of video documentations by numerous different sources. You just don't watch them, and that is the problem with most Americans. They have inherent bias against Arabs because they have been fed media to believe that everyone is a terrorist. Sort of how they believe that all AA are criminals. It is this bias that allows Israel to continue its apartheid practices with zero intervention.

This sort of over-the-top accusatory and frankly ridiculous response makes your entire position weak.

The fact is that many Americans have seen many, many videos. Some are indeed videos from Israel that are awful. Some are the videos that Hamas uploads to its own Telegram channels, or other videos from radical Islamists. You seem to want us to only believe the first group and ignore the second group, and that’s not going to happen for rational people.

Out of curiosity, how many videos have you watched from 2000? or 2014? or 2018? How many Palestinians have you spoken with who suffered administrative detention with zero charges and zero wrong doing? And have you read the ICJ charging docs filed by South Africa regarding genocide and ethnic cleansing? The thing is for any rational human the knowledge of the facts contained in the ICJ case would move you to call for a ceasefire and end to the occupation. How anyone could ignore Israel's actions is beyond me. Unless of course you do not see Arabs as human. And that really could be the only answer.

Please stop blaming this woman's resignation on the Jews

Why?

It is obvious they switched sides on her, prompting her fall.

WAsn't it Bill Ackman (Jewish and married to an Israeli) who led the charge for her removal? I don't understand. Jewish resentment and Gay's failure to align with zionist beliefs is the direct cause for her removal. Why are we pretending that it wasn't?

Gay's shortcomings were acceptable, perhaps even preferable, so long as she supported the "right things." Let this be a lesson to everyone clambering up the greasy pole to an elite position: its not your ability that will get you to the top, but your willingness to support Zionism that will get you there.

Fair point, but we need to realize that's an inherent weakness of affirmative action/ dei initiatives.

So what about white male leaders who have been caught plagiarizing? Is there an inherent weakness in hiring white male leadership as well?

You do know Stanford's white president had to resign when it was discovered some of his articles contained manipulated data. That was just last July btw.

Exactly. So why is PP attributing these " inherent weaknesses " in leadership hiring to DEI?

?? We're talking about her ouster - which she said had to do with racial animus. Uh, no. and white president caught committing any academic fraud would receive the same treatment she did. See, Stanford's president.
And this observation was made in response to the above question: "what about white male leaders who have been caught plagiarizing?" They're treated the same.

[Anonymous]

It ties back to the CRT hysteria. All the same people and playbook.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It ties back to the CRT hysteria. All the same people and playbook.

Makes sense. The GOP is masterful at seizing these opportunities to promote its culture wars. Dems could learn a lot from them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tik-tok has been so effective at brainwashing people on this. I am truly afraid for the next election, with so many low-information people willing to become chines/iranian/terrorist-loving puppets.

I'm amazed at how many people truly know nothing about the Israeli government or their systematic human rights violations for nearly a century. Do you honestly not know or refuse to educate yourself on it? Have you read any of the UN reports, foundational documents, seen any of the documentaries or eye witness accounts from the ground?

It's crazy to me how many of you guys live with blinders on. Or it's just plain racism. You hate Arabs and Muslims so much that you're able to swallow the propaganda hook, line and sinker.

DP. I’ve read a lot of UN reports about alleged human rights violations by Israel but after watching how the UN reacted to the 10/7 atrocities I no longer trust the UN.

You don't have to trust the UN. There are thousands of video documentations by numerous different sources. You just don't watch them, and that is the problem with most Americans. They have inherent bias against Arabs because they have been fed media to believe that everyone is a terrorist. Sort of how they believe that all AA are criminals. It is this bias that allows Israel to continue its apartheid practices with zero intervention.

This sort of over-the-top accusatory and frankly ridiculous response makes your entire position weak.

The fact is that many Americans have seen many, many videos. Some are indeed videos from Israel that are awful. Some are the videos that Hamas uploads to its own Telegram channels, or other videos from radical Islamists. You seem to want us to only believe the first group and ignore the second group, and that’s not going to happen for rational people.

Out of curiosity, how many videos have you watched from 2000? or 2014? or 2018? How many Palestinians have you spoken with who suffered administrative detention with zero charges and zero wrong doing? And have you read the ICJ charging docs filed by South Africa regarding genocide and ethnic cleansing? The thing is for any rational human the knowledge of the facts contained in the ICJ case would move you to call for a ceasefire and end to the occupation. How anyone could ignore Israel's actions is beyond me. Unless of course you do not see Arabs as human. And that really could be the only answer.

