I thought

I understood

the assignment.

Three 

Ivy presidents

(notably, women)

were interrogated

by Congresswoman

Elise Sefanik

about anti

semitic

rhetoric

on campus.

The rest 

of us

watched,

dumbfounded,

while the three

were hounded

as they sounded

pathetic.

Penn

stepped down

soon thereafter

and then 

the mission

to get Harvard’s

resignation

broadened

to include

plagarization.

Huh?

Now I’m 

confused

as

The Right

is amused.

Is President

Gay

as incompetent

as they say?

She (and the others)

certainly failed

to stand

against hate

in a clear

and forceful

manner.

But the issue

morphed

and quickly

dwarfed 

the inherent

problems

of free speech.

Now it’s clear

that the smear

was in play

before

any admissions.

All the way

from k

through 12,

book bans

and some 

topics

are prey 

to the optics

of so-called

conservative

victories.

And higher

ed

is losing

cred

when

boards

revamp

campuses.

New College,

“too liberal”,

has become

undone,

replacing curriculum

and extras

begun,

as faculty

and students

have already

run

to more 

hospitable

schools.

The tools

of The Right

insist on

a fight

against

inclusion.

Their claim

of exclusion

is construed

as intrusion

of those

people

and ideas

lacking

“merit”.

Offended

by difference

and fueled

by belligerence 

creating

inference

of incompetence

and interference

of values,

twisting

DEI

and Critical

Race Theory

into some

nefarious

notions

of promotions

of people

undeserving

(because only

certain people

are deserving).

The subtext

seems to be

that white

and/or male

are merit-worthy,

and what 

is now called

elite

is not

because 

of the rot

of a culture

changing.

“But her 

plagiarism”

reminds me

of another claim:

“But her

emails….”

as she fails

not on merit

but on whatever

they declare

it to be.

The suspicions

against women

and  any other 

minority

in positions

of upward

mobility

in a facility

deemed

liberal ,

especially

those at 

or near

the top,

will be fodder

for politicians

whether omissions

or admissions

of guilt

even apply.

Somehow

social justice

has been

perverted

by one side

to collide

with merit,

and subverted

to an inverted

definition

of bias 

against.

Inclusion

is now 

exclusion.

The ones

who used

to benefit

now see fit

to destroy

elite institutions

and upend

people’s lives.

The mascot

for team

defiance

whose reliance

on winning

at any cost,

while

aligning

with bitter

resentment,

is ascendent

to the most

elite

postion 

of all.

His Wharton

degree

could not be

based

on merit.

Admittedly,

and shamefully,

hypocrisy 

and conspiracy

are embraced

as winning

strategies

to counter

the culture

of decency

and meritocracy.