3 ms·

Academia just isn't WORTH it for talented peasants (speaking as one). I had people encouraging me to go into academia since I was 4-5 years old, had a desire t

by Mezzie 4y ago

Academia just isn't WORTH it for talented peasants (speaking as one). I had people encouraging me to go into academia since I was 4-5 years old, had a desire to go be a professor, etc. But things have changed a lot since I was a child 30 years ago. Now, if I were to go into academia without family or other connections, I'm looking at: - Unstable employment and a serious amount of overwork. At the end of this I may get a chance at some stability, but given how academia is moving away from the tenure-track, that's less and less likely. - Restrictions on what I can say and what kind of work I can do based on academic politics, what grants will fund, etc. - Very little reputational benefit to affiliating myself with an institution: speaking as an American, our institutions are collapsing. Why would I tie myself to a sinking ship? Those who are already in the upper-middle or upper class are all in on maintaining the status quo because it works for them and because they have a safety net if things go south. It's similar to how, no matter what your interpretation of Jan. 6, 2021, I bet there's some reconsidering of people's desires to be staff in Congress. ("I'm not getting shot for Pelosi/McConnell, fuck that noise.") On the other hand, if I DON'T go into academia, I can still access research and I can say whatever I want. I can also work on my own schedule and only do work that I think has some value (as opposed to chasing after publications and massaging my work to beef up my CV). Anyone from a poorer background who has the skills to make it in academia also has the skills to recognize that it is a TERRIBLE deal for them at the moment and that they have better options. Granted, this is also true of higher socio-economic classes, and that's one reason the people from elite backgrounds in academia are also trending towards the more and more mediocre.

matthewdgreen 4y ago
> Restrictions on what I can say Academia isn't perfect and it sure isn't what it once was. But go ahead and talk crap about your corporate employer for the next six months and see what happens to you.
- Mezzie 4y ago
  I'm a freelancer + work in the non-profit space; I don't do corporate work. Which is also on purpose. ;) The difference is that corporate work never had the pretense of offering me intellectual freedom, whereas academia did. At least if I go corporate, they'll buy my silence with resources/$$$. Academia? So you want to give me nothing AND restrict what I can say? That's going to be a hard pass.
  - matthewdgreen 4y ago
    I have to push back against this since I have some personal experience here. As a (non-tenure-track) research assistant professor I got into a major argument with a dean at my University over a specific speech issue re: the NSA and Snowden leaks [1]. (The NSA is also a major funder of [part] of my University.) I was prepared to be fired when I refused to go along with the University's request: I was not fired, and instead I've been promoted. I don't think there are very many other institutions where I could have expected this outcome. Yes, my story is just one data point. But all important speech issues are just a few datapoints. It's absolutely critical for our society that there be real institutions where policy critics can survive. Until someone builds an alternative home for policy criticism (and no, consulting for non-profits isn't it) I'm going to stand by the academic system... however imperfect it is. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/10/johns-hopkins-dean-apologises-for-blog https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/10/johns-hopkins-...
    - Mezzie 4y ago
      I appreciate the push back; it's how I learn and refine my positions. I think it very much depends on what field you want to go into and the institution. Since I have the misfortune of having my primary academic research interests lie in the intersection of tech and society, my work is/would be unfortunately politicized. I'd also go in through Library/Information Science (which my Master's is in) if I were to get a PhD and go into research, and that particular field is STEEPED in rightthink. I'm happy to hear that you had a positive experience, and it's definitely possible. It's just harder to find that than it used to be, and the opportunity cost for trying is very high. > It's absolutely critical for our society that there be real institutions where policy critics can survive. 100% agree. I'd love for academia to grow a spine and assert itself. (I did debate leaving the country, but as someone with a disability that isn't a permanent option.)
- xhkkffbf 4y ago
  It all depends what kind of crap you talk. There are plenty of things you just can't say and tenure won't protect you when they come for you. Ask Joshua Katz, formerly of Princeton. He complained very publicly and they dug up an old crime and tried him again. Suddenly the old crime that was punishable with a suspension before is now bad enough to merit firing. Note: I'm not speaking to the merits of how Princeton or Katz behaved. Only that tenure is not the license to speak that some people imagine. And if you criticize your own institution, you're bound to upset people and maybe they'll be the ones with control over the punishment process.
  - matthewdgreen 4y ago
    From what I understand, Joshua Katz had a sexual relationship with one of his undergraduate students and behaved inappropriately with several others. When the matter was first being investigated he contacted the student directly and then failed to disclose this fact to the investigators, who then learned about it when the student filed a new complaint. I know it is fashionable to say this is about Katz's "speech" but the case would be much easier to make if he'd upheld basic standards of professional behavior (i.e., don't date or try to date your students.)
    - Nasrudith 4y ago
      What disturbs me most is that Princeton acts right out of the dictator playbook - knowingly keep corrupt people with serious oustable offenses on staff to have them pre-blackmailed. To be frank this is the behavior which allows for mass sex abuse rings. Also something which statues of limitations, even not made for this purpose (limitations of investigative capabilities are more likely reason). It would still be a good fit. It is an admittedly bizzare and perverse phenomena thatnthe best defense against abuse in a judicial system has been to let the guilty go free for misconduct of others.

