A curious piece in Canada’s National Post argues that the attacks on Darwin and the criticism of Larry Summers are both religiously based, just from different ends of the political spectrum.

“Intelligent Design is linked with the ‘fundamentalist right,’ while Mr. Summers came under attack from the ‘egalitarian’ left. In fact, both are essentially religious positions,” writes columnist John Foster.

How’s that again?

Well, “the attack on Mr. Summers… seems to come from evangelical academics who are uneasy with the implications of neo-Darwinism for their socialist-inspired faith in an egalitarian society of equal results rather than equal opportunities.”

Like many arguments in support of Summers, this one rests on a caricature of the Harvard faculty—its intellectual composition and its motives. I’d argue that this kind of caricature has been deeply damaging to Harvard.

It’s certainly not Summers’ fault (and, in fact, he may be sympathetic to it, particularly now). But as I’ve written before, a ringing defense of the faculty coming from the Harvard president would be more than appropriate—it would go a long way towards winning support from that constituency.