Current president of the Organization of American Historians, Richard White recently noted:

“As historians, we do take opposing positions, but we seem to be united on one thing: a reluctance to debate. ”

Read the whole thing: https://www.oah.org/pubs/nl/2006aug/white.html

I note some SOAS-bashing in this article and so as a current SOAS grad student, I will gently leap to its defence and point out that there is a big difference between the students and the college.

SOAS student politics has always tended towards shrill left-wing activism, and now that the SWP Stop the War front-organisation has gained control of the Union, anti-Zionism will continue to be at the forefront of the agenda.

However, most serious-minded SOAS students, and there are a lot more than is usually given credit for (especially now that flagrant dope-smoking has been permanently banned from the bar), tend to reject the more extreme opinions of the most visible student politicians – who are all egomaniacs and whiny attention-seekers, anyway.

Despite the alleged air of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism that clouds the place (as some would have you believe … ) Jewish and Israeli students continue to study there and organise student groups.

SOAS student politics is nothing if nor combative. It should be noted that whilst a poorly-attended SU GM voted to ban a representative of the Israeli embassy from speaking at SOAS, they were over-ruled by the college director, who pointed out that such an act would contravene the college’s policy on freedom of speech.

In any case, SOAS continues to be the UK’s flagship institution for Asian and African studies (despite some glaring holes in Central Asian studies, which i won’t go into here) and, as a state-funded organisation, is hardly in hock to Saudi Wahhabism.

By way of illustration, it was a group of SOAS scholars in the ‘70s, led by the formidable John Wansborough, who modified principles of Biblical exigesis and applied them to the study of the Qu’ran, reaching a series of conclusions about the origins of early islam that continue to upset Muslims to this day

Dude, that’s like, so harsh. The government should monitor hate speech like that.

Just kidding. I’m still looking for academics w/o academia.

One almost wishes for the days of the Cold War, when American academia was kept competitive by the spectre of the Soviets out-innovating it.

For decades the US has not produced enough (or not produced good enough) doctors and engineers. But we import them from India, China, Europe, Latin America, even Africa.

Has it now? I thought the decay of academia was a recent phenomenon, one that had just begun to unfold and would take decades to ripen. I was under the impression that the US had an post-secondary system that was more than able to meet all its politico-economic needs, even if K-12 public education was s***. Apparently I was mistaken. I worry about the clout of both the left and the right in school curricula (intelligent design and all that with the right, crackpot teaching methods and all-around dumbing down with the left). In many ways, stiff competition, especially from a dictatorship like China that doesn’t have to worry about such pressure groups, would be properly reinvigorating. Robert D. Kaplan, as you will recall, commented on the decadence of a society not stiffened by war, or more broadly by any kind of international conflict. Such a society naturally turns inward and becomes increasingly myopic. Without conflict (and the concurrent attentiveness toward the mechanisms of society’s self-reproduction and perpetuation), society gradually turns inward, becomes more and more shortsighted, with emphasis on the future disappearing and the focusing of the politico-economic structure more toward the whims of the “moment”. Kaplan observed that “the Academy Awards have assumed a near-holiday status”, a chilling commentary on our current state of decay. He mentioned the phenomenon of the “mass man”, someone interested in the products of civilization but woefully negligent of its processes. His insight continues to echo in my mind every time I read about battles over education in the news.

We have the best professional and technical post-secondary education in the world, but Arts & Sciences have largely been seized by Leftists. Take ‘em down

Well me coming from latinamerica an study two career ( politics science and informatic engineering) i cann understaind perfectly the article, here theuniversitys ( in social studys) are very dominated by leftwingers, that have very negative views about the west ( specially against the great evil empire of USA) and in some way the aproved the islamic terrorist ( Not the attacks in new york, londo or madrid) but yeah feell symphaty for the anger of the islamic radicals; so from my view many leftwinger from the university there and here no see the real amenace and the new global reality.

is mean i dont say the islamic religo is an amence but is amenace the radical islamics they using terror can control and put their radical view of life in our country.

also, i want to that 21 Century is the century of the knowledge in this century with need engineering and focus like national interest the development of education and investment in science, technology and investigation, the Asian people (i think) know this; for that the invest and graduated more people in engineering than social studys the FUTURE AND PROSPERITY is in the science and the west is losing the time in the hippie ideologys.

Finally Curson says. ” For decades the US has not produced enough (or not produced good enough) doctors and engineers. But we import them from India, China, Europe, Latin America, even Africa.”

Well this remenvber me to sad study about the engineering in my country, here is very hard to find jobo for engineers because we dont have the industry or the system to created our compays, for that in recent polls here say the almost the 60 % of the stundet in engineering was to emigrated to USA or ASia becuase the see more future to their career than in the country .

Joe: Quantitative political scientists don’t make things up? What about the research questions they pose? Sorry, quantitative methods in the social sciences do not free them from politics. How could they be, when even earth sciences are being radicalized?

(see http://www.cei.org/ to download some of the funniest PSAs since This Hour has 22 Minutes’ spoof on Viagra).

For an interesting look at the “impartiality” of the natural sciences, I highly recommend reading Bruno Latour’s “Science in Action, How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society” (1987, Harvard U Press).

Heres one thing thats bothering me- if, as you say, campuses are breeding grounds for lefty ideology aimed at bringing down the west, why is it that fewer Americans want to do science? It’s the same in the UK here- less children are doing science at school every year, and that cannot be down to any political idology making them choose art studies instead of chemistry.

It all makes sense now! Leftists hate science. You see, science disproves religion, and those conservative bastards love science! Once again, America has been undermined by the pinko commies that are secretly running everything behind the scenes of a conservative executive and legislative branch. My solution is not only a border between Mexico (dey tuk der jobs) and Canada (wacko atheist health care lovers), but between GODLESS AMERICA (California and other leftist strongholds) and the real US of A. Because GOD KNOWS, the direct correlation of my ignorance and my faith shall never be challenged!

ps. 9/11

guthrie – I would say the problem is that Science is a touch difficult – there really are ‘correct’ answers, and that means you can be wrong… Sticking to wishy washy stuff where all answers are acceptable is much more allied with the notion that we are all above average…. But in the long run, as our forbears knew well, if it isn’t difficult it isn’t really worth talking about.

Here, here, Dr. Wallace.

Guthrie, I don’t think students want to avoid subjects like science because of leftism, necessarily. I think it has more to do with the trend of promoting a feel-good approach to school (and life). We are continually told to “Ëœfollow your heart’ or to study what truly interests you. Is it any wonder people take film studies and other enjoyable subjects (I know, I did-I took music and drama, too). The problem is that once we get out into the real world, it soon becomes apparent that such degrees guarantee nothing and even getting a job with one can be difficult.

Excellent point, snow. As a sixteen year old highschool student in Canada, I can really relate to what you’re saying. As I’ve said elsewhere, people today feel much and think little. These aren’t necessarily “leftist” values- in fact the Old Left professed a belief in reason and science, though the “cultural left” (I realize this is a very broad term- I’m using it to denote assorted subjectivists who bastardize the classical liberal philosophy of tolerance, turning into an emotive one) has done much to promote it. Unfortunately, the right is often equally guilty, with its emphasis on faith over reason. No wonder
American higher education is steadily going to crap. Maybe if they re-emphasized the profit motive we wouldn’t have this problem.

I wish I had learned about entreprenuership and gained a knowledge of money and capitalism. In my day, there was absolutely nothing like this.

It is a sad fact, but little of what is imparted in school has any substantial relevance in later life. Here in Canada we have CALM (Career and Life Management) which is supposed to teach basic life skills- and it does, to some extent. Unfortunately, it is often intwined with emotionalist nonsense, so naturally doing it made me want to vomit. Asking foolish, useless, and meaningless questions like “What is your purpose in life?” hardly strikes me as practical. Of course, such claptrap is immediately dismissed by the vast majority of adolescents who take it, often causing them to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Sorry if that’s a little tangential, I just felt the need to vent.

Are there at least opportunities to learn about developing an entrepreneurial spirit and mindset and money management and such? What’s the feeling these days in schools regarding capitalism? Is it subtly demonised? Or is there some support given for it?

