The American Spectator

Summers’ refusal to grant tenure to someone who so clearly did not deserve it, though she had the support of her department, had to have sent shockwaves throughout the faculty.

The president’s unwillingness to cave to political correctness (remember his warning that “profoundly anti-Israel views are increasingly finding support in progressive intellectual communities”) and his desire to push out professors who prefer dabbling in pop culture to creating serious scholarship should have made him a hero at an institution that prides itself on being America’s most prestigious and intellectually challenging institution of higher education.

And perhaps he does have the support, albeit silent, of most of the faculty. He certainly has the support of the Harvard Corporation, which functions as Harvard’s board of directors. But his independence and refusal to value academic trendiness over academic rigor have made him the primary target of a disaffected minority of faculty members for whom he represents a serious threat.

Officially, the dissatisfaction with Summers centers on his remarks about women and his “management style.” More likely, the conflict stems from a fear among Harvard’s poseurs, professional activists, and intellectual lightweights that Summers could emerge from this controversy as a strong and highly independent president — one who will bend only so far to political intimidation.

A university president not susceptible to political intimidation is the worst nightmare for any political activist disguised as a professor. That reality, and not Summers’ benign comments on women, is the most probable driving force behind this increasingly absurd controversy.