Please stop blaming this woman's resignation on the Jews

Why?

It is obvious they switched sides on her, prompting her fall.

WAsn't it Bill Ackman (Jewish and married to an Israeli) who led the charge for her removal? I don't understand. Jewish resentment and Gay's failure to align with zionist beliefs is the direct cause for her removal. Why are we pretending that it wasn't?

Gay's shortcomings were acceptable, perhaps even preferable, so long as she supported the "right things." Let this be a lesson to everyone clambering up the greasy pole to an elite position: its not your ability that will get you to the top, but your willingness to support Zionism that will get you there.

Fair point, but we need to realize that's an inherent weakness of affirmative action/ dei initiatives.

So what about white male leaders who have been caught plagiarizing? Is there an inherent weakness in hiring white male leadership as well?

You do know Stanford's white president had to resign when it was discovered some of his articles contained manipulated data. That was just last July btw.

Exactly. So why is PP attributing these " inherent weaknesses " in leadership hiring to DEI?

?? We're talking about her ouster - which she said had to do with racial animus. Uh, no. and white president caught committing any academic fraud would receive the same treatment she did. See, Stanford's president.
And this observation was made in response to the above question: "what about white male leaders who have been caught plagiarizing?" They're treated the same.

Why are you making observations in responses to questionS you do not understand? The question was challenging the comment it quoted.

The cases do not appear to be treated the same by the PP the question was responding to. One case becomes a caution on DEI just because the leader in that case is black. That is what the question was challenging. Go back and read the PP the question quoted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does plagiarism have to do with assaulting Jewish students?

She is a famous anti-Semite.

This country just hates Jews so much that even being a raging anti-Semite who went into the House floor to spew her anti-Semitic and anti-Israel message wasn’t enough to get her rightfully fired and/or arrested. It took plagiarism charges.

Yes! During her time she over saw the decline of Jewish enrollment at Harvard from 23% to 10%. This is totally unacceptable! The next President will be a lot more pro Israeli and get these number up by removing DEI and wokeness in the admissions process.

let me get this straight, she's anti-semitic because Jewish enrollment no longer represents one quarter of Harvard's student body despite making up less than 2% of the country? You realize that does not prove the point that you're trying to make. And that is victimization of Jewish students? WTF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

So because she plagaraized, she was a bad candidate. I agree. Will you say the same thing about Justice Alito, who also plagarized?

Link that Alito plagiarized?

You might be referring to Gorsuch, but what he did in the footnote (borrowing language from a secondary source about facts of a legal case, not legal analysis, and properly citing the primary source) is quite different from what Gay did (taking language to pass a theory off as her own without citation).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think her comments at the hearing got everyone looking at her (and the other two presidents) -- but it was the evidence of pervasive plagiarism that actually did her in.

I agree.

The real scandal here is how come she was hired to begin with. Would have taken 5 minutes to properly vet her.

Nepotism, racism, or both?

It's not difficult to see Gay was (and still is) everything that was wrong about the DEI movement. Elevating highly unqualified and mediocre talent into senior roles and fast tracking people simply because of the need to fill an identity gap. Her academic history is weaker than a typical community college adjunct professor and yet she made tenure at elite universities, and she will retain her yearly salary of $900,000. And she is part of a pattern that includes Kamala Harris and some of Biden's vastly under-qualified appointees.

It is a pattern of corruption.

This form of corruption isn't unique to DEI. The same pattern happened in the Soviet Union as people with the right ideology were promoted over more capable talent. It happened in the aristocratic regimes where noblemen were appointed to high offices due to the title, not talent. Hopefully this means going forward people will be wiser as to the risks of failing people upward.

So because she plagaraized, she was a bad candidate. I agree. Will you say the same thing about Justice Alito, who also plagarized?

Link that Alito plagiarized?

You might be referring to Gorsuch, but what he did in the footnote (borrowing language from a secondary source about facts of a legal case, not legal analysis, and properly citing the primary source) is quite different from what Gay did (taking language to pass a theory off as her own without citation).

Alito was not accused of plagiarism--he was accused of an ethics violation (the usual one--accepting a favor from a wealth GOP donor).