Academic Freedom and Cancel Culture

[Mobius]

Malcontents don't want power to do anything. It is much easier to chime in from the side.

[dismalist]

To return to our regularly scheduled programming, I came across the World Socialist Website, run by US Trotskyists, which has an article about the lady in question

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/07/02/hann-j02.html, and a lot of material on the 1619 project. They have a book out, called The New York Times' 1619 Project and the Racialist Falsification of History, introduced here https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/12/04/intr-d04.html

Their point is that contemporary upheaval ignores the class based interests that cause history to unfold, and substitute for it racial conflict, to the benefit of a small slice of  upper middle class Blacks. Now, if one believes in class and class conflict, they are absolutely correct!

The website is riotous!

Disclaimer: I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of any Communist Party. :-)

[spork]

Fired Linfield professor files suit:

https://www.opb.org/article/2021/07/12/fired-linfield-university-professor-files-lawsuit-alleging-illegal-retaliation/.

[mahagonny]

I'm responding to you only to hammer you again with my points about you needing to up your game, get a TT job, & get tenure, so you can have the power in academe to command the attention and respect that you so desperately crave for yourself and your viewpoints, as well as make the changes in higher ed (at least at your institution), that you so desperately want to see. Read my post again, because it obviously didn't sink in the first time. Your only response was that tenure is no longer desirable, so I will speak to that point.

You might be surprised at this, but last spring, I had to endure the periodic diversity training that I loathe. Yes, you read that right. I loathe those things, too, although for vastly different reasons from your reasons. Strangely, we are both in agreement on that point.

The difference between us is, I could speak up at that meeting and express my reservations about the contents of the training session and the effectiveness of that session to meet the university's diversity/inclusion goals, and that we should not be bringing in overpaid consultants to waste our time with what amounts to virtue signaling. (I said it in a much nicer way, but I won't repeat that here because that takes longer.) The reason I could do that is because I have tenure. You don't, so that's why you have to whine express your feelings here and sit in those diversity training sessions in silence and cowardice. Get tenure, get the power & protection, and you, too, can perform the takedown of diversity training that I did. I know you so desperately want to tell them off, like I did. So, again (and I'm sure this won't be the last time), read my post, up your game, go get a TT job, get tenure, get the power/protection, then get the attention & respect you so desperately want. If not for yourself, do it for your conservative viewpoints and the others aligned with you. Anything short of this, well, you can always wait for Trump to get re-installed in August, and you can write him a letter and ask him to do your dirty work for you.

I won't be getting tenure for a couple of reasons. One of them is I don't believe in it. Never could bring myself to. I saw the lay of the land years ago. Tenure runs on adjunctsploitation. It breaks up faculty solidarity and encourages spite, then gives a select minority the opportunity to act on it. It contributes to department infighting by keeping faculty who've got too much invested in the job to move on, and no longer fit in with the department mission.

For one example, for the last ten years, we have not used a single adjunct in my unit.

Such a policy may well be beneficial to the institution, but by reducing the demand for adjuncts one reduces the remaining adjuncts' wages.  :-(

Interesting that in academia, a world where the conservative is starkly underrepresented, it is a conservative who steps up to the plate with sympathy for the little guy who's on the receiving end of union busting or other anti-labor practices...:-)

Indicentally, The Nikole Hannah-Jones rhetorical flame throwing act has been dealt a minor setback. The 1619 project, along with the Kendi-man's basket of goodies for social justice warriors are not going to be a required part of the criteria for certain government grants.

https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/education-secretary-walks-back-critical-race-theory-preference-for-federal-grants/article_b4afa56a-e96e-11eb-aaef-db6cf2706daf.html

[lightning]

I'm responding to you only to hammer you again with my points about you needing to up your game, get a TT job, & get tenure, so you can have the power in academe to command the attention and respect that you so desperately crave for yourself and your viewpoints, as well as make the changes in higher ed (at least at your institution), that you so desperately want to see. Read my post again, because it obviously didn't sink in the first time. Your only response was that tenure is no longer desirable, so I will speak to that point.

You might be surprised at this, but last spring, I had to endure the periodic diversity training that I loathe. Yes, you read that right. I loathe those things, too, although for vastly different reasons from your reasons. Strangely, we are both in agreement on that point.

