3 ms·

"...the Chicago School economists who used shitty math to prove that greed is good and that corruption consists solely of direct quid-pro-quo bribery..." Yea,

"...the Chicago School economists who used shitty math to prove that greed is good and that corruption consists solely of direct quid-pro-quo bribery..." Yea, I stopped there. Interested in other's reactions though.

weberc2 8y ago
That one was a doozy, but this was the final straw for me: > Lessig walks a fine line between academic and activist Society doesn't need (and can't afford) more people conflating activism and academy.
- chottocharaii 8y ago
  Many of the greatest minds of the academy of the last 3 centuries were active in politics. Montesquieu, Burke, etc... Academic ideas renew society.
  - _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
    Chomsky
    - arethuza 8y ago
      Also Einstein and Szilárd.
- pc86 8y ago
  Conflating would be calling an activist an academic because they wrote a paper once, or calling an academic an activist because they have opinions. Saying that Lessig is right between the two without going full bore into one or the other seems like a pretty apt description. And from his Wikipedia page: > Lester Lawrence Lessig III is an American academic, attorney, and political activist. So it's pretty clear that he's both.
  - weberc2 8y ago
    I think my point was poorly phrased, so the replies all (understandably) missed my point, which was roughly: there are lots of "academics" whose "research" is purely political/ideological activism and they're eroding the public trust in the academy generally. I'm specifically thinking of the folks who push climate change denialism or basically anyone in the grievance studies departments. In modern times, activist/academics more often than not seem to be these sorts of imposters (maybe I'm biased by relatively few 'squeaky wheels' and there are lots of legit academics/activists?). Others have rightly pointed out that there have been many examples of academics who were also activists, and you're pointing out that Lessig is an academic on paper (as are the "academics" I referenced in the previous paragraph, although Lessig may be legitimate). Both of these are valid, correct observations, but they miss my point (which isn't to say that my point is good; only that it survives these observations! :) ).
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ionised 8y ago
Funny, becaused that's when I knew it was worth continuing to read.
platz 8y ago
it's boingboing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ take their snark in stride — focus on the big picture

weberc2 8y ago

That one was a doozy, but this was the final straw for me: > Lessig walks a fine line between academic and activist Society doesn't need (and can't afford) more people conflating activism and academy.

chottocharaii 8y ago
Many of the greatest minds of the academy of the last 3 centuries were active in politics. Montesquieu, Burke, etc... Academic ideas renew society.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y ago
  Chomsky
  - arethuza 8y ago
    Also Einstein and Szilárd.
pc86 8y ago
Conflating would be calling an activist an academic because they wrote a paper once, or calling an academic an activist because they have opinions. Saying that Lessig is right between the two without going full bore into one or the other seems like a pretty apt description. And from his Wikipedia page: > Lester Lawrence Lessig III is an American academic, attorney, and political activist. So it's pretty clear that he's both.
- weberc2 8y ago
  I think my point was poorly phrased, so the replies all (understandably) missed my point, which was roughly: there are lots of "academics" whose "research" is purely political/ideological activism and they're eroding the public trust in the academy generally. I'm specifically thinking of the folks who push climate change denialism or basically anyone in the grievance studies departments. In modern times, activist/academics more often than not seem to be these sorts of imposters (maybe I'm biased by relatively few 'squeaky wheels' and there are lots of legit academics/activists?). Others have rightly pointed out that there have been many examples of academics who were also activists, and you're pointing out that Lessig is an academic on paper (as are the "academics" I referenced in the previous paragraph, although Lessig may be legitimate). Both of these are valid, correct observations, but they miss my point (which isn't to say that my point is good; only that it survives these observations! :) ).

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

ionised 8y ago

Funny, becaused that's when I knew it was worth continuing to read.

platz 8y ago

it's boingboing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ take their snark in stride — focus on the big picture