The Loss Of Nuance
The departure of Claudine Gay from Harvard over plagiarism accusations has created a new grimmer chapter in America's ongoing culture war.
by Ben Cohen
Take a moment and evaluate these two sentences:
Claudine Gay is an inept college president and guilty of plagiarism.
The right in America despises Claudine Gay because she is a successful black woman.
In today’s political climate these statements would be considered highly inflammatory and loaded with potentially racially sensitive implications. So of course I’ve started my article with them (because that’s what we like to do here at The Banter). In all seriousness, I think it is important we are able to look at these two seemingly opposing ideas and entertain the notion that both might be right.
To the identity politics left, the first sentence is tantamount to racism. Any attacks on prominent black women must by definition, be racism. Here was ‘How to Be an antiracist’ author Ibram X. Kendi on Twitter denouncing the recent resignation of Gay:
Alongside accusations of academic plagiarism, during a testimony in Congress in December of 2023, Gay refused to give a clear answer as to whether calling for the genocide of Jews constituted “bullying and harassment.” Kendi, an identity politics ideologue, makes no mention of this but has determined racism against black women is the only explanation. What would Kendi say if it were a white male president whose students were calling for the genocide of black people? He would undoubtedly call for his immediate resignation. But given militant identity politics adherents do not consider Jews to be minorities, Gay’s equivocating over a very straightforward moral question isn’t of much interest to him.
The identity politics right (alternatively the Alt or MAGA Right) insists racism has nothing to do with their campaign to get rid of Claudine Gay. They apparently want to protect Jews and ensure Harvard hires “the best person for the job.” Gay, they insist, was only hired because of her skin color and gender:
Contrary to the insinuations, Gay has a long track record of accomplishment and success. She was (at least before the accusations of plagiarism emerged) as deserving of the role as anyone else, and those insisting she was a ‘Diversity Equity and Inclusion’ (DEI) hire have no real evidence to suggest otherwise.
Support independent media and become a Banter Member:
Two things can be true at once
While Gay is no doubt a highly accomplished woman, she does appear to have a troubling record of plagiarism that should be properly investigated. Thus far the allegations are not damning, but probably not befitting of a president of one of America’s most prestigious university. Reports the Washington Post:
The reports published in various outlets collect nearly 50 instances in which Gay allegedly misused academic sources. They appear in eight of her works: a 1993 essay in the magazine Origins, her dissertation from 1997, a 2001 working paper, and five articles she published while a professor at Stanford and Harvard (out of a total of 11 journal publications across her career).
The alleged misuse varies in scope. In some places, it appears that Gay took verbatim wording — ranging from sentences to paragraphs — from academics she cited, but without placing that text in quotation marks. In others, she appears to have paraphrased or lightly modified the texts she drew on, without citing the source in the same sentence or paragraph. In a few cases, she did not make any mention of her source.
Gay is not exempt from criticism because she is a black woman and she should be held to the same standards as everyone else. Standford’s former president Marc Tessier-Lavigne, who is white and male, was forced to resign after an investigation into his work showed “significant flaws in studies he supervised going back decades.” If Tessier-Lavigne, a highly credentialed and esteemed neuroscientist had to go, then so should Gay. Furthermore, Gay’s atrocious performance in Congress — like the presidents of MIT and U-Penn — should have spelled the end of her tenure.
Unfortunately it is almost impossible to make points like this without being labeled a racist or a ‘woke liberal’. Because being nuanced during the peak of America’s culture war is akin to drowning a kitten at a cat convention.
The Woke vs anti-woke paradigm
The inability to contend with some of these issues is creating serious problem for both political parties. Democrats are being held hostage to a morally bankrupt ideology that has far outlived its use. Diversity Equity and Inclusion dogma has become a bizarre cult that is undermining its own objectives. Far from being inclusive, it has created new forms of discrimination based on hierarchies of oppression. If DEI adherents cannot unequivocally condemn the most grotesque displays of antisemitism, then something has gone terribly, terribly wrong.
The GOP on the other hand is incapable of admitting the racism rotting within the party. Fox News and right wing talk radio have made a sport of attacking prominent black women, and Republican politicians have openly called black women “apes” and “monkeys.” The party is regressing at breakneck speed, a trend set by Donald Trump who made racism exponentially worse after his election. Trump didn’t get elected despite his racism — he got elected because of it. Few Republicans are willing to confront this and it will take the party generations to recover.
“Both sides?”
Some might read this article as an attempt to “both sides” the debate over race/gender and identity in America. I am not suggesting that defending Claudine Gay irrespective of her faults is a moral equivalent to the very real racism leveled towards her. I am suggesting however, that both sides don’t make any sense.
The Left needs to acknowledge that antisemitism is racism and that Claudine Gay absolutely should have resigned, and the Right needs to acknowledge the appalling racism Gay has been subjected to. Anti-woke activists seem to believe black success can only be a product of DEI initiatives — a historically idiotic position to take given the very real barriers many African Americans have faced in the workplace.
The art of nuance
When Barack Obama became president in 2008 I remember thinking America had turned a corner in its painful history. Not only was Obama the first black president, he was also the first radically nuanced president. Rather than crashing into America’s culture wars, Obama made a real effort to cool tensions and reach out to those he disagreed with. His extraordinary speeches were mostly pleas to Americans to come together and see past their difference — a refreshing break from the tribalism of George W. Bush and an increasingly divisive political culture. Obama’s perspective was unique: he was mixed-race, a product of a single parent household, and had an Arabic middle name. He had to be nuanced to get to the White House, and his scandal free administration was a testament to his astonishing ability to navigate America’s ongoing cultural psychodrama.
Fast forward to 2023 and the left appears to have abandoned Obama-style inclusivity for something many liberals no longer understand. Thankfully the left is beginning to wake up to the excesses of radical identity politics:
Unfortunately, we might have to wait a while for someone on Fox News to show similar levels of self awareness.
Ultimately, the Claudine Gay debacle isn't just about one person or one institution; it is a microcosm of a larger struggle America faces. This struggle cannot be solved if we revert to tribalism and warfare. We have to make space for nuance when dealing with complex issues like race, gender, and personal accountability. Because without nuance, these problems won’t go away — they’ll just get worse until something finally breaks.
Please consider supporting The Banter by becoming a paid member. We are 100% independent and do not run advertising. Banter Members get access to all premium articles, The Emergency Meeting podcast, and exclusive member chat threads. Your contribution is greatly appreciated:
"The GOP on the other hand is incapable of admitting the racism rotting within the party."
Which is odd. You'd think admitting to your core principal would be easy.
"and those insisting she was a ‘Diversity Equity and Inclusion’ (DEI) hire have no real evidence to suggest otherwise."
What do you mean no evidence? She's female and black. What more do you need? Everyone knows anyone who is female or black (let along *both*) is only ever hired as diversity hire!
(Gods, just pretending to be alt/MAGA I could feel IQ points slipping away for the few seconds it took me to write that. Oh, here they come back now.)