Category Archives: morality

A Proposal for Harvard University

Posted on by
Reply

Given the blatant antisemitic bigotry of Harvard’s President Claudine Gay, as well as her dishonesty, demonstrated by her plagiarism—She plagiarized her acknowledgments—and the antisemitism demonstrated by the Harvard Corporation, the school’s governing body, and its open condonement of Gay’s bigotry and dishonesty, when that body unanimously supported retaining her as President, it’s clear that drastic changes to Harvard University’s governance is badly needed.

A Harvard professor has suggested a pathway to that.

One faculty member, citing a carve-out in the Massachusetts Constitution that reserves authority over Harvard to the state legislature, has urged Massachusetts lawmakers to install a government official on the board to provide more transparency and public accountability.

Here is the relevant section of that constitution, from Chapter V, Section I, Article III:

…it is declared, that the governor, lieutenant governor, council and senate of this commonwealth, are and shall be deemed, their successors, who with the president of Harvard College, for the time being, together with the ministers of the congregational churches in the towns of Cambridge, Watertown, Charlestown, Boston, Roxbury, and Dorchester, mentioned in the said act, shall be, and hereby are, vested with all the powers and authority belonging, or in any way appertaining to the overseers of Harvard College; provided, that] nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the legislature of this commonwealth from making such alterations in the government of the said university, as shall be conducive to its advantage and the interest of the republic of letters….

The professor is on the right track, but one government rep on a board of 13 or 14 won’t accomplish anything. The State needs to revamp the Corporation board altogether—maybe put on the board reps from the ministers of the congregational churches in the towns of Cambridge, Watertown, Charlestown, Boston, Roxbury, and Dorchester in sufficient number that their aggregation outnumbers the remaining members, if they’re not, instead, to replace the incumbents. Additionally—these are Critical Items—the State needs to remove the President’s sole authority over the board’s agenda and to eliminate the board’s authority to select their own replacements.

 

Massachusetts’ constitution can be read in its entirety here.

Responsibility and Carping

Posted on by
Reply

A couple of letter writers in Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal‘s Letters section have some remarks about the way Israel is (trying to) prosecute its defense against Hamas’ war of extermination.

First is the Progressive-Democrat Congressman from Massachusetts, Seth Moulton. He so-piously wrapped himself in his status as a veteran and a US Marine to decry the Gaza civilian casualties occurring as Israel fights to defend itself. In his bellyaching about those casualties, he implies that they are the result of IDF action. He very carefully, though, ignores the fact that those casualties are inflicted on Gaza’s civilians by Hamas directly, as those terrorists shoot the civilians who are trying to leave the combat zone, especially including those proximate targets that the IDF routinely is at pains to identify beforehand so those civilians could otherwise depart.

Moulton further carefully ignores the fact that Hamas inflicts those casualties indirectly by placing their weapons caches, their rocket and missile launchers, and their command centers inside Gazans’ residential buildings, schools, and hospitals.

Moulton, perhaps even more despicably, provides no evidence whatsoever to support his contention that the IDF isn’t doing enough to protect the civilians even as it tries to pick out the terrorist immersing himself in the civilian crowd.

Israel certainly is responsible for its actions. So is Hamas. Carping from safety, by anyone, is not responsible action.

On the other hand, a letter-writer from outside the Progressive-Democrat Beltway Bubble, Paul Mertis of Atlanta, pointed out these items, contradicting Moulton:

[Biden to Netanyahu:] “There was no reason why we had to be in a war in Afghanistan at 9/11. There was no reason why we had to do some of the things we did.” Perhaps Mr Biden should be reminded that while it is approximately 7,000 miles from Washington to Kabul, Gaza borders Israel.

To which I add, regarding Biden’s…irresponsible…advice: yeah, that was just some people that did something. And, it’s also 5,900 miles from Washington to Gaza. It’s easy enough for Biden—and Moulton, come to that—to sit safely on the faraway sidelines and carp, while terrorists, operating from inside Gaza, try to destroy the nation on whose borders Gaza sits.

The Harvard Corporation and Antisemitism

Posted on by
Reply

The Harvard Corporation (or, formally, President and Fellows of Harvard College) is the body that, overall, governs Harvard University. That august forum has just explicitly backed Harvard President Claudine Gay in the aftermath of her antisemitic testimony before a House committee several days ago. The corporation said her testimony was unfortunate, but that otherwise everything is jake for and with her.