The difference between us is, I could speak up at that meeting and express my reservations about the contents of the training session and the effectiveness of that session to meet the university's diversity/inclusion goals, and that we should not be bringing in overpaid consultants to waste our time with what amounts to virtue signaling. (I said it in a much nicer way, but I won't repeat that here because that takes longer.) The reason I could do that is because I have tenure. You don't, so that's why you have to whine express your feelings here and sit in those diversity training sessions in silence and cowardice. Get tenure, get the power & protection, and you, too, can perform the takedown of diversity training that I did. I know you so desperately want to tell them off, like I did. So, again (and I'm sure this won't be the last time), read my post, up your game, go get a TT job, get tenure, get the power/protection, then get the attention & respect you so desperately want. If not for yourself, do it for your conservative viewpoints and the others aligned with you. Anything short of this, well, you can always wait for Trump to get re-installed in August, and you can write him a letter and ask him to do your dirty work for you.

I won't be getting tenure for a couple of reasons. One of them is I don't believe in it. Never could bring myself to. I saw the lay of the land years ago. Tenure runs on adjunctsploitation. It breaks up faculty solidarity and encourages spite, then gives a select minority the opportunity to act on it. It contributes to department infighting by keeping faculty who've got too much invested in the job to move on, and no longer fit in with the department mission.

For one example, for the last ten years, we have not used a single adjunct in my unit.

Such a policy may well be beneficial to the institution, but by reducing the demand for adjuncts one reduces the remaining adjuncts' wages.  :-(

Interesting that in academia, a world where the conservative is starkly underrepresented, it is a conservative who steps up to the plate with sympathy for the little guy who's on the receiving end of union busting or other anti-labor practices...:-)

Indicentally, The Nikole Hannah-Jones rhetorical flame throwing act has been dealt a minor setback. The 1619 project, along with the Kendi-man's basket of goodies for social justice warriors are not going to be a required part of the criteria for certain government grants.

https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/education-secretary-walks-back-critical-race-theory-preference-for-federal-grants/article_b4afa56a-e96e-11eb-aaef-db6cf2706daf.html

That's it? What a lame excuse -- a bunch of BS. Read my posts again, and stop making excuses.

What was that conservative line that was always got used before conservatives got soft and pivoted to identity politics? "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps" or something like that. Yeah, you need to stop making excuses, stop wasting your time spinning on the wheel that the right-wing rage manufacturing machine has cleverly fabricated for you to supply your energy, and and be an old-school conservative, again.

Once again, I'll repeat myself again, with the context. We have not employed a single adjunct in ten years, because I(we) insist on everyone being full-time in the unit. During our time of enrollment growth, we didn't let admincritters force us to exploit adjuncts. We got full-time lines, with a net increase of one full-time line.

[mahagonny]

OK, lightning, I hear you loud and clear, thanks for your candor.

In the interest of restoring this thread to its original subject, Nikole Hannah-Jones

BUMP

https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/education-secretary-walks-back-critical-race-theory-preference-for-federal-grants/article_b4afa56a-e96e-11eb-aaef-db6cf2706daf.html

I wonder if not using incorporating Hannah-Jones's and Kendo's work into the grant proposal as a key ingredient for awarding grants is going to be called racist?

ETA: re -- dismalist's linked article. Very interesting. For a critique of Kendi's ideas, with some of the same concern about ignoring class conflict, here

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/07/how-anti-racist-is-ibram-x-kendis-anti-racism.html

[ciao_yall]

Jumping in, against my better judgement...

Bear with me here - this analogy makes sense.

We have a homeless problem here in San Francisco. One issue that makes it challenging is that some homeless people perceive being homeless as their natural, permanent state instead of a temporary bad circumstance. And then well-meaning "homeless advocates" focus on the rights of the homeless to be happily homeless and sleep undisturbed on the street, bathe in the park fountain, use any business restroom they want whenever they want to do their business and brush their teeth. So energy goes into making being homeless a little less miserable instead of getting people sheltered and, if necessary, treated.

The "homeless advocates" often fight "affordable housing" initiatives because the low-income homeless would not be able to afford that housing. So the cycle of short-term shelters continues while the middle class, working class, and creative types flee for the more affordable suburbs.

One homeless man even complained that the City wanted to "force" him to spend his SSI money on an SRO. But he could sleep on the street... for free! Why couldn't he make his own choices?

Mahagonny reminds me of this situation. He is an adjunct, but sees it as a natural permanent state. He fights for being a slightly less miserable adjunct instead of pushing to make more full-time faculty lines for himself and others. He drags down others who are better off instead of trying to figure out ways to get those advantages for himself and then remember to help others in the same situation.

When I was an adjunct, I wanted to be full-time. When I went full-time and started advocating for more full-time positions, I was surprised how many adjuncts were actually quite happy to be part-time. They didn't want the full teaching loads because it worked well with other parts of their lives. They didn't want to deal with committee responsibilities or internal politics. They just would be fine with being paid a little better for the work they actually did.

