I couldn't agree more about speaking up against this madness.
I've been doing so at my own institutions since this newer, more radical version of political correctness burst (back) onto the scene over a decade ago. I've lost some friends and friendly colleagues over it. But I'd say that, mostly, the results have been positive. I've garnered some critical and unfriendly attention, including journalistic attention, but haven't been mobbed...yet, anyway. I know I've been the subject of discussion at some fairly high-level meetings...but I'm lucky in that my department and my institution remain committed to free speech and academic freedom. At some levels, anyway. Thus far, anyway.
Even just speaking up in meetings or otherwise in public can, in my experience, help. Committees, of course, often make very important decisions. They are often influenced by a few radicals or a few people just rather thoughtlessly mouthing faddish views. Just one person speaking up, raising objections, and making cogent arguments can make a difference. Sometimes others will then speak up, too. Sometimes they won't, but sometimes they'll vote with you when it comes to that. Sometimes just demonstrating disagreement derails the crazy train...or just brings it to a rolling stop. (And I find that people often contact me afterward to thank me and express agreement, even if they can't bring themselves to speak up in the moment.)
Of course, you're often gambling with your career and your reputation. And people do lose those gambles. But if standing up against this abject madness isn't a worthy cause, I don't really know what is. It is opposed to the very animating purpose of the university. What good does it do to publish another paper while the academy falls to ruins around you?
"To do a cancellation is a very warm, social thing. It has the energy of a potluck. Everyone brings what they can, and everyone is impressed by the creativity of their friends. It’s a positive thing, what you’re doing, and it doesn’t feel like battle, but like tending the warm fire of community. You have real power when you’re doing it, and with enough people, you can oust someone very powerful. "
And before I read that, I always thought the great problem of cancellation and peer pressure was one of cowardice. If we could just get people to demonstrate a bit more spine -- and help those trying to oppose cancellations -- it would just stop. Now I have serious doubts about this approach. Being loved by Bari Weiss and converting to Judaism seems to have redeemed Nellie Bowles' soul. What if 'peer pressure' is not the pressure to conform, against your will, against your own knowledge, in order to belong but instead some sort of horrible perversion of the desire to grow, be nurtured, and succeed?
1. I LOVE NELLIE BOWLES. Platonically. From a distance. She's married, and so am I. Plus, she's a lesbian. And I am probably about 30 years older than she is. So a carnal thing really is not in the cards.
2. I read that piece and, like most of what she has written that I've read, its terrific.
3. She is clearly right about that. I suspect there is something deep in our psyche that make participating in such things hugely satisfying. "You are so evil, my whole tribe is coming after you" sort of thing.
4. But that's a set of different issues than how to deal with the mob, when they come after you.
Marines, in a sense, do this. They use the shared misery of basic training to bind men together. Drill instructors start out intentionally harsh to the point of being hateful. That gives recruits a common "enemy."
The Marines don't have a monopoly on this. Many organizations use the same tactic to reach the same goal: a cohesive force, be it for fighting, practicing medicine (yes, really), etc.
I couldn't agree more about speaking up against this madness.
I've been doing so at my own institutions since this newer, more radical version of political correctness burst (back) onto the scene over a decade ago. I've lost some friends and friendly colleagues over it. But I'd say that, mostly, the results have been positive. I've garnered some critical and unfriendly attention, including journalistic attention, but haven't been mobbed...yet, anyway. I know I've been the subject of discussion at some fairly high-level meetings...but I'm lucky in that my department and my institution remain committed to free speech and academic freedom. At some levels, anyway. Thus far, anyway.
Even just speaking up in meetings or otherwise in public can, in my experience, help. Committees, of course, often make very important decisions. They are often influenced by a few radicals or a few people just rather thoughtlessly mouthing faddish views. Just one person speaking up, raising objections, and making cogent arguments can make a difference. Sometimes others will then speak up, too. Sometimes they won't, but sometimes they'll vote with you when it comes to that. Sometimes just demonstrating disagreement derails the crazy train...or just brings it to a rolling stop. (And I find that people often contact me afterward to thank me and express agreement, even if they can't bring themselves to speak up in the moment.)
Of course, you're often gambling with your career and your reputation. And people do lose those gambles. But if standing up against this abject madness isn't a worthy cause, I don't really know what is. It is opposed to the very animating purpose of the university. What good does it do to publish another paper while the academy falls to ruins around you?
Minor point, but do you mean Kathleen Stock rather than “Helen Stock”?
Heh. Indeed. I think I have graduated from The King of All Typos to Most Gaseous Brain Farter of All Time. Thanks. Corrected and updated.
re: "Play the long game [...] they just move on to the next thing.
Up until 3 Days ago, I would have agreed 100% with this. And I still think that playing the long game is correct. But 3 days ago I read this:
https://www.thefp.com/p/nellie-bowles-morning-after-the-revolution
in particular:
"To do a cancellation is a very warm, social thing. It has the energy of a potluck. Everyone brings what they can, and everyone is impressed by the creativity of their friends. It’s a positive thing, what you’re doing, and it doesn’t feel like battle, but like tending the warm fire of community. You have real power when you’re doing it, and with enough people, you can oust someone very powerful. "
And before I read that, I always thought the great problem of cancellation and peer pressure was one of cowardice. If we could just get people to demonstrate a bit more spine -- and help those trying to oppose cancellations -- it would just stop. Now I have serious doubts about this approach. Being loved by Bari Weiss and converting to Judaism seems to have redeemed Nellie Bowles' soul. What if 'peer pressure' is not the pressure to conform, against your will, against your own knowledge, in order to belong but instead some sort of horrible perversion of the desire to grow, be nurtured, and succeed?
1. I LOVE NELLIE BOWLES. Platonically. From a distance. She's married, and so am I. Plus, she's a lesbian. And I am probably about 30 years older than she is. So a carnal thing really is not in the cards.
2. I read that piece and, like most of what she has written that I've read, its terrific.
3. She is clearly right about that. I suspect there is something deep in our psyche that make participating in such things hugely satisfying. "You are so evil, my whole tribe is coming after you" sort of thing.
4. But that's a set of different issues than how to deal with the mob, when they come after you.
"What joins men together is not the sharing of bread but the sharing of enemies."
Cormac McCarthy
Marines, in a sense, do this. They use the shared misery of basic training to bind men together. Drill instructors start out intentionally harsh to the point of being hateful. That gives recruits a common "enemy."
The Marines don't have a monopoly on this. Many organizations use the same tactic to reach the same goal: a cohesive force, be it for fighting, practicing medicine (yes, really), etc.