It’s convenient for Gay, though, that she also sits on the Harvard Corporation. Although she cannot vote on matters before the board, she does set its agenda.

I have to wonder whether the subject of her handling of antisemitism would have been on the agenda if she didn’t already know the Corporation’s decision.

Some Bigotry is Acceptable, Apparently

Posted on by
Reply

Here is Harvard President Claudine Gay when she was Harvard’s Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences on the matter of the then-contemporaneous George Floyd murder [emphasis added]:

I have watched in pain and horror the events unfolding across the nation this week, triggered by the callous and depraved actions of a white police officer in Minneapolis.
…
I write this knowing that for some in our community, and I count myself among them, the events in Minneapolis, Brunswick, Louisville and beyond, feel anything but abstract; to the contrary, the headlines stir an acute sense of vulnerability. We are reminded, again, how even our most mundane activities, like running, which is something I am passionate about, can carry inordinate risk. … It shouldn’t be this way. Our presence and our voices make these experiences visible—and that, too, is part of the change. Together with the many who know these fears only vicariously, we must actively work to build a more just society, where no one is above the law and where each of us is treated with the dignity that is our birthright.

Here is now-Harvard President Claudine Gay, in her testimony before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce over a week ago (Tuesday, 5 December), answering the question of whether calling for genocide of the Jews is a violation of Harvard’s codes of conduct:

It can be, depending on the context.

Apparently, bigotry against some is bad, and each of us should be treated with dignity, except when Jews are involved. Antisemitic bigotry is fine, and Jews don’t need? deserve to be? mustn’t be? treated with dignity.

That Harvard’s governing body, Harvard Corporation, hasn’t yet—nine days later!—fired Gay for cause over her overt antisemitism and her selective bigotry is clear demonstration of the rank bigotry of the members of the Harvard Corporation, as their studied inaction condones Gay’s bigotry.

H/t Niall Ferguson writing for The Free Press.

Occurring after I wrote the above: in the event, the Harvard Corporation, which is the governing body for this school, has decided to retain–enthusiastically–Gay as President.

“Our extensive deliberations affirm our confidence that President Gay is the right leader to help our community heal and to address the very serious societal issues we are facing,” the board said in a message to the Harvard community Tuesday morning.

With judgment like that–affirming Gay’s testimony that genocide against Jews sometimes is a permissible threat–it’s clear that the Federal government must cut off all Federal funding to the school unless and until Gay is fired for cause and the Harvard Corporation’s own governing body–the President and Fellows of Harvard College–undergoes a 100% replacement.

Taxpayer money should not be going to institutions that so overtly support selective bigotry, or any bigotry at all.

“Invisible Americans”

Posted on by
Reply

Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D, MI) thinks she has the support of “invisible” Americans, her constituents. It’s…unfortunate…that she does, but it’s especially saddening given what she thinks her constituents believe, which they seem to demonstrate by repeatedly electing her. Her antisemitic bigotry is blatant.

Here’s her claim regarding her openly supported slogan From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. It’s

an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate.

This is a lie. The region encompassed by the slogan she so enthusiastically supports includes the region in which is situated the nation of Israel. Even were Tlaib’s associated claim that her one-nation solution wherein Jews and Arabs live “side-by-side” with “equal rights” were true, it would only be a supposedly peaceful driving out of Jews from their homeland since they would be dramatically outnumbered in population and in voting. Her own interpretation calls for the removal of Jews from the Middle East.

The more accurate interpretation of her slogan is the one that’s been the case since the First Intifada, a four-year period of overt terrorism against Israel perpetrated by Hamas. It’s a slogan of hatred of Jews and a call for their extermination, as noted by Congressman Max Miller (R, OH) on the House floor during the debate regarding House censure of Tlaib:

To be clear, “from the river to the sea,” as someone who’s Jewish, means to exterminate my people. I understand she thinks it’s some kind of aspirational message. I do think it’s aspirational—an aspiration to the genocide of Jews.

In response to the censure debate, Tlaib was careful to carry through her antisemitic bigotry: when she spoke during her part of the debate, she wore a Hamas keffiyeh over her blazer.