Usefully, the protesters carried signs quoting Peretz’s own words as they followed him and his entourage through Harvard Yard.

Here is the must-see video of the protest:

Here is James Fallows’ take on why what happened today was an acceptable outcome.

And here is the press release put out by the protest organizers:

CAMBRIDGE, Sept. 25—Over 100 members of the Harvard community and others “welcomed” New Republic editor and the university administration’s favorite racist, Martin Peretz, at the 50th anniversary of Harvard’s Social Studies program with a combination of protests, walk-outs, and probing questions.

Demonstrators at the event confronted Peretz outside Harvard’s Science Center—which was held in part to launch a $650,000 research fund in his name—and followed him for several minutes while chanting slogans rejecting his racist stances.

“Just because President Faust wants to honor a longtime public bigot doesn’t mean that the Harvard community does,” said senior Abdelnasser Rashid, a social studies concentrator. “We’ve billed this demonstration as a ‘Party for Marty’ to show how absurd Harvard’s decision to celebrate Peretz is.”

Peretz attempted to sneak out of the Science Center’s back entrance around noontime but was quickly spotted and surrounded by Harvard students chanting “Harvard University will not stand bigotry” and “Harvard Harvard shame on you, for honoring a racist fool” as he walked aross campus.

The protest continued outside of the Adams House dining hall, where Peretz was honored at a Social Studies luncheon. During his talk, around 10 faculty and staff walked out in protest.

“It’s Marty’s party and he can cry if he wants to,” said Maryam Monalisa Gharavi, a graduate student in comparative literature. “But the rest of us are here to remind him that we’re not going to stand by while the Harvard administration overlooks his 25-year career in spewing hatred and bigotry. He has a right to free speech, not a right to be honored.”

Protesters had gathered in the morning outside the Science Center, brandishing signs with some of Peretz’ most memorable quotes from his long career of spouting racism. Peretz has described “Arab society” as “hidebound and backward”; declared that “many in the black population are afflicted by cultural deficiencies”; and described Latin American societies as “congenitally corrupt” with “near-tropical work habits.”

Peretz was roundly criticized during the Social Studies celebration itself. During the event’s morning panel, Berkeley economist Brad DeLong cited Peretz’s recent statements about Muslims and argued that the only “appropriate response” was “What the frackity frack is going on here?”

During the afternoon panel, several Social Studies alumni and current students challenged Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, former deputy attorney general Jamie Gorelick and Princeton professor Michael Walzer over their support for the Peretz Fund during a question and answer period. Students remarked on the irony of the session’s title, “Social Studies and Social change,” and asked the panelists how they managed to overlook a career of bigotry spanning decades.

The demonstrators joined the over 600 people, nearly all Harvard affiliates or alumni, who signed an open letter this week calling upon Harvard to reverse its decision to honor Peretz and establish a fund in his name. Separately, several Harvard student groups representing Arab, African-American, Muslim, and Latino students jointly signed letters condemning the decision to honor Peretz.

Harvard administrators have cited Peretz’ recent attempt to apologize for a few of his most recent remarks after they drew nationwide condemnation; but these half-hearted and belated remarks do not address the many racist statements he has made over the past few decades.

“The Harvard administration has no right to accept to absolve Martin Peretz of his racism on behalf of students of color and others who oppose racism,” Rashid said.

Here’s how we got to this point:

It started when Peretz, who has an extremely long history of writing racist things about Arabs and Muslims, wrote in a blog post earlier this month:

But, frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims. And among those Muslims led by the Imam Rauf there is hardly one who has raised a fuss about the routine and random bloodshed that defines their brotherhood. So, yes, I wonder whether I need honor these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges of the First Amendment which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse.

After criticism from many, including Nicholas Kristof in the Times, Peretz later apologized for the First Amendment bit, but stood by the “Muslim life is cheap” bit.

The crucial backdrop here is that a group of influential alums from Harvard’s social studies major have been raising money for an undergrad research fund to honor Peretz — to be unveiled at a Sept. 25 event marking the 50th anniversary of the program.

