by el gato malo
The response to Claudine Gay’s resignation has been remarkable.
now, call me mr cynical paws, but how is “holding authors to quite rudimentary standards for honesty and honor” characterizable as “destroying higher education“?
just what were you hoping to teach these students?
the predictable outlets (whose business models are now mostly paid advocacy gussied up as news content) went in predictable directions.
“this has not real plagiarism, it was a witch hunt.”
“standards have been weaponized by the far right!”
and the fast followers all joined in the chorus.
but this fawning lockstep is as tired as it is tawdry.
the soft bigotry of folks like david roberts claiming that “black scholarship” will be smeared/destroyed by “strightforward standards in place for 100’s of years” looks more an more like what it is: actual racism pretending to be anti-racist.
does this even convince anyone anymore or it is just a form of fully recursive virtue signaling to preach to the choir while proving to all outside it just how little diversity “team diversity” actually permits among its ideas and ideologues?
claudine’s “non apology apology” did little to help matters, but showed much about the only frame remaining to the increasingly vulnerable and vanquished amoung the formerly elite:
1. it’s not me, it’s you. (because you are racist)
“frightening to be subjected to personal attacks and threats fueled by racial animus.”
2. the gaslighting will continue until morale improves.
“to have doubt cast on my commitments to confronting hate and to upholding scholarly rigor—two bedrock values that are fundamental to who I am.”
she’s literally trying to deny being stone cold busted. this is a helluva “shaggy defense.”
the hilarity of watching an entire edifice of alleged intellectuals suddenly act as though “literally cribbing your entire corpus of academic publication from others without attribution right down to the acknowledgements and made up data” was somehow a wildly over exacting standard to which to hold an ivy league professor is difficult to swallow and the cries for additional application are unlikely to go the way which many proponents hope.
this is the problem with woke mascottism.
you put a whole bunch of amoral institutional climbers who will use any and all claims and contrivances to get and stay ahead 2-3 levels past their peter principles and then have to defend them and what they do.
and they do ridiculous things. because they are way over their heads.
this woman was a complete, end to end fraud. but now they must defend her. and the denials just add fuel to the “wow, you guys are so stunningly dishonest” fires because the facts keep leaking out and you no longer monopolize the story.
and that’s the end of the road.
if you want woke to survive, you cannot allow ANY criticism because once it starts and the cracks open, it’s going to be open season on collapsing the whole thing. it only works as one unified whole. barrack obama knew this. it’s why he urged the defense of ms gay. but this one was too much, too far, too fast. there was no putting it back into the bottle.
and absurdity will reign.
team “diversity and equity and inclusion” will have to keep adopting more and more preposterous positions to try to maintain hegemony.
but it’s already too late.
the cracks are there.