Over at the Heidelblog, R. Scott Clark writes, “Plagiarism And The Ugly Truth About Education.” I agree in large measure with Scott’s essay, but my comment took the issue in a bit of a different direction.

I’m reproducing my comment here, as it can be read as a stand-alone:

The fact that Gay has not been fired tells you what kind of institution Harvard is, and what their leaders understand is the role of the president.

If a celebrity pastor confesses to an affair and stealing money, and then is placed on “sabbatical” for three months, before being fully reinstated by the board of that church, then outside observers would rightly conclude that the role of “pastor” as defined in that church is not as spiritual leader and undershepherd of Christ’s flock, but as the celebrity CEO who keeps the money and attention flowing to/through an organization. Through the exercise of discipline, we learn what the role is and is not.

Even before we learned about the plagiarism, a glance at Gay’s academic record (11 articles in a field of dubious academic validity, no books published) shows us that the reason for her hire are 1) her race and gender, and 2) her adherence to the ideology/religion of academia, which might be dubbed “progressivism” or “identity politics.” She is not qualified to be CEO of the foremost teaching and research institution in the country, but she is highly qualified to be an eminent priestess in the religion of academia.

The plagiarism revelations do not damage her qualifications as a high priestess in this religion. They do not make her less able to do perform her fundamental duties.

However, Harvard’s success depends in part upon maintaining the appearance of an institution tasked with research and teaching. Since Gay is not irreplaceable, she will eventually be fired if the cost of keeping up appearances while maintaining her in office is greater than the cost of throwing her under the bus and finding someone else.

But if she ultimately gets fired, this doesn’t mean that anything will fundamentally change at Harvard. The leadership has already told us the nature and purpose of that institution, by their choice of her in the first place.