But naturally, some members of the Harvard community are not pleased with the idea of honoring Peretz. The Harvard Crimson reports today:

“As a community, we’re certainly not happy about this happening—it’s not appropriate to recognize someone making such hurtful remarks,” said Rashid M. Yasin’’12, the Islamic Society’s director of external relations. “A couple of students—myself included—have been trying to reach with Social Studies to address this issue.”

The Boston Globe quoted Harvard professor Steve Walt: “The question is whether an institution like Harvard wants to valorize someone who would hold such hateful views.” And Benjy Sarlin at the Daily Beast reports that another academic thought seriously about canceling his attendance at the Sept. 25 event.

So in response to all this, plus other critics, Harvard issued the following statement to Sarlin:

“As an institution of research and teaching, we are dedicated to the proposition that all people, regardless of color or creed, deserve equal opportunities, equal respect, and equal protection under the law. The recent assertions by Dr. Peretz are therefore distressing to many members of our community, and understandably so.

It is central to the mission of a university to protect and affirm free speech, including the rights of Dr. Peretz, as well as those who disagree with him, to express their views.

We are ultimately stronger as a university when we maintain our commitment to the most basic freedoms that enable the robust exchange of ideas. The undergraduate research fund donated by friends, former students, and colleagues of Dr. Peretz was established earlier this year to recognize his teaching and scholarship as well as his stewardship of the social studies program from its inception in the 1960s through the 1990s. The fund will enable undergraduates to undertake significant research experiences as part of the social sciences curriculum and strengthen our commitment to rigorous intellectual inquiry.”

It seems significant that Harvard would officially refer to Peretz’s comments as “distressing.” But the statement’s framing of the issue as one of protecting Peretz’s free speech seems wrong. None of his critics are questioning his right to say whatever he wants. The question is whether Harvard should establish a fund to honor someone with Peretz’s history of anti-Muslim comments. And the university is clearly sticking to its plan.

Why?

It may have something to do with the influential people on the list of those promoting the Peretz fund. They include former Vice President Al Gore, Washington Post columnists David Ignatius and E.J. Dionne, Washington Post CEO Donald Graham, Dissent editor Michael Walzer, Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, author Steven Pinker, and many others.

That’s not a group the university is eager to disappoint.

In writing up the poll, Politico failed to note that the district’s elites are not the only human beings in Washington. They did contact someone who almost might count as an non-elite, though: the mayor of Flint, Mich.! He would like more government spending. But the elites — led by the sort of people who read and write for Politico! — will not allow this.

The idea of the elites not understanding the mindsets of non-elite Americans may, perhaps, have actually been news to pollster Mark Penn, a longtime member of the elite who has always had a tendency to imagine that the nation is made up of people who think exactly like him.

In fact, this may be news to most of the people who write for media outlets like Politico, as the No. 1 fallacy committed by those sorts of people is thinking that they can read the minds of — or even recognize the basic realities of — “regular Americans.” Someone should perhaps show this survey to Peggy Noonan and David Broder! Now that Mark Penn has proved that the elites are out of touch with the commoners, I am sure that the elites will stop pretending to be commoners.

Also I am sure that we’ll get some major jobs initiatives under way.

(In a bizarre, tangentially related argument that I am just going to get into down here because it’s not worth its own post, Reasonable New York Times Conservative Ross Douthat writes that he agrees with Pat Buchanan that Hitler didn’t mean to kill all those Jews the elites discriminate against white people by letting minorities go to Harvard. Pat Buchanan, in his usual mixed-up backlashy way, was actually making a point about class, but conservatives are not allowed to advocate for class solidarity, so he and Douthat pretend they are talking about white Christians instead working-class people, and they pretend the problem is special handouts to black people instead of decades of the postindustrial economy, aided by blinkered elites in both parties, screwing over working Americans. But that is maybe an “elitist” way of looking at the problem of not enough farmers at Harvard.)