In fact, they fought the creation of full-time positions because instead of one full-time position, they saw their own and one other half-time position disappearing.

[Sun_Worshiper]

many adjuncts were actually quite happy to be part-time. They didn't want the full teaching loads because it worked well with other parts of their lives. They didn't want to deal with committee responsibilities or internal politics. They just would be fine with being paid a little better for the work they actually did.

That would be fine if people were just doing this as side work or for supplemental income, but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

[mahagonny]

many adjuncts were actually quite happy to be part-time. They didn't want the full teaching loads because it worked well with other parts of their lives. They didn't want to deal with committee responsibilities or internal politics. They just would be fine with being paid a little better for the work they actually did.

That would be fine if people were just doing this as side work or for supplemental income, but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

Circling back to the topic of this thread, and one adjunct faculty member's relationship to it, I note that not all history professors agree with Nikole Hannah-Jones' distorted view of American history. They couldn't. They are not that stupid. Nevertheless they object to a donor for the UNC system having a question about whether Hannah-Jones has any regard at all for the mission statement, namely, telling the news without spin or bias, even when not only is that an absolutely valid concern, but the faculty neglected to notice it, leaving a void.

And, since we must discuss Mahagonny, in spite of all this dysfunction and grandstanding I and other adjunct faculty are expected to be cheerleaders for academic tenure.

[marshwiggle]

many adjuncts were actually quite happy to be part-time. They didn't want the full teaching loads because it worked well with other parts of their lives. They didn't want to deal with committee responsibilities or internal politics. They just would be fine with being paid a little better for the work they actually did.

That would be fine if people were just doing this as side work or for supplemental income, but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

Just to be clear; there are a significant class of people in this category, (such as retired profs and people with another full-time job), who are happy with the pay, etc. and who don't want to be lumped in with the perpetually-disgruntled adjuncts.

[Sun_Worshiper]

many adjuncts were actually quite happy to be part-time. They didn't want the full teaching loads because it worked well with other parts of their lives. They didn't want to deal with committee responsibilities or internal politics. They just would be fine with being paid a little better for the work they actually did.

That would be fine if people were just doing this as side work or for supplemental income, but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

Just to be clear; there are a significant class of people in this category, (such as retired profs and people with another full-time job), who are happy with the pay, etc. and who don't want to be lumped in with the perpetually-disgruntled adjuncts.

That's fine. More power to those folks.

[dismalist]

... but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

Again, hard to believe the facts -- the odds -- weren't known to them ahead of time. 

[Sun_Worshiper]

... but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

Again, hard to believe the facts -- the odds -- weren't known to them ahead of time.

Of course.

Look, I understand that people want to be professors and that they are socialized through grad school to think that being a academic is the only way forward, but one cannot eek out a decent living (let alone a comfortable retirement) through adjuncting alone. If you have a PhD, are not otherwise wealthy, and have a slim-to-none shot at getting a full time position, then you should be looking for non-academic jobs.

[Wahoo Redux]

... but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

Again, hard to believe the facts -- the odds -- weren't known to them ahead of time.

Of course.

Look, I understand that people want to be professors and that they are socialized through grad school to think that being a academic is the only way forward, but one cannot eek out a decent living (let alone a comfortable retirement) through adjuncting alone. If you have a PhD, are not otherwise wealthy, and have a slim-to-none shot at getting a full time position, then you should be looking for non-academic jobs.

From my experience, people go into grad school already fixated on the idea of becoming a professor,  and no one can socialize them out of it.  Both my wife and I fit that profile.  We were both warned independently about the then-already-bad job market but decided independently to pursue the life anyway.  We have both tried to warn off young people from pursuing academia as a career, and it has always failed.  People are simply too in-love with the idea of academia to be put-off, in my experience.

[dismalist]

... but too many want to make a career of adjuncting and then are upset when that career doesn't grant them status, job security, and sufficient income.

Again, hard to believe the facts -- the odds -- weren't known to them ahead of time.

Of course.

Look, I understand that people want to be professors and that they are socialized through grad school to think that being a academic is the only way forward, but one cannot eek out a decent living (let alone a comfortable retirement) through adjuncting alone. If you have a PhD, are not otherwise wealthy, and have a slim-to-none shot at getting a full time position, then you should be looking for non-academic jobs.

From my experience, people go into grad school already fixated on the idea of becoming a professor,  and no one can socialize them out of it.  Both my wife and I fit that profile.  We were both warned independently about the then-already-bad job market but decided independently to pursue the life anyway.  We have both tried to warn off young people from pursuing academia as a career, and it has always failed.  People are simply too in-love with the idea of academia to be put-off, in my experience.

But that means everything is OK!