Defenders of Claudine Gay accuse her detractors of white supremacy. Conservative journalists Christopher Rufo and Christ Brunet exposed serial acts of plagiarism committed by the Harvard University President who sometimes lifted paragraphs almost verbatim from other writers without proper attribution. But the Harvard Corporation cleared her of all accusations and the woke institutions circled the wagons.
Despite Gay publishing just eleven papers in her academic career, five of which were shown to contain plagiarism, Nikole Hannah-Jones, who won the Pulitzer Prize for her conspiratorial race-baiting The 1619 Project, declared that attacks on the Harvard’s president’s qualifications are “racist”. President of the Black Economic Forum Alphonso David found Gay’s accusers to be engaged in an exotic kind of hate called “misogynoir,” reserved by the white supremacy exclusively for black women in positions of power. The Southern Poverty Law Center published multiple hit pieces on Rufo — they probably were banking them just in case he did something damaging.
I find their line of defense well-meaning but insufficiently radical. If the goal is to insert unqualified diverse apparatchiks into Western institutions — then yes, by all means shriek racism every time you get caught red-handed. But if the goal is not merely to create a wealth-sucking DEI attachment on capitalism, but to bring down the West, plagiarism should be celebrated.
Recall, for instance the infamous graphic on something called whiteness published by the Smithsonian Foundation during the 2020 George Floyd riots. America went a little crazy at the time, but the picture was too radical even for the moment and had to be removed after a few days of ridicule. That wasn’t the first time I’ve heard that critique —I spent a few years in the UC Berkeley Anthropology Department in the 1990’s and the 2000’s where these ideas were widely discussed and, back then, frequently discarded as a blueprint for life — or even for a political action. We couldn’t imagine progress without the scientific method, for instance.
According to the graphic:
“White dominant culture, or whiteness, refers to the ways white people and their traditions, attitudes and ways of life have been normalized over time and are now considered standard practices in the United States. And since white people still hold most of the institutional power in America, we have all internalized some aspects of white culture — including people of color.”
The Smithsonian gave examples of whiteness — or, as most of us would say, Western civilization — in American culture. Among them were rugged individualism, emphasis on scientific method and Protestant work ethic. Justice, the Smithsonian bemoaned, is designed to protect property and entitlements. Written tradition was presented as problematic, along with following rigid time schedules and delayed gratification. One could sense a bit of envy in the Smithsonian’s complaint about thin blond women and nuclear families.
Intellectual property rights that Gay violated have been designed to fortify the very culture of whiteness the Smithsonian railed against. Rugged individualism, the scientific method and work ethic are advanced by the academic citation requirements. The current rules require that every idea is sourced and quotation marks are used around any language borrowed from another writer. Failure to follow the rules is considered theft and constitutes grounds for expulsion or termination.
The arrangement allows academics to receive proper credit for their work from which they benefit both socially and financially. Because they create incentives for an individual to work hard and delay gratification, they enable scholars to advance scientific inquiry. And yes, I am aware that I’m oversimplifying the situation, particularly when it comes to giving credit to academic research assistants.
Citations perpetuate the culture of literacy — they require exact replication of a quote accompanied by a detailed and highly regimented description of the source. By contrast, oral literature, like ballads and legends, always varies. Exact replication is an impossibility.
The only two major cultural values of whiteness omitted by the Smithsonian that applies to the academic world is specificity of detail and authenticity. It’s a shameful omission because attention to detail is highly prized in the Western. The academy is scrupulous to the point of ridiculousness — to launch investigations into esoteric topics and study all possible angles is considered admirable.
Authenticity presupposes that there exists the original version of a text for which, then, its author can be credited. The idea seems natural to the Western mind, so it’s easy to miss, but as someone who was once unfortunately tasked with grading student papers, I can assure you that in some cultures replication is the norm. As a former Soviet, I lived in a society with strong ideas about authenticity but weak intellectual property rights. Creators weren’t properly rewarded and economy stagnated.
The values fueling university research culture present themselves throughout our society. The properly encouraged individual achievement, hard work and perseverance put the man on the moon and created the most vibrant, productive society on Earth. These Western values is not something that we should hold for granted because they are by no means universal — the Smithsonian is right about that, of course.
Others are more interested in living in the moment or are motivated by envy. There is a certain charm to the first type of mentality, but if it’s combined with the second, the social arrangement it produces is a downward spiral. Revolutions are grounded in envy and Harvard’s President is very much a part of a racialist revolution.
So what that Gay didn’t follow the rigid publish or perish time schedule? We have to recognize that her refusal to live by the expectations of whiteness is a revolutionary act. Disposing of the accepted rules of academic citation should be seen as another way of undermining Western civilization. Campus queers are well advised to follow her example.
First of all, plagiarism is easy — no need to overexert yourself with a or Protestant work ethic. Secondly, if writers can’t be guaranteed a proper acknowledgement for their work, academic enterprise will break down. It won’t be the first institution to be destroyed or the last.
I don’t know how Gay absolved herself from guilt for intellectual theft. What did she tell herself when stole from black scholars? It could be that she concocted an excuse about not living by whitey rules, including those governing the institution that created incredible advantages for her. Many others try, but she is one true insurgent of the academic world.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY