Former Harvard President Claudine Gay’s resignation caused quite an uproar on social media among many left-wing acolytes. These people, who often consider themselves enlightened, espouse such things as diversity, tolerance, and inclusion. Yet they are among the most exclusive, intolerant, and homogeneous of people. They seek power, authority, and wealth for themselves and those like them. They have contempt for anyone who is different. They have fear and loathing for anyone who opposes them. Hell hath no fury like the social media scorn of people who supported Gay and her left-wing ideology.

Based on her posts on X, one of those supporters appears to be Dr. Roopika Risam. Risam is a fellow Penn alum. She is talented and intelligent. Currently, she is an associate professor of film and media studies and of comparative literature at Dartmouth University. Based on her posts, Risam seems to believe that Gay’s ousting had to do with her skin color.

BIDEN SQUEEZED FROM BOTH SIDES OVER STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS

“Oh Harvard, FFS, I am just absolutely livid that President Gay is resigning,” Risam posted. “They were always going to come for the leader who’s a brilliant Black woman.”

Every logical and rational person knows that Gay’s removal had absolutely nothing to do with her race. Yet the intellectual elite continues to make such inflammatory claims without providing any evidence. This is not unusual among left-wing ideologues in academia. Creating a world that prefers and prioritizes racial minorities fuels their disgruntled behavior. Moreover, anyone who doesn’t subscribe to such beliefs is a bigot in their minds. All that is required for people like Gay’s defenders to proclaim prejudice and discrimination is disagreeing with their opinions.

Knowing this, I asked Risam a simple question on X. “Professor, if one of your students was caught repeatedly plagiarizing work, what would your punishment be for him/her?” I posted. “What would Dartmouth’s?”

I hoped to get valuable input from an Ivy League professor. Instead, within minutes, I was blocked from communicating with Risam. Her actions were not unexpected. Nevertheless, I hoped an accomplished and intelligent woman such as Risam would be able to answer this very mundane question.

Before I realized I was blocked on X, I also contacted Risam through her email, hoping to interview her about her post. I was genuinely hoping for an engaging conversation or a spirited debate. It was apparent we would have differing opinions on the matter. However, I hoped she would be willing to answer a few questions for me. I asked:

If one of your students was caught repeatedly plagiarizing work, what would your punishment be for him/her? What would Dartmouth’s? 

You mentioned that “they were always going to come for the leader who’s a brilliant Black woman.” What proof do you have that “they” came after her because of her skin color? 

If “they” came after her because of her skin color, why would “they” allow her to be president in the first place? 

Why does your value system of what “they” did not apply to Liz Magill, who has white skin?

Unfortunately, she didn’t reply, but her silence spoke volumes. Obviously, if any student was caught doing what Claudine Gay did, that student would most likely suffer serious consequences. And something tells me that if the student tried to use skin color as a justification for the offense, no college professor would accept the excuse. It would appear that someone such as Risam knows this and I suspect that might be why she never replied.

Shortly after my email to her, I noticed another post by Risam on the matter. Once again, she made passionate and overly emotional, baseless accusations of racism and suggested that plagiarism was not the impetus for Gay’s resignation. And, once again, Risam, an intelligent, accomplished, established professor at an Ivy League school, failed to provide any evidence backing her claim.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

“To the trolls who are @-ing me claiming this is about 'plagiarism,' the amount of racist filth you include about her and me when claiming it’s plagiarism tells us what this is really about,” Risam posted.

Simply put, academia's elitist aristocrats and any other person insinuating racism was behind Gay’s removal cannot actually prove their claims. Why? Because as mentioned above, no such evidence exists. Such claims are little more than exaggerated nonsense, provocative accusations, and incendiary remarks. In fact, one might suggest that the people making these bogus claims of racism legitimately want racism to exist, even when it doesn’t, just so it can validate their own ideological beliefs and existence in their fields.

Claudine Gay's hubris, not racial bigotry, led to her demise. Everyone knows this, but the Left’s aristocrats refuse to acknowledge it. Instead, they prefer to craft an unsubstantiated narrative that is at the core of their activism: cries of racism. However, it is 2024, and most people should be privy to this circus act by now. As such, it’s time to start intellectually challenging these agitators and expose them for their inability to support their claims.