Many progressive academics are forever griping about unjust privileges and hierarchies in society — bad stuff that they’re out to change!
Ah, but the academic world itself is loaded with privilege and hierarchy, as Garion Frankel observes in today’s Martin Center article.
He writes:
The problem, however, is not that academics are merely rude, or that insecurity is simply one of the negative trade-offs of a proper life of the mind. The problem is that this poor behavior has a structure and logic governed by academia’s obsession with credentials. In this respect, degrees, titles, and interactions with “prestigious” institutions play the same role that bloodlines and courtly prestige did in medieval Europe. They mediate all interactions, tightly regulate the social order, and aim to prevent any disruptions from malcontents or free thinkers.
But while the medieval order of nobles and peasants was at least clear, the academic order is more hidden. Even outstanding scholars can be relegated to low status if they don’t have the right ideas.
Under feudalism there was a sense of noblesse oblige, but that’s lacking in our academic feudalism. Frankel observes, “Yet academics frequently fixate on the noblesse without the oblige. They fashion themselves as ‘priests of democracy’ but act as reliable progressive operatives. They talk about fighting for the little guy but make very little effort to understand their background or values. They are quick to vocally support reparations for past injustices, or offer land acknowledgements, but the tip jar at local businesses remains suspiciously empty. Simply put, the obsession with social status comes with a whole lot of bark and very little bite.”
He’s right. Owing largely to federal subsidies for higher education, we have created a very expensive and largely counterproductive academic feudalism.