by Mezzie 4y ago

matthewdgreen 4y ago

> Restrictions on what I can say Academia isn't perfect and it sure isn't what it once was. But go ahead and talk crap about your corporate employer for the next six months and see what happens to you.

Mezzie 4y ago
I'm a freelancer + work in the non-profit space; I don't do corporate work. Which is also on purpose. ;) The difference is that corporate work never had the pretense of offering me intellectual freedom, whereas academia did. At least if I go corporate, they'll buy my silence with resources/$$$. Academia? So you want to give me nothing AND restrict what I can say? That's going to be a hard pass.
- matthewdgreen 4y ago
  I have to push back against this since I have some personal experience here. As a (non-tenure-track) research assistant professor I got into a major argument with a dean at my University over a specific speech issue re: the NSA and Snowden leaks [1]. (The NSA is also a major funder of [part] of my University.) I was prepared to be fired when I refused to go along with the University's request: I was not fired, and instead I've been promoted. I don't think there are very many other institutions where I could have expected this outcome. Yes, my story is just one data point. But all important speech issues are just a few datapoints. It's absolutely critical for our society that there be real institutions where policy critics can survive. Until someone builds an alternative home for policy criticism (and no, consulting for non-profits isn't it) I'm going to stand by the academic system... however imperfect it is. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/10/johns-hopkins-dean-apologises-for-blog https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/10/johns-hopkins-...
  - Mezzie 4y ago
    I appreciate the push back; it's how I learn and refine my positions. I think it very much depends on what field you want to go into and the institution. Since I have the misfortune of having my primary academic research interests lie in the intersection of tech and society, my work is/would be unfortunately politicized. I'd also go in through Library/Information Science (which my Master's is in) if I were to get a PhD and go into research, and that particular field is STEEPED in rightthink. I'm happy to hear that you had a positive experience, and it's definitely possible. It's just harder to find that than it used to be, and the opportunity cost for trying is very high. > It's absolutely critical for our society that there be real institutions where policy critics can survive. 100% agree. I'd love for academia to grow a spine and assert itself. (I did debate leaving the country, but as someone with a disability that isn't a permanent option.)
xhkkffbf 4y ago
It all depends what kind of crap you talk. There are plenty of things you just can't say and tenure won't protect you when they come for you. Ask Joshua Katz, formerly of Princeton. He complained very publicly and they dug up an old crime and tried him again. Suddenly the old crime that was punishable with a suspension before is now bad enough to merit firing. Note: I'm not speaking to the merits of how Princeton or Katz behaved. Only that tenure is not the license to speak that some people imagine. And if you criticize your own institution, you're bound to upset people and maybe they'll be the ones with control over the punishment process.
- matthewdgreen 4y ago
  From what I understand, Joshua Katz had a sexual relationship with one of his undergraduate students and behaved inappropriately with several others. When the matter was first being investigated he contacted the student directly and then failed to disclose this fact to the investigators, who then learned about it when the student filed a new complaint. I know it is fashionable to say this is about Katz's "speech" but the case would be much easier to make if he'd upheld basic standards of professional behavior (i.e., don't date or try to date your students.)
  - Nasrudith 4y ago
    What disturbs me most is that Princeton acts right out of the dictator playbook - knowingly keep corrupt people with serious oustable offenses on staff to have them pre-blackmailed. To be frank this is the behavior which allows for mass sex abuse rings. Also something which statues of limitations, even not made for this purpose (limitations of investigative capabilities are more likely reason). It would still be a good fit. It is an admittedly bizzare and perverse phenomena thatnthe best defense against abuse in a judicial system has been to let the guilty go free for misconduct of others.