Who knew that perfect SAT scores were a predictor of moral imbecility? Do you doubt that’s true? Well, Harvard proves it daily.

For example, every Deplorable understands at a gut level that each of us has certain characteristics we can’t change: our race, national origin, color, age, etc. And because we can’t change them, it’s immoral to discriminate against someone based on them. Martin Luther King Jr.’s immortal words ring in every Deplorable’s ears.

Not Harvard’s. No, not at all. Always exhibiting the Left’s maddening propensity to overthink, yet half-bake everything, Harvard thinks it knows better. Its mad desire to discriminate knows no bounds.

For nine embarrassing years, Harvard dug its little pink heels into the ground and, at great expense, litigated for its right to discriminate against Asian applicants. Yes, putting all their impeccable extracurriculars and 1600 SAT scores to work, the Einsteins at Harvard believed they’d come up with arguments in favor of discrimination that would win the day. They had cracked the discrimination code and outthought Dr. King! Discrimination was good! And, to Harvard’s way of thinking, the victims were, after all, only Asians.

Finally in 2023, Harvard’s clown car clunked up to the Supreme Court.  The five sane justices rolled their eyes, held their noses, and thundered at Harvard that it had “concluded, wrongly, that the touchstone of an individual’s identity is not challenges bested, skills built, or lessons learned but the color of their skin. Our constitutional history does not tolerate that choice.” A basic American principle every Deplorable believes in their heart.

But it was after the bestial rapes, murders, and abductions of October 7, 2023 that Harvard’s moral rot was really laid bare. That very day, 34 Harvard student organizations signed a statement proclaiming they, “hold the Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.” Students also forcibly blocked Jewish students from entering certain public spaces on campus. Judenfrei.

But surely it was just the students flaunting their youthful ignorance; the brilliant Harvard faculty would perceive the moral imbecility of such actions. That was the hope until Harvard’s president, Claudine Gay, testified before Congress. When asked repeatedly if students calling for the genocide of Jews violated Harvard’s Code of Conduct, she haughtily replied, “Again, it depends on the context.”

Inevitably, Harvard’s rot was of the top-down variety. And every Deplorable knew the undeniable truth: if Harvard students were calling for the genocide of any minority other than Jews, it would have shut the harassment down in a nanosecond. But to Harvard, the victims were, after all, only Jews.

The situation became so embarrassing that Harvard had to appoint a taskforce on combating its own antisemitism. Amongst hundreds of pages of the usual bureaucratic drivel, there’s a remarkable passage that summarizes the views of Harvard’s faculty and staff:

They saw Harvard as a place where, over time, many students’ politics become more radical and where students become less tolerant of people who disagree with them. Faculty who work closely with students told us that in this generation, students too often feel they are carrying the weight of their identities, since they say that is how they sold themselves to Harvard in the application process. This positioning contributes to a kind of affective polarization that, we believe, Harvard has neither anticipated nor developed a set of tools to counteract.

What could that “set of tools” possibly be? Somewhere, Dr. King is laughing.

What to do about Harvard? Blessedly, the answer came in a recent Wall Street Journal article, “Harvard Has Trained So Many Chinese Communist Officials, They Call It Their ‘Party School’”.  The article examines Harvard’s seamless integration into the Chinese Communist Party:

Harvard enjoys a sterling reputation among Chinese officials thanks to its record in training highflying bureaucrats who went on to take senior government roles and, in some cases, join the party’s elite Politburo. Some observers dubbed Harvard a de facto ‘party school,’ as the party’s own training academies for promising bureaucrats are known.

So, there’s the answer. Utilizing its own $53 billion endowment and what would surely be generous subsidies from the CCP, Harvard should pull up stakes and move to Beijing. There, they can live happily ever after with a simpatico government that’s also cracked the discrimination code. Because to Harvard, the victims are, after all, only Uyghurs.

Peter Merkl blogs at pmerkl.co

Image: Public domain.