In the past five years, higher ed has demonstrated that it's a soft target for right-wing culture war attacks. Too many are willing to sacrifice part of the sector to protect the rest, as parochial interests dictate. That shows weakness and guarantees a loss for the whole sector.
The way Harvard abandoned Claudine Gay was a disgrace.
Higher education in the US needs career educators and researchers working at the regents level. This know-how needs to be baked into the structure. Fewer political appointees.
Since BDS, imho. Back in the early 10's, maybe?
Instead of "don't cut our funding," our message should be: hands off higher ed. You want to restrict what professors can say in the classroom? Hands off. You want to ban diversity offices? Hands off. You want to cut our research funding? Hands off. Hands. Off. Higher. Ed.
you can say "hands off" but who will listen? Higher ed is unpopular. only 30% of Americans have college degrees. The current government was elected by the other 70%
words mean nothing when you've got jackbooted thugs telling you "no". you've got to escalate my guy. nothing will happen with strong words and "playing their game". we've seen that over the past few weeks.
Yeah, I don’t buy that. Democracy and democratic oversight matter. Free and open debate. Search for knowledge. Improve our understanding of the world. Nobody voted for this. There are many good arguments against their garbage. But “hands off”? The public money only comes with democratic oversight.
the OPs point is that if you give an inch they take a mile. you have to fight them at every single front because this is not "oversight", its annihilation
It should be about defending democracy, education and the rule of law. Academia should exist within those spheres and the rights established in our constitution. If this goes beyond oversight—and it does—make THAT argument. Do not argue against democratic oversight.
"make that argument" do you think these are people that can be argued with, convinced of things by logic? "Fuck you, hands off" is the only message they understand
They have guns, control of law-enforcement, and control of the military. “Fuck you, hands off” ain’t gonna convince them of anything. It’s just rage on the way to complete loss and perhaps even physical harm and death.
then what are you suggesting? you think "making arguments" is a better tactic against people with guns?
No, I am suggesting that we need to make arguments and assertions to people other than the ones who have the gun. You are the one saying, we should yell at the people with guns. I think that’s a bad strategy. I prefer the mechanisms of the rule of law.
buddy the rule of law is gone
Then yelling ain’t gonna help you. You better get some guns.
Nothing you say will convince THEM. But we need to convince the public and we need to convince the courts. We need to convince a minority of Republicans and a major majority of independents.
That’s exactly how our coalition trying to protect health care is framing it: “Hands off Medicaid” www.protectourcare.org/new-protect-...
You demand we sic the cops on pro-Palestine students? Hands off (dare to dream)
I don't disagree with this, but we need to be prepared to explain how we're not engaging in what I call "academic exceptionalism." That is, lots of workers could/would/should be claiming this autonomy. There's nothing special about academics that entitles us to *more* autonomy than anyone else gets.
I would agree with part of this. Part of this I do. But you sound like you’re justifying BIPOC, trans & disabled people not being taken more seriously, or am I wrong?
I don't mean to be saying that and hope we're just crossing wires. Am trying to say that academics often act like what we do deserves an exalted status that other workers don't, so we miscontrue our own political power and also piss off other people who we might otherwise organize with. 1/2
2/ The most privileged among us often recreate the exact same exclusionary problem with marginalized siblings, which I take it is what you're hearing me doing? I hope you're reacting to a more generalized concern, but I'm listening if I'm wrong about that. What made you hear me like that?
To answer your question, it was the wording that threw me off. But once you clarified it it makes sense.
OK, good. And I appreciate your calling it. Nobody should have to do that, but I'm grateful to people who do.
Oh I see. That makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!
Absolutely right!
Period
You say "hands off" and they ignore you, tear it down anyway. What then? A stern talking to isn't going to cut it. You need Actual, real life, PHYSICAL resistance. You need hard, painful, IMMEDIATE consequences. You need to be ready to KILL to save your country.
This is the principle of ideological autonomy for the higher education sector. The government helps fund higher ed, which gives it authority over many aspects of the partnership. But it should have no role in deciding what ideas can be present on a college campus.
All those claims that university admins make to institutions being "incubators of innovation" only work, as it turns out, when scholars have total autonomy to follow the research where it may lead To the extent they think it means tacking on a Provost of Innovation, it's hardly going to cut it
Otherwise, universities cease to exist as places of free intellectual inquiry, and become mouthpieces of the government, where only one set of ideas can exist. To prevent that, we must say: hands off. Hands. Off. Higher. Ed.
I work for a public university in a midwestern red state. The silence is deafening. We are considered a very progressive uni in a very progressive college town. In the last two weeks, the local school district has resisted in word and deed with far greater strength of conviction than my institution.
I can’t remember which podcast explained this, but that silence is likely due to public universities being governed by Boards of Trustees that are managed by state governors and legislators. Public universities can’t resist bc their boss (the governor) said so =\
Definitely a huge part. Our board is elected not appointed but is very much an architect of the conservative-led policies my institution has adopted in the last year, like institutional neutrality and discussion of dismantling/defunding DEI programs.
Sounds like it’s time to start campaigning for seats and educating the public 👀
Yes. All true. And when that rolls up to the state of Ohio. Welp.
Ole Mikey D. ain’t lettin it happen. Butttttttttt bc it’s a public entity, they have to have public meetings and published agendas and minutes. It never hurts to figure out which trustee represents your institution and get in contact 🤷🏾♂️
Sure but when has that saved any of them from purges, still fired for being liberal a la new college of fl and replaced w idiot sycophants might as well go out fighting w one voice and encourage others
The only thing that can stop that is the public. New College fought back as hard as they could. The professors, students, and alumni immediately started sounding alarm bells/protesting/lobbying and the Floridian electorate DID NOTHING to help them. New College isn’t at fault, Floridians are.
📌
Amen 🙏
Except MAGA wants universities to be mouthpieces of the government. They don’t see that as a bad thing. 80M people voted for it and will vote for it again in 4 years. We need every smart person at those universities to be working on how to fix that problem.
Fantastic thread. Thank you.
"First they came for CRT, but I..." I suppose the silver lining is it showed how hollow higher ed can be. Which I guess critics on the left already knew, but still.
I can’t remember if it it was a podcast or news article, but this may be due to University Boards of Trustees being appointed by and accountable to governors and state legislators. That relationship usually prohibits much of the speaking out you’re referring to.