By “W”
New book on Martin Luther King Jr.’s time at Crozer Seminary.
This weekend’s WSJ review sez the author reports “on subjects that might prove difficult to stomach for those who worship King. Among them: King’s penchant for plagiarism, which seems…to be worse than previously known. King plagiarized repeatedly… and the faculty either missed it, didn’t care or decided it wasn’t important enough to derail the career of a promising student.”
N.S.: How could a serial plagiarist be “a promising student”?
That line reminds me of the rationalization that at least one black media operative made for Jayson Blair, after the latter was finally exposed in 2003. Since Blair was "breaking stories," people looked the other way. But Blair never broke a single story. He alternately plagiarized other people's stories, and fabricated fake ones.
Everything I’ve read about King the college student leaves no doubt in my mind, that in matters of race, the American university was already hopelessly corrupt by circa 1950.
In other words, there was no more excuse for the indulging of the young King than there was for the indulging of Blair.
At Patrick Parr.
3 comments:
How could a serial plagiarist be “a promising student”?
Very easily. He was black. So many, if not all, of black heroes are flat out frauds. There is a statue to this fraud on the mall at DC but the blacks want to scrub the Confederates tribute off of Stone Mountain in Georgia. Congress passed Public Law 805 in the year 1958 making all Confederate veterans US veterans. I don't hear much about that as blacks desecrate Confederate tributes around the South.
Read WFB's "God and Man at Yale" to see how far to the secular Left the Ivy League was circa 1950. Then think about what a joy it would be to return to something so relatively normal.
And the response would be: "even if we knew he was a man not above educational mischief we would still graduate him with honors."
Post a Comment