Why Academics Feature Prominently in the Epstein Files: It's More Than Money
The Jeffrey Epstein saga is frequently framed as a nexus of sexual abuse and financial power, with recently released emails providing ample evidence of both. However, after over two decades as a professor at Harvard, Cornell, and Cambridge, I find this perspective limiting, particularly because it fails to account for the consistent presence of academics in these documents.
The Role of Money and Donations in University Connections
Undoubtedly, money played a part in Epstein's relationships with universities. The narrative of a wealthy individual using donations to enhance their ego and legitimacy is a familiar one, tracing back to figures like Andrew Carnegie and extending to modern philanthropists like Bill Gates. As a college dropout, Epstein sought "respect" from high-profile academics, while universities, perpetually fundraising, often avoid scrutinizing the origins of donations. Leon Botstein, president of Bard College, defended his Epstein ties by noting, "Among the very rich is a higher percentage of unpleasant and not very attractive people." This dynamic leads institutions to sometimes overlook ethical questions about funding sources.
Beyond Greed: The Allure of Lifestyle and Social Capital
Some professors were attracted to Epstein's louche lifestyle, as seen in emails where Duke's Dan Ariely requests contact information for a "redhead," Yale's David Gelernter describes a job candidate as a "v small goodlooking blonde," and Stanford's Nathan Wolfe invites Epstein to dinner with "a couple of hottie interns." The proximity to universities with young women was likely another draw for Epstein, though Ariely, Gelernter, and Wolfe have all denied any wrongdoing.
Yet, the emails suggest motivations deeper than greed or libido. Epstein demonstrated a malevolent genius in identifying personal and professional vulnerabilities, offering bespoke, non-monetary rewards such as access to business deals, insider information for journalists, and private banking relationships. As Molly Jong-Fast observed, Epstein built influence by "acting as a kind of superconcierge."
The Academic Hunger for Status and Recognition
Academics typically operate within the ivory tower, a realm separated from everyday commerce and politics, focused on research and teaching with its own norms and hierarchies. This isolation fosters freedom but also breeds a unique hunger for status that extends beyond campus. Even top professors lack the type of power recognized in the "real world," with their prestige confined to narrow, specialized circles.
While universities emphasize "impact," they often neglect the conditions necessary to achieve it, leading to a constant craving for immediate, personal recognition. Epstein catered to this by providing attention and connections to elites in finance, entertainment, technology, and government. He made scholars feel like celebrities for their intellect, something they are trained to value but frequently denigrated in American society.
Navigating the Indignities of Academic Life
Academic life, even at its highest levels, is rife with quiet humiliations: anonymous peer reviews, rejected grants, disengaged students, bureaucratic committee work, and draining institutional politics. Departments obsess over minor expenses, with senior professors constrained by per diem caps and required to submit receipts for small purchases. Pre-approval forms and rules turn routine travel into petty negotiations, where endowed chairs might argue over "reasonable" hotel costs.
Epstein understood the psychological relief of bypassing this grind. In one email arranging a visit for Harvard professor Martin Nowak, he offered "use of an available apartment ... as well as the Jaguar." He recognized the social capital gained from providing shortcuts around the myriad indignities of academia.
Epstein's Appeal: Status and Class Boundaries
Epstein's power over academics was not an anomaly; it stemmed from his ability to identify and exploit people's needs and desires. His private plane, infamously nicknamed the "Lolita Express," symbolizes this dynamic. As journalist Michael Wolff noted, flying private was less about travel and more about creating a class boundary between those who can and cannot afford such luxury. The status was paramount, with Epstein's perspective summarized as: "Nobody turns down an invitation to fly private."
To comprehend how Epstein amassed the wealth and influence that enabled his predation, we must look beyond sex and money. For his circle, what truly mattered were intangible assets: deference, access, and moral permission.
A Hard Truth for Universities and Academics
Universities and academics must confront an uncomfortable reality about their own desires. Academia is supposed to center on ideas, teaching, and public knowledge. Epstein offered an alternative: prestige without peer review and attention without accountability. Too many individuals, even those not directly involved in exploitation, accepted this deal because it was easy and gratifying.
This case underscores the vulnerabilities within academic systems and the seductive power of status in a world where recognition is often elusive.
