I don't think expressions of awe and reverence for one's good fortune or the system that created that good fortune is productive at all. And, I think it becomes

I don't think expressions of awe and reverence for one's good fortune or the system that created that good fortune is productive at all. And, I think it becomes counter productive when that awe goes so far as to suppress one's discontent. In wealthy countries like the US, the quality of life improves every decade, and it only improves when people seek to change the system where faults remain. Professors are supposed to be thought leaders, not automatically and uncritically deferential to established thought or power structures. Perhaps his specialty is mathematics rather than the structure of academia, yet even still nothing is gained by subservience. Furthermore, how does it matter when a professor is a loathsome misanthrope or not? Most important is the quality of their original research, and second to that, the quality of instruction they provide, and both of those in relation to their cost. If their misanthropy affects their job choose people who are less misanthropic. If the institutions aren't getting enough A-level talent for research and instruction to choose from, then they should look at how they are attracting talent. Surely, the compensation is an entire basket comprised not only of money and tangible benefits, but such forms of autonomy as the ability to move without giving up progress in your career, the freedom to pursue research regardless of unpopular outcomes, and the ability to speak freely.* How best would you characterize "the problem with academia"? You seem to be saying (1)that there is too little talent in academia—an a outcome signify the combination of working conditions or salaries discourage talent from trying to enter academia. But then seem to say that (2)they are over compensated with days off and benefits. The only way to get such a juxtaposition of overcompensated and under-talented, though is if the positions are filled through some political manner such as personal PR, nepotism, graft etc, and yet that runs counter to your third complaint, that (3)academics aren't political enough to bow and scrape and show deference to everyone else. At least one of these complaints must have a flaw. Finally, how do you know you can't get a job in Hawaii? These days it takes remarkably little effort to browse job offerings and send out a few resumes. Maybe you'd end up with a lot of the same concerns anywhere you live, but maybe you'd also end up liking the climate a lot more. * Though tenure can make moving difficult, it does help enable intellectual and academic freedom, since it effectively limits the equivalent of having a boss who tells you to suppress an unpopular conclusion.