June 22, 2012
Death by Degrees
From the editors of n + 1:
According to many on the American left, the “elitist” is a right-wing bogeyman sustained by the mendacious organs of the actual elite — the moneyed one — and by the reactionary reflexes of an anti-intellectual public. Working-class whites, we’re told, vote in the interests of billionaires on the mistaken assumption that culture, not economics, is the main political battlefield, and that godless eggheads, not greedy businessmen, are their true class enemies. The 1-percenters bankrolling the Tea Party thereby deflect the attention of “bitter clingers” away from the wealthy and toward the clubby arrogance of the other 1 percent — the fraction of American students who graduate each year from the top tier of colleges.
The eggheads make sensible targets. Over the last thirty years, the university has replaced the labor union as the most important institution, after the corporation, in American political and economic life. As union jobs have disappeared, participation in the labor force, the political system, and cultural affairs is increasingly regulated by professional guilds that require their members to spend the best years of life paying exorbitant tolls and kissing patrician rings. Whatever modest benefits accreditation offers in signaling attainment of skills, