
‘A bully’: the billionaire who led calls for Claudine Gay’s Harvard exit
US hedge fund manager Bill Ackman posts 4,000-word screed decrying ‘racism against white people’ after Gay’s departure
Or ... The irony here is that people blindly support Gay because she is black, and they assume that the only reason she can succeed is if the policymakers put their thumb on the scale to reward one for their melanin content. An additional irony, they don't see this as racism.The irony here is that these people are going after Gay because she is Black, and they assume this is the only reason she got the job as president of Harvard.
An additional irony, they don't see this as racism.
Merit triggers a lot of folks.thanks. apparently dei programs/woke/pronouns trigger a lot of folks
Absolutely. It is extremely amusing that those who are political junkies and on this board 24/7 are just discovering that politicians engage in demagoguery. But, only one side, of course. Geez, people! They are politicians. If they are in front of a camera, they are spewing populist talking points and engaging in demagoguery.Two things can be true at once: Gay committed academic misconduct and Stefanik's hysterics were mere demagoguery. (As an aside, demagoguery really stinks, doesn't it?) The hearing was choreographed to generate outrage.
Yep. I saw this first hand while attending George Washington University. University administrators tend to be money-grubbing cowards. They'll tolerate a lot for a dollar from a despot.For the record, the Chinese, the Russians and the Qataris already do this with university donations to American universities, to control agendas. And universities lap it up.
You are guessing here. We have no concrete evidence which says Gay was hired because she is black. Until that evidence surfaces, the proper thing to do is to assume the woman was hired on merit.The irony here is that people blindly support Gay because she is black.
You are guessing as well. So, the proper thing to do is not have an opinion one way or the other until we know. The left and right are like porch dogs thinking they see a squirrel and are running off howling into the woods. My comments are more with finding amusement at the tribal response to all this.You are guessing here. We have no concrete evidence which says Gay was hired because she is black. Until that evidence surfaces, the proper thing to do is to assume the woman was hired on merit.
I would hope so. But, there is often a strong political agenda in academia.My last two hires were a black woman and a Hispanic woman. Both were the best candidates for the job and both have been excellent hires. They were hired on merit, not because they were minorities.
Agreed. Including her teaching job.If Gay cannot fulfill the duties of the president of Harvard, she should absolutely be let go.
Well, I've spent enough time in academia to see how things work. I've seen it happen in the private sector some and it is the norm in the government sector. And her moral cowardice and college president-speak on antisemitism cost her employer hundreds of millions of dollars. And she's accused of plagiarizing half her journal articles and her dissertation, but we are told to be skeptical about her is racist. That's a nice privilege.Where you and I differ is in whether or not Gay was hired because she was the best candidate for the job. I haven't seen anything that tells me she wasn't fully qualified.
Anyone making the claim she was hired for any reason other than the board thought she was the best person for the job has the burden of proof.So, the proper thing to do is not have an opinion one way or the other until we know.
What I notice missing is any reference to any materials that would provide evidence for his assertions. There is literally nothing there to back his claims.Bill Ackman's essay on the Harvard situation...pretty powerful.
c’mon now, he was forced to bring these allegations because children are being allowed to identify as cats and use litter boxes at school. /sWhat I notice missing is any reference to any materials that would provide evidence for his assertions. There is literally nothing there to back his claims.
And the burden is on him to provide evidence for his claims.
Nope. People are allowed to have opinions that don't have to conform to your constructs.Anyone making the claim she was hired for any reason other than the board thought she was the best person for the job has the burden of proof.
What a joke of an article![]()
‘A bully’: the billionaire who led calls for Claudine Gay’s Harvard exit
US hedge fund manager Bill Ackman posts 4,000-word screed decrying ‘racism against white people’ after Gay’s departureamp.theguardian.com
With her actions she provided him all the evidence he needed....along with the overboard DEI culture that exists @ Harvard. One of my best friends was a Harvard grad -- and former professor -- and he deplored what had happened there over the last couple of decades.What I notice missing is any reference to any materials that would provide evidence for his assertions. There is literally nothing there to back his claims.
And the burden is on him to provide evidence for his claims.
Personal experience is not the right kind of evidence ... or something.With her actions she provided him all the evidence he needed....along with the overboard DEI culture that exists @ Harvard. One of my best friends was a Harvard grad -- and former professor -- and he deplored what had happened there over the last couple of decades.
True. Uninformed opinions are all the rage.Nope. People are allowed to have opinions that don't have to conform to your constructs.
That is certainly true. Always been that way. As is the belief by some that only their opinion is valid. Always been that way. Tribalism and whatnot.True. Uninformed opinions are all the rage.
Changed your text color didn't you.Personal experience is not the right kind of evidence ... or something.
Rufo and Stefanik are who they are.The letter I posted is not Gay's resignation letter, rather an OpEd she sent to the NYT. Is it possible you were thinking I posted the resignation letter? The oped was published about an hour before I posted it here. I would be surprised to learn you have a subscription the the Times.
Write it off as "president speak" if you like; I thought Gay's words were meaningful.
You implied earlier that Gay's career was not ruined. The OpEd addresses how she feels this has been an attack on her character. Her integrity has been impugned.
As for whether or not she was forced out by donors withholding donations, you may be right. However, the way I'm seeing things, none of that happened without the political grandstanding by Stephanik in Congress and the right wing misinformation machine. Christopher Rufo and Stefanik are claiming victory. Rufo tweeted, "Scalped." This isn't on the donors even if they were the muscle that removed Gay from her position.
Correct. I was speaking of her resignation letter.The letter I posted is not Gay's resignation letter, rather an OpEd she sent to the NYT. Is it possible you were thinking I posted the resignation letter? The oped was published about an hour before I posted it here. I would be surprised to learn you have a subscription the the Times.
Write it off as "president speak" if you like; I thought Gay's words were meaningful.
You implied earlier that Gay's career was not ruined. The OpEd addresses how she feels this has been an attack on her character. Her integrity has been impugned.
As for whether or not she was forced out by donors withholding donations, you may be right. However, the way I'm seeing things, none of that happened without the political grandstanding by Stephanik in Congress and the right wing misinformation machine. Christopher Rufo and Stefanik are claiming victory. Rufo tweeted, "Scalped." This isn't on the donors even if they were the muscle that removed Gay from her position.
My guess is that someone somewhere knows all about that.That is certainly true. Always been that way. As is the belief by some that only their opinion is valid. Always been that way. Tribalism and whatnot.