“It Depends on the Context”: One down, two to go

“It Depends on the Context”: One down, two to go.

At a Congressional hearing on December 5, Congresswoman Stefanik questioned Harvard University President Claudine Gay, MIT University President Sally Kornbluth, and UPenn President, Elizabeth Magill about the rise of antisemitism on their campuses. Three PC women, running some of the most influential institutions in the USA.

Congresswoman Stefanik: Dr. Kornbluth, at MIT, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate MIT’s code of conduct or rules regarding bullying and harassment? Yes or no?

President Kornbluth: If targeted at individuals not making public statements.

Congresswoman Stefanik: Yes or no, calling for the genocide of Jews does not constitute bullying and harassment?

President Kornbluth: I have not heard calling for the genocide for Jews on our campus.

Congresswoman Stefanik: But you’ve heard chants for Intifada.

President Kornbluth: I’ve heard chants which can be antisemitic depending on the context when calling for the elimination of the Jewish people.

Congresswoman Stefanik: So those would not be, according to the MIT’s code of conduct or rules.

President Kornbluth: That would be investigated as harassment if pervasive and severe.

Congresswoman Stefanik: Ms. Magill at Penn, does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Penn’s rules or code of conduct? Yes or no?

President Magill: If the speech turns into conduct, it can be harassment. Yes.

Congresswoman Stefanik: I am asking, specifically calling for the genocide of Jews, does that constitute bullying or harassment?

President Magill: If it is directed, and severe, pervasive, it is harassment.

Congresswoman Stefanik: So the answer is yes.

President Magill: It is a context dependent decision, Congresswoman. …

Congresswoman Stefanik: And Dr. Gay at Harvard? Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules of bullying and harassment? Yes or no?

President Gay: It can be depending on the context.

Etc. etc. Lying and evasion, but the moral stance shone through clear enough. The Congress and public do not like what they see, and many donors are furious.

Melissa Korn at the WSJ yesterday:

The president of the University of Pennsylvania [Liz Magil] and the chairman of its board of trustees [Scott L. Bok] resigned Saturday, capping a tumultuous week at the Ivy League school stemming from statements the president made about antisemitism at a congressional hearing Tuesday.  …

The presidents of Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have also faced calls to resign, and leaders at other schools are under intense scrutiny regarding how they balance the rights of pro-Palestinian protesters with the safety of students on campus. …

Look who she alienated:

Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan — who chairs the Wharton School’s advisory board — said in October he would halt further donations to his alma mater unless Magill and Bok were removed. Diplomat Jon Huntsman Jr., said his family would halt contributions, and cosmetics tycoon Ronald S. Lauder sent a letter in October saying he was reconsidering future gifts.

On Thursday, financier Ross Stevens said he would rescind a $100 million donation made in 2017 unless Magill was ousted.

The public and Congress are finding out what the universities are like, and find them morally repugnant.

Student at MIT:

Right and wrong in wokedom. Using the wrong pronouns will get you expelled, but calling for genocide on Jews or white people is alright.

Ok, I found these are funny: