 |
| Claudine Gay defending Jew harassment |
An anti-white racist, an anti-Semite and a plagiarist walk into a bar. The bartender, who happens to be a former socialist congresswoman from New York, smiles and says, "What are you having Doctor Gay?"
Harvard President Claudine "Depending on the Context" Gay is finally coming out. No, not as a gay woman, but as an alleged plagiarist, and definitely as an anti-Semite who also hates white people, especially conservative white men.
Gay is the first black woman to preside over Harvard, a former prestigious university that has gone the way of the left and continues in its long-standing history of anti-Semitism. Gay has often been accused of
bullying colleagues, overseeing a racist admissions program and
suppressing free speech. Who among us can forget how she refused to answer Rep. Elise Stefanik's (R-NY) question at the Congressional Hearing as to whether calling for the genocide of the Jews was considered by Harvard to be harassment. Instead she claimed that it depended on the context. She was asked the same question 17 times and came up with the same nonsense.
Chris Rufo of the Manhattan Institute of Policy Research obtained exclusive documentation that appears to indicate another problem with Gay. Specifically, she appears to have plagiarized sections of her Ph.D. dissertation, a violation of Harvard's standards, and virtually every college, university and every publishing house in the nation, mostly because it's illegal and grounds for a lawsuit.
Shades of Joe Biden!
Gay's dissertation, “Taking Charge: Black Electoral Success and the Redefinition of American Policies,” was published in 1997, as part of her doctorate in political science from Harvard. The reason she has gotten away with the alleged plagiarism for so long is that people tend not to read those things because they're tediously boring.
Gay's paper deals with white-black political representation and racial attitudes, much like the tripe that Ihram X. Kendi writes and refuses to debate anyone on.
 |
| Chris Rufo |
As evaluated under Harvard's own plagiarism policy, the paper contains at least three problematic patterns of usage and citation.
First, the affirmative-action-now-school-president lifted an entire paragraph almost verbatim from Lawrence Bobo and Franklin Gilliam’s
paper, “Race, Sociopolitical Participation, and Black Empowerment.” She never cited with author and passed it off as her own language.
Here is the original, from Bobo and Gilliam:
Using 1987 national sample survey data . . . the results show that blacks in high-black-empowerment areas—as indicated by control of the mayor’s office—are more active than either blacks living in low-empowerment areas or their white counterparts of comparable socioeconomic status. Furthermore, the results show that empowerment influences black participation by contributing to a more trusting and efficacious orientation to politics and by greatly increasing black attentiveness to political affairs.
And here is the language from Gay’s so called work:
Using 1987 survey data, Bobo and Gilliam found that African-Americans in “high black-empowerment” areas—as indicated by control of the mayor’s office—are more active than either African-Americans in low empowerment areas or their white counterparts of comparable socioeconomic status. Empowerment, they conclude, influences black participation by contributing to a more trusting and efficacious orientation towards politics and by greatly increasing black attentiveness to political affairs.
It's obvious that Gay didn't think too deeply in how to interpret what the authors were saying, using her own words and thoughts. Yes, she referenced Bobo and Gilliam, but uses their language with few exceptions.
But this isn't a "one-off." Gay continues repeating the same violations throughout the dissertation along with passages from Susan Howell, Deborah Fagan, and Richard Shingles, which again was practically copied and pasted.
Gay also apparently lifted work by Carol Swain at least twice, as Rufo points out: "In one passage, summarizing the distinction between
'descriptive representation' and
'substantive representation,' she copies the phrasing and language nearly verbatim from Swain’s
book Black Faces, Black Interests, without providing a citation of any kind."
Swain writes:
Pitkin distinguishes between “descriptive representation,” the statistical correspondence of the demographic characteristics … and more “substantive representation,” the correspondence between representatives’ goals and those of their constituents.
Gay’s version is basically the same, with tiny modifications to the diction and punctuation:
Social scientists have concentrated . . . between descriptive representation (the statistical correspondence of demographic characteristics) and substantive representation (the correspondence of legislative goals and priorities).
Later in the paper, Rufo explains, Gay uses identical language to Swain, without adding quotation marks, as required.
Rufo then writes:
Third, Gay composes an entire appendix in the dissertation directly taken from Gary King’s book, A Solution to the Ecological Inference Problem. While she cites King’s book—in fact, King was her dissertation advisor—Gay does not explicitly acknowledge that Appendix B is entirely grounded in King’s concepts, instead passing it off as her own original work.
Throughout the appendix, Gay takes entire phrases and sentences directly from King’s book, without any citations or quotation marks. In total, Gay borrows material from King in at least half a dozen paragraphs—all in violation of Harvard’s standard on academic integrity.
Rufo et al., then call on Harvard's Board of Overseers to conduct "a full investigation into Claudine Gay's academic integrity."
But they have already given her the green light to support the green headscarf with all that funny Arabic writing on it.
Posts
