Primer: Claudine Gay

On January 2nd, 2024, Harvard President Claudine Gay resigned from her presidential position. The growing pressure for her to resign, both from Harvard members and the nation as a whole, was primarily based upon potential acts of plagiarism and her leadership of Harvard during the Israel-Hamas war. In contrast to all of the people who were calling on her to resign, many others stood up for her and wanted her to remain Harvard’s president. All of this brings Northwestern’s Political Union to the following resolution:

Former Harvard President Claudine Gay should have retained her position.

Please enjoy the following primer!

There are many pro side arguments to consider. First, the seriousness of the plagiarism charges against former President Gay can be contested. As the BBC article linked above mentions, a critical analysis of her research found that she simply failed to properly cite all of her sources. The pro side would argue that it was not that she was making up all of her data, but that she wasn’t correctly giving credit where it was due. Simply put, Harvard’s board concluded that she did not violate research conduct. If this investigation truly found that these accusations are merely minor transgressions, Gay being pressured to step down seems out of line. Second, the pro side would argue that many of the attacks of former President Gay are purely political. Nancy Maclean, a Duke University history professor, called the movement against her a “political hit job.” Right-wing politicians and activists, the pro side might argue, wanted Claudine Gay gone due to her political beliefs and, then, tirelessly pushed for her resignation. Following Gay’s resignation and the recent resignation of the University of Pennsylvania’s president, Republican congresswoman Elise Stefanik posted “Two down.” With the sense that conservative politicians are taking a victory lap after getting Gay to step down, the pro side would argue that many arguments against her are purely political in nature. Another point to briefly mention is the race aspect to the story. Claudine Gay was the first Black person to serve as Harvard president. Some on the pro side argue that Gay’s race played some role in how she was treated in the media, which partially led to her resignation. Finally, the pro side argues that Gay should have retained her position as Harvard’s president because her performance can be explained because of the tough position she faced. One major issue on college campuses in recent memory has been about freedom of speech, with the accusation that colleges are restricting the speech of students. So, with this in mind, Gay’s comments during her congressional hearing make more sense in their intense devotion to protecting the safety of Jewish students and the free speech rights of all students. Thus, the pro side would argue that Gay’s answers seem improper because there were no correct answers to give. Gay was trying to satisfy both free speech and antisemitism concerns at once. 

The con side to this resolution also has much to consider. The first thing is that former President Claudine Gay was not fired, she instead resigned her post. In her resignation letter, Gay explained that it was her decision to leave her post. If Claudine Gay truly thought that the presidency of Harvard was best being filled by her, then she would not have resigned. Listening to what Gay thought is crucial here, the con side argues, and she chose to step down. Second, the opposition argues that Gay should not have remained president because of how poorly she led Harvard during this tense time. An article in The Harvard Crimson explains how Gay was solely concerned with antisemitism on campus and ignored the problems that Muslim students were also facing. If Gay was failing to lead Harvard properly and to the benefit of all students, as the con side argues, then it makes total sense that she was the wrong person to be Harvard’s president and was correct in her resignation. Finally, it’s important to consider how Gay’s potential acts of plagiarism reflect on the University. Just a few hours before her resignation, multiple new accusations of plagiarism were levied against Gay, as explained in the BBC article linked above. If the academic reputation of their president was consistently on the line, this would look poorly on Harvard’s image. Instead of keeping this potentially dishonest leader, the con side argues, it makes sense for Gay to step down.

Please join us for our debate in Scott Hall 201 at 7pm on February 5th! 

"Harvard Business School - Baker Library" by roger4336 is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

Previous
Previous

Opinion: Foreign Investment Screening

Next
Next

Primer: Supreme Court Term Limits