Ethics Quiz: Harvard’s Diversity Speaker

As the keynote speaker at its annual diversity conference, Harvard University’s Faculty of Arts & Sciences selected Tim Wise, an “anti-racism writer, educator and activist.” Here is a Facebook post by Wise from 2015.

This is America…people basing their beliefs on the fable of Noah and Ark, or their interpretation of Sodom and Gomorrah…rather than science or logic…If you are basing your morality on a fairy tale written thousands of years ago, you deserve to be locked up…detained for your utter inability to deal with reality…NO, we are not obligated to indulge your irrationality in the name of your religious freedom…but we will provide you a very comfortable room, against which walls you may hurl yourself hourly if your choose. Knock yourself out….seriously, knock yourself out, completely, for weeks at a time…I’m sorta kidding but not by much…I don’t believe lunatics like this should be locked up, but I do think they have to be politically destroyed, utterly rendered helpless to the cause of pluralism and democracy …the world is not theirs. They have no right to impose their bullshit on others. They can either change, or shut the hell up, or practice their special brand of crazy in their homes…or go away. Their choice. And this argument applies to any fundamentalist religionist of any faith who thinks they have a right to impose their beliefs on a secular, pluralistic society. Go away.

There is no evidence that Wise has moderated these views at all. He didn’t issue a direct attack on Christians at Harvard; he did say  that President Donald Trump is and “always was” racist, and that his election shows that “this country is more sexist and more racist than I realized” (because there was no reason not to want Hillary Clinton as President other than racism and sexism, I guess). He argued that academic institutions like Harvard should embrace the struggle for social justice and solidarity “not just at the level of rhetoric but policy.” This means,  Wise said, “Schools must make mission statements up to date,” and tell potential applicants that “if you’re not down with this mission, then you don’t actually fit in with us as an institution.”

You know: diversity!

Wise explained that current students should be required to prove  their commitment  to “this mission” by institutions like Harvard installing “community service requirements … relevant to solidarity.” If students don’t meet this standard, “then you don’t graduate.”

Your Ethics Alarms Ethics Quiz of the Day:

Is Wise a responsible and appropriate choice as the keynote speaker at a Harvard diversity conference?

My answer? It depends. Wise’s positions are the opposite of diversity. If the idea of making this narrow-minded ideologue the intentional catalyst for serious discussion about how intellectual diversity as well as democratic principles are endangered by the increasingly totalitarian orientation of the extreme American Left, an orientation that Wise flamboyantly represents, then sure. Throwing a bomb at the beginning of a conference is a valid strategy. (I’ve been recruited for that role myself.)

Keynote speeches are also sometimes meant to represent the over-all goal of the conference, however, and if someone like Wise is regarded as mainstream at Harvard, then it is time to be afraid, very afraid.


Facts:Neo, College Fix

19 thoughts on “Ethics Quiz: Harvard’s Diversity Speaker

  1. Hey, what’s the problem? Just agree with everything he and his fellow elitists decide are the correct positions, thoughts, and actions and you are free to be as diverse as you like.

    Remember to disagree is to hate. Haters must be reeducated or put in one of Mr. Wise’s (ironic) rooms, permanently.

    Reminds me of a spoof advertisement for the Anarchists Club that went something like this: “Must bring #2 pencil, arrive promptly at 7PM, wear the correct anarchy A button in white on black, a Mao jacket, sit in rows according to class standing, by last name alphabetically. Any variance from the above is cause for removal from the meeting and club.”

    Apparently, all too wise for me.

  2. If you could trust academic institution’s leadership, faculty, staff and students to see this totalitarian for what he is and why he was selected fir the role then ok use him as the kenote speaker.

    However, I don’t. I have no issue with him offering his perspectives as a speaker but elevating someone to “keynote speaker” status suggests whay he has to say is consistent with policies and positions of Harvard.

    So, I am very very afraid.

  3. Keynote speeches are also sometimes meant to represent the over-all goal of the conference, however, and if someone like Wise is regarded as mainstream at Harvard, then it is time to be afraid, very afraid.

    Afraid? Of that douchenozzle? Not likely.

    If this is what he and/or Harvard truly believes, I don’t object to it. They can believe whatever they want.

    The first time they try to do anything about it, though, should probably be the last — either by legislation or violence.

    When someone takes the position, however jokingly, that people should be locked up for their beliefs, I take the position, mostly (but not entirely) jokingly, that the Tree of Liberty could be in need of some watering.

  4. Seems the inappropriately named Wise and his ilk rarely, if ever, find it necessary to malign the pedophile Prophet Muhammad or his followers while flexing their religious bigotry.

    Wouldn’t be because some the more ardent practitioners of The Religion Of Peace©™® are reluctant to turn the other cheek, would it?

  5. “If you are basing your morality on a fairy tale written thousands of years ago, you deserve to be locked up…detained for your utter inability to deal with reality…”

    I like this. I don’t think he’s self-aware enough to realize how funny it is.

    Hey, you know who probably WOULDN’T send wrong-thinkers to a re-education prison? People who believe in that morality based on “fairy tales written thousands of years ago.” Funny.

    • “we are not obligated…” but ya’are, Wise, ya’are: the very1st Amendment says so “to indulge your irrationality in the name of your religious freedom…” Does it take an atheist to point out there is no mention of rationality in the Constitution? “….seriously, knock yourself out, completely, for weeks at a time…I’m sorta kidding but not by much…” just engaging in a little hate speech like “lunatics”… “locked up” … “destroyed” … “utterly rendered helpless” editorially speaking rendered utterly helpless, he’s sooo confused…. He thinks “…the world is not theirs” but it IS, Wise, it IS, as much as it is yours. You too can love-it-or-leave-it if that’s your suggestion, to ” …. change, or shut the hell up, or practice [your] special brand of crazy in [your] homes…or go away” what? no more Christmas carols or St. Paddy’s Day parade or unwelcome visitors on your front porch at dinnertime to attack you with a pamphlet? … and gee, what about the money that has that awful three-letter word on it? “And this argument” argument? You are having an argument with yourself on your Facebook page? “applies to any fundamentalist religionist” oooh, now you’re talking about them fundamentally religionators who are gettin’ in your face and messin’ with your ‘maginary “secular … society”. But is that wise, Wise? When Gallup says three-quarters of Americans identify with a Christian faith; 37% are highly religious; and 33% not religious at all? Looks to me like you’re in a minority of this “pluralist” country of yours, mine and everybody [legally] else’s. So welcome to the fold, son. Welcome to the fold.

      I seriously doubt Harvard invited Wise to repeat anything of that inane rant. They are most probably aiming for his mistakenly called “anti-racist” but in fact “race-and-class separating, guilty bad white or employed person” rant. YouTube; don’t bother. But it cannot be said that Harvard did not pick the right person for the job. It’s their last chance to remind the graduates that they are an integral part of the elite now and — in hopes of their open-handed legacies to their alma mater — forever.

      p.s. Just because I have stated I don’t do polls or trust them doesn’t mean I can’t use the results. I can be as irrational as the last wiseguy.

      • I don’t doubt Wise would probably just as soon forget he wrote this, probably in a moment of anger or high emotion. What you just say can be forgotten. What you write or post is not so easily dismissed or forgotten. He and Melinda Byerly, who wrote that ridiculous rant about how the rest of the country is a bigoted shithole that needs to catch up to San Francisco, and soon, because the Friscoites are getting tired of waiting, should get together. Maybe Craig Stephen Hicks, the crazy atheist rage-a-holic still in jail for killing three Muslim students and facing a capital trial, can be sent to join them.

        • They habitually show a complete lack of self-control, otherwise known as that virtue which you learn in Sunday School is one of the Fruits of the Spirit.

          Here’s the intelligent, brave and worldly journalist Keith Olbermann on Twitter:
          “Fuck you @RealDonaldTrump Nazi Nazi fuck Nazi Nazi RACIST Nazi BIGOT go fuck yourself fucking Nazi fuckers.”
          What a wonderful future it will be when we cleanse the Earth of the God Delusion and can finally move forward as a species of 7 billion Keith Olbermanns.

  6. His promotional photo does not evoke a sense of trust. It looks like a photo of a salesman or cult leader.

    This is not to be an ad hominem attack it is just that plasticine smile as he leans in to to photo makes me a bit wary of what he is selling.

  7. Wise no doubt thinks he is some kind of hero, since he identifies himself as an “anti-racist activist.” That should be clue one, since real heroes don’t feel the need to self-title. His writing is frankly unreadable, thicker than Victor Davis Hanson’s prose and more full of itself than an overstuffed turkey. The final nail in the coffin is the 2015 post you quoted. He is a pompous, arrogant jerk, and my first reaction to anyone who told me anything like that would be to tell him to go STRAIGHT to the devil, or to oblivion if he didn’t believe in the devil.

  8. Back when I worked Hewlett Packard and it was run by Carly Fiorina we had mandatory “diversity courses” and one of them was run by this dipwad. Having to sit through and hour of his anti-white hatred, I can assure you that he is every bit as bad as you think he is.
    He is totally imerssed in the grievance industry. He runs around and tells black people that all whites are racist, and everything wrong in their lives is due to pervasive rasicm.

  9. Well, we can look at his ideology and how it works out.
    What did society gain from ” basing your morality on a fairy tale written thousands of years ago”?
    Freedom of speech
    Freedom of religion
    Separation of church and state
    Value of (all) human life
    Our view of absolute truth
    Corruption is bad
    Rulers have restraints on their behavior
    Equality under the law
    Sexual morality

    A civilization like never seen before was built on these values. That society’s accomplishments spread throughout the world. Despite objections about the methods used, no one else is rejecting the fruits of that society.

    About 40 years ago, the left began to reject these ‘fairy tales’ and decided to make a new morality based on their ideas of ‘science or logic’. What did we get?

    We are now unable (or not allowed) to tell the difference between men and women.

    Human life has no intrinsic value. Human life should be preserved only when the cost of preserving it can be justified economically based on previous investments and future production benefits (the bioethics field that guide’s the Democrats ‘Whole Life Plan’ is based on this principle).

    We have gone back to infanticide.

    Your legal rights and privileges are based on your skin color and sex.

    Your only religion is the religion of the state.

    Only approved opinions are allowed, all others must be destroyed with extreme measures.

    Truth is what the leftists tell you it is. There is no objective truth. Men are women, women are men.
    Discriminating against people for skin color is not discrimination. People in masks running around breaking windows of those who won’t comply, beating the racial group they blame for ‘undue influence’ in society are ‘anti-Nazis’.

    Our richest cities are in such disarray that they are the only places on Earth that typhus now runs rampant and Denver is hoping to get in on this exciting new development in leftist policy results.

    Well, which set of values has a better track record? Now, I know the leftists would say ‘but look at the look at the Inquisition, look at the wars of religion, look at racism! OK, let’s look at them. Were any of them supported by this moral code and its ideals, or were they in opposition to it? The things I posted above about the leftist policies are completely in line with their ideals and goals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.