Popular news commentator Leo Terrell shared his thoughts on the ongoing drama surrounding Harvard President Dr. Claudine Gay.
“Firing Dr. Claudine Gay is not Racist. Keeping her as Harvard President is Racist!”
Gay has been under the microscope after she and other college presidents testified before Congress to address reported anti-Semitic protests at their colleges. In our view, much of the modern anti-Semitism is also based on anti-White racism additionally, just a note other pundits appear to be afraid to say.
Gay is the only college president who will keep her position after the embarrassing and notorious testimonies before Congress.
Gay is also the only black female who testified before Congress, and she is notably Harvard’s first woman of color to lead the school. Clearly, Terrell sees Harvard’s inaction as racist on those grounds.
Since the hearing, it has also been made public that Gay allegedly plagiarized works she submitted to the college while attaining her doctorate.
Harvard has however chosen to use softer language calling the plagiarism “duplicative language without proper attribution,” as they appear desperate to hold on to their Black female president.
Harvard revealed this week that Gay will be making further corrections to the paper she wrote to earn her doctorate from the college. Harvard’s refusal to hold Gay to a standard required of others shows how far they will go to keep a “woke” woman of color at the top.
The statements that put Gay in the hot seat were her answers to Congresswoman Elise Stefanik’s (R-NY) question, “At Harvard, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules of bullying and harassment?”
Gay replied, “It can be, depending on the context.” When further pressed Gay shared, “Antisemitic speech when it crosses into conduct that amounts to bullying, harassment, intimidation — that is actionable conduct and we do take action.”
It appears that Harvard will keep Gay, and it doesn’t seem to matter that Gay failed to be ethical in her papers that earned her the title of Dr. or her indifference to the protests on her campus.
Many decent Americans are indeed anti foreign war interventionists, but a lot of these rallies appear like BLM rallies in disguise to many. The topic of the war in Israel is a very contentious one indeed following the most recent Hamas attacks and then questions of ethical response.
- Jack Smith BTFO After Judge Cannon Denies Gag Order Request on Donald Trump - May 28, 2024
- Nancy Pelosi Refuses to Answer Directly the Question of Whether or Not Donald Trump is Still ‘Eligible’ to be President in Midst of State Ballot Fiascos - January 7, 2024
- Idaho AG Joins 18 Other Attorneys General to Halt Jack Smith’s Move to Speed up Donald Trump’s Trial with SCOTUS - December 21, 2023
The ONLY reason that unqualified cheating female black homosexual was hired because she was a female black homosexual the cheating was scrupulously ignored. She had NO other qualifying traits. Harvard is now a well earned joke.
Nobody bothered to go after her until the Jews disliked the fact that she supported free speech even when it comes to Jews.
When rules are applied equally to all;
When recognition requires the recipient rise to a consistent level of performance;
When reward is tied to the same standard of excellence expected from all awardees –
[Call this Premise 1; Objectivism]
It’s called “racism” by the left (those intent on creating specific classes of people, ultimately resulting in two major divisions – the ruling elite and the subservient collective)
To show favoritism based on someone’s perceived “race” – using external factors such as skin color, eye shape, or hair texture.
[Call this premise 2; Favoritism]
Apparently this is “not racist” (according to leftism)
That’s because the “official definition” of “racism” is “prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism” applied based on “race” and MOST people assume or are taught certain negatives in that definition and assume a specific direction of application of those negatives.
This produces a warped worldview where up is down, black is white, and false is accepted as true.
“Prejudice” is a “preconceived opinion not based on reason”. Re-reading Premise 1 and Premise 2 above, it’s clear that Premise 1, Objectivism IS based on reason so it is not prejudicial and therefore does not qualify as racist. Premise 2, Favoritism is not based on reason and is therefore prejudicial and racist.
“Discrimination” is “prejudicial treatment…based on [among other external and unrelated criteria] ethnicity or race…”. Again, Premise 1, Objectivism, is based on reason, not prejudice, so it is not discrimination, and still not racist. Similarly, Premise 2, Favoritism, is not based on reason but on prejudices, fitting the definition of discrimination, and once again showing itself to be racist.
Antagonism is “active opposition or inhibition”. A standardized measure applied objectively to all is not “active opposition” so again, Premise 1, Objectivism, cannot be racist based on this either. However promoting on prejudicial grounds (opinions without objective reasons) actively opposes those prejudiced against, in favor of those prejudiced for Premise 2, Favoritism, once again shows itself to be actively opposing/inhibiting one “race” in order to promote another.
Thinking people recognize that objectivism is not racism but favoritism [applied to “race”] is racism.
Apparently, higher education is, less and less often, the place to find thinking people.