Hi there! I saw the article on Claudine Gay and had some comments.

Alexis Ibarra’s opinion has a couple of central problems. First off, the idea that Republicans were “digging up her past as a student” to “defame Harvard” is absurd, as truth is an absolute defense against defamation, and Claudine Gay was found to have plagiarized. Plagiarism is not a “new conservative weapon against colleges,” as the Associated Press claimed; it is a violation of intellectual honesty so fundamental that it is taught in first-grade classrooms. If we as a society can’t ascertain the truth of the matter asserted without getting into a political argument, America is in for some serious problems. Conservatives should not be trying to twist this into an attack on the liberals — that will only validate people who think they want to interfere in the education system. Likewise, liberals should find a better hill to die on — defending a plagiarist on political grounds will only validate conservatives who think higher education is a liberal echo chamber protected by those in power.

As for Ellis Jacoby, he had some excellent points. Plagiarism of the nature described should have been caught the first time around, and absolutely would have been at any respectable institution. Leaving out citations is not “something that happens to the best of us,” as Ibarra claims — especially not on a doctoral thesis. Errors of that kind should be caught on the second draft, at the latest. Jacoby is also correct in his assessment of Gay’s statement to Congress. One of the organizations Gay protected was Students for Justice in Palestine, a group that stated that Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks were a “historic victory for Palestine.” While it is important to have diverse perspectives, if Harvard is willing to give a platform to groups that endorse this kind of violence, then perhaps they should also be willing to listen to groups like the Ku Klux Klan. Both groups are committed to removing an ethnic group from what they view as their territory, after all. “Freedom of speech” is a thin shield behind which to hide hypocrisy. If these schools want to protect students from aggressive activist groups, SJP has to go. And if they would rather promote a wholly libertarian ideal of freedom of speech, let them put their money where their mouths are.

Morgan Powers, class of 2027

The opinions stated in this submission do not necessarily reflect those of Campus Publications or the University itself.