I have a bunch of stuff to write, and due to the New Year, I already feel backed up and what not so I’m just trying to get back on track. Here’s my thoughts on Claudine Gay and her situation, not that anyone asked.

Claudine Gay recently wrote that the attack on her previous leadership at Harvard was due to racist tropes (probably) and that “Trusted institutions of all types – from public health agencies to news organizations – will continue to fall victim to coordinated attempts to undermine their legitimacy and ruin their leaders’ credibility”

Before I get too much further into that statement alone, I’ll have to preface by saying that I am a person of color that has experience racism DIRECTLY because I’m a person of color, still experiences racism due to that probably monthly, and am fully aware of the unique issues and challenges that Claudine Gay faces because of that. Harvard is a prestigious white university full of money-rich people whose leadership have typically been white. She’s a black woman, facing many different issues in today’s world and trying to lead that former institution into a new era (probably more PC scripted than that but I lack the effort to describe). I feel for her in general, facing many, many uphill battles.

BUT specifically because of that, she HAS to be better. It’s not a secret that black people and people of color touch on the issue of “white privilege” that you “can’t give cops a reason to search you” and other dictums that make the difference in our country. To be a leader at a leading institution means you have to be better at just about everything, and there’s little excuse to give to anyone about your credentials or leadership skills. Many POC know this, and many people who accept leadership know this. If you are a leader in general, especially at something you wish to be good at, you’re going to have accountability and ensure that you’re squeaky clean. They do background checks and other things for a specific reason. And anyone who’s had issues with their background face challenges-it’s been scandals that take down presidents for some of these matters. I believe I read that Biden’s earlier presidential hopes were dashed due to a plagiarism issue. She SHOULD have known better. She SHOULD have taken care of those issues before she came to power as a leader. It’s just common sense, and even someone at Harvard should have taken care of it.

I haven’t read too far into the plagiarism issues. I think there’s proof that there’s plagiarism, even if some scholars are arguing that it’s not “technically”. If it is or if there wasn’t many instances of it, then there wouldn’t be too much of a problem. It might be minor, which I’m sure that it is, but that combined with her missteps at the hearing proved to be too much. I think she stumbled in both. Her lack of conviction and preparation at the hearing was her own fault, and pretty much shows that she was unprepared for that type of questioning and reasoning. It would have saved her to have a session before hand to give her time to answer those sorts of questions. I don’t think that her answers were that bad as a lapse of the moment, but the assumption and image of what she said lead to questions in her leadership. If she held her conviction, she probably could have weathered that storm out and possibly the plagiarism issues too. But because she waivered, because there were questions about her past, it lead to confidence loss and her leadership as well. I think even if she held herself accountable, explained the minor issues-a quote is a misstep, a half a page is a problem, then she still could have had a shot at maintaining her job.

That’s the story that plays out for many leaders, and she is no different. SHOULD we have given her a wider berth? Possibly, and I could argue that she deserves it, but the world is full of tons of deserving mouths and nothing to feed those with, so that argument holds little weight. She could have refused to step down and kept fighting, but she was convinced to go and she still gets a great pension so I think she’s covered. If that ruins her quest for presidency, then that’s on her, I know the previous president weathered a ton of scandals and somehow is still trying for the presidency upcoming. His conviction never waivered despite him being an idiot.

Also, her line about leadership being threatened is crap. All leadership is threatened. It’s part of the job of a leader. If you have to quash rebellion (not physically of course), it’s part of your job to do those types of things. Legitimacy is based on the person itself, and your portrayal of your character, it’s why you were elected as a leader. If you have nothing to fear or undermine, you really won’t have an issue quashing or dealing with those issues from the start. Even people who DO have issues do their best to stop potential problems before they start. Lance Armstrong maintained power for so long despite the whispers that he was a cheater until he admitted it himself. There are plenty of other examples that deal with those issues and Machiavellian tactics. That just sounds like whining to me, which I can’t condone and it still undermines her leadership ultimately and proves those challenging her correct. If we cannot challenge the leadership to accountability, how do we hold ourselves accountable?

Frankly, I think the accountability is what the world needs more of.