Remember when Harvard president Gay, UPenn president Magill, and MIT president Kornbluth were pilloried for being insufficiently outraged about Palestinians on their campuses? They did give pretty tepid and timid answers to questions about campus protests, but I hate to break the news to you about college presidents: that’s their job, being professionally tepid and timid about everything in order to avoid antagonizing politicians and donors. They could have done better, but they never received any training in being forthright.
Then, strangely, everything shifted from being about their responsibilities to all sides on a politically contentious issue to…plagiarism? Not that that isn’t an important matter, but it’s peculiar how we got this abrupt change in focus. What had happened is that certain ideologically motivated people had decided to really get those college presidents, and they’d been doing their best to dig up dirt on them. They didn’t find evidence of anti-Semitism (that would have been a bad tactic, since the dirt diggers tended to be anti-Semitic themselves), but they did find that one nasty little nugget, the horrible secret that plagues a lot of academics who are pressured to churn out lots of papers.*
Well, unsurprisingly, it turns out that neither anti-Semitism or an epidemic of cheating were the actual motivations behind the assault on university presidents, or universities in general. They really, really hate DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). This was another anti-woke crusade all along.
Gay’s resignation almost a month after Magill’s had initially redirected the backlash onto Kornbluth, who has largely evaded the brunt of the outrage, kept her job and remained relatively silent amid the calls for her ouster. But as the focus of the online outrage now trains on Business Insider, the calls for the presidents’ firings — once primarily fueled by concerns over antisemitism on campus — are shifting to a broader campaign against diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives at U.S. colleges and then detouring into seemingly tit-for-tat plagiarism probes. The shift appears to reveal that the initial uproar was never really about protecting Jewish students, scholars told Salon.
“Given how quickly the focus of the people claiming to be concerned about antisemitism on our campuses shifted to academic dishonesty, it certainly appears that the focus was never really about antisemitism and protecting students,” Irene Mulvey, the president of the American Association of University Presidents told Salon. “It’s part of a long-running, well-funded effort to create a false narrative for the public that higher education is broken.”
What’s driving that well-funded effort are conservative billionaires, like Bill Ackman. Ackman’s campaign got briefly short-circuited when it was discovered that his wife, Neri Oxman, had the same plagiarism sins that were used to get Gay fired. Uh-oh. Need to recalibrate. Suddenly, Ackman is babbling about “nuance” and “context.” It would be funny if this weren’t a rich, powerful guy looking for pretexts to get people he doesn’t like fired.
But the act backfired for the financier, whose involvement in the controversy had brought him his fair share of criticism according to Bloomberg, last Thursday after Business Insider released reports accusing Oxman of failing to cite and copying passages from other authors without proper citation in her 2010 MIT dissertation, claims The New Republic notes are similar to those thrown at Gay. While Oxman acknowledged some of the claims and apologized for errors in a post to X, the outlet published a second report the day after alleging at least 15 new instances of plagiarism in her dissertation, including segments claimed to be directly lifted from Wikipedia.
With the ire aimed at his spouse, Ackman’s strong-minded stance against plagiarism in all forms suddenly became more nuanced, with the billionaire arguing in a post to X that charges of plagiarism in academia should be more context-reliant and weigh intentionality. The Business Insider reports prompted Ackman to expand his campaign against higher education to the journalism industry, with the Pershing Square CEO announcing his plans to launch an AI-powered dig for potential plagiarism in the outlet’s work.
What’s this about “intentionality”? I suspect he means plagiarism with intent to lend support to the poor and oppressed is bad, while plagiarism with an intent to enrich billionaires is good.
He just hates DEI. It is the root of all sins.
In the same post in which he detailed a strict stance on plagiarism, Ackman also gave voice to a conservative talking point about DEI, concluding, after meeting with students and faculty at Harvard, that DEI was at the core of the antisemitism cropping up on the campus in the wake of Oct. 7.
I think it would be a stronger point to argue that evangelical Christianity is at the core of that anti-Semitism. Except that conservative evangelical Christians also hate DEI, so he can’t blame them.
You know that DEI initiatives strongly oppose anti-Semitism, along with any racial or ethnic discrimination, right? You can’t be a DEI proponent and also promote bigoted ideas about any group.
This is really all about finding any excuse to cut down anyone who opposes the billionaire agenda.
Is too on the nose?