Harvard’s DEI Hiring Practices and the Plagiarism Controversy

The recent resignation of Harvard’s president has reignited discussions about the institution's hiring practices, particularly in the context of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Some critics argue that the Harvard Corporation must have known about the plagiarism allegations, while others defend the decision, pointing to the importance of proper vetting processes.

Excusing Plagiarism: DEI Works Differently

One perspective is that the Harvard Corporation excused the plagiarism by labeling it as “duplicative” instead of outright referencing it as “cheating.” This approach aligns with the philosophy of DEI, which often prioritizes representation over absolute standards of ethics and competence. Despite her resignation, the president maintains her faculty position and $900,000 annual salary. Harvard is attempting to avoid accusations of racism by deflecting focus towards DEI hiring.

The ‘Are You Still Beating Your Wife’ Question

This situation can be framed as a variation of the “are you still beating your wife” conundrum, where the president resigned to avoid tarnishing the institution's reputation. Despite the clearing of plagiarism charges, an inquiry found some instances of poor referencing practice. Others argue that the controversy is a result of extensive discussions in previous platforms, and the debate on whether it was plagiarism or not is largely irrelevant.

Proper Vetting Over DEI

Another perspective suggests that Harvard did not know about the plagiarism, but they failed to conduct a thorough vetting process, which is an accountability issue. It is crucial for academic positions to not knowingly hire anyone who has shown signs of unethical behavior such as plagiarism. It's important to highlight that citation errors, which were discovered and corrected years before her presidency, do not equate to lifting entire paragraphs or pages of someone else's work.

H hire H Hire

The dirty secret is that in the case of highly connected, Black “scholars,” plagiarism and other unethical behaviors are often overlooked. Harvard, in its quest to appear inclusive and ethical, hires black women in high positions, even if they are incompetent, liars, plagiarists, or bigots. The focus is on virtue signaling rather than academic excellence and transparency.

It's apparent that academic institutions must prioritize integrity and ethical standards, regardless of the candidate's connections or diversity statistics. As someone who has experienced Harvard, the author feels a visceral disdain for liars, bigots, and propagandists, which surpasses any negative feelings towards the institution itself.

This ongoing issue highlights the need for a comprehensive and transparent vetting process in academic settings, especially when it comes to high-profile positions. The accountability of institutions to uphold ethical standards is paramount in maintaining trust and integrity.