Well, actually, in my school there are. There is a financial management class, but I’m too lazy by several orders of magnitude to take it, and I’m not really interested in accounting anyhow. I don’t think there is a general antipathy toward “capitalism” as some monolithic theoretical entity, if only because most people in school have only a rudimentary conception (at best) of what it is and what it implies for the organization and values of a society. Nevertheless, many values that are not “socialist” as such (when I say socialism I have in mind a rather specific ideology/form of societal organization: the control of the means of production by the workers or bureaucrats through some kind of powerful state-like apparatus) are espoused that nonetheless have socialist connotations- they are of a collectivistic nature, emphasizing self-sacrifice, “community service”, and my personal favourite, the “public good” (a term so broad and empty it can be taken to mean virtually anything). The material is de-emphasized in favour of the ideal, something that consternates me to no end. Maybe I’m just a greedy, self-centred bastard, but I’d prefer not to live in a mud hut, whatever “moral high ground” such an existence might conceivably confer. The problem is that many people take a western standard of living for granted, and so seem to think “they don’t need all that much” to get by, not realizing that “not all that much” by the standards of the rest of the world is somewhere between a Russian suburb and an Indian slum. These sentiments are usually just that, general sentiments that are rarely crystallized as ideas, but I get that impression whenever I pontificate about the material glories of capitalism and economic growth to people. As for entrepreneurship, the great mass of adolescents are as listless and unenterprising a lot as they always have been. What really gets under my skin, though, is how rarely we seem to celebrate productive enterprise, which is a precondition for all leisurely pursuits, or at the very least the power of the rational mind. Mostly the emphasis is on athletics (a highschool norm) and “serving others”. Call me Randian (and to a fairly considerable extent I am), but this indicates something fundamentally wrong about the state of society.

In my day, I think a big reason why I never learned anything about money and markets was because few teachers knew anything about these things and due to a general mistrust of money. The idea that to learn about money was a bad thing because the pursuit of it equates to greed. I remember that as an underlying assumption (this might have been my own upbringing, not necessarily what I got in school).

They don’t realize that greed, like most other human traits, is value neutral. For every corporation that conspires with the government to profit at the common man’s expense, there are dozens that provide us with good, affordable food to eat in their unending competition for share capital.

My main problem, however, is that I often feel like Winston Smith in Orwell’s classic 1984: one isolated, mostly sane individual pitted against all the insanity the world has to offer. Thanks for the moral support, though.

I’ve advocated paying kids in 7th through 12th grade the equivalent of what they would make working in McDonalds if they take math and science and get a B or better. Overnight you would change the culture of poor neighborhoods”Â?

Newt is damn smart.

Kenneth, what you say is correct. But I do not think you are in some kind of minority. Many people would say the same thing throughout Western society. I also took note of another regular contributor’s post regarding oil off Cuba. Right again, saying that the “enviros” would act differently when a real crisis hit. Agreed. As Leonard Cohen sang “Everyobody wants a box of chocolates and a long-stemmed rose”. I may sound as if I am a pessimist, but I am in fact optimistic. I will try to explain why.

The likely sceario of – let’s call them – “the hypocritical ‘enviros’” may seem like just desserts to some, but it misses the serious question of what form will that crisis take? How badly will we all be hit?

The earth’s resources are not finite. Optimists would say that pessimists have always been wrong in the past, but there comes a time when “something’s gotta give”. Surely this is clear to everyone.

What I will simply assert is that a planet of some 9 billion people (as the US census bureau predicts by 2050) cannot all expect to live as Americans or Norwegians do today.

We the rich, however, may be able to do more with less, in other words, if we handle our policy right. Capital will likely have a role to play. Other policies may be needed too. The world’s early industrial-revolutionary experiment with complete laissez-faire captialism showed many pitfalls. If you let it push ordinary folks too far you get revolutions. So we must find compromises.

Does anyone want to give up their priveliged status in the world? No. Does the average North American or European homeowner want to live a life somewhere between a “Russian suburb and an Indian slum”? No. Will we have to? That depends. If we continue to live wastefully, and if we keep ensuring that those who are poor remain so to keep our advantage, I submit that the downward spiral may be sudden, and more unpleasant.

If we don’t go the “collapse” route, and use a mixture of market-enforced conservation, social policy and marketing (I am not even advocating this, just guessing a sceario that looks likely to me), the next 20 years may see us (in the weathier countries, save for an elite few) doing with less than what we have, but being brainwashed to like it (maybe using more advances in Information Technology to put people into a trace), with some (technological) gains in efficiency and also with some (small) gains in overall weath for the poorer regions of the world. Enough to stave off collapse and anarchy.

My guess is that the alternative will be much more unpleasant – if we try to maintain what we have, we will have to use force. It will come back to bite us.

It seems that as rational actors, opinion leaders in our society will make adjustments to stave off a complete reversal of fortune. The only way to do this is to muddle through a middle path. Some form of “social engineering” by elected governments is inevitable.

What we can try to do, however, is find ways now to make the “doing with less” part more comfortable. Sometimes this may mean, for example, investing in technologies before private capital does. What’s wrong with that? Much if not most of our technology comes from US public spending, in the defense industry investments. But there are other ways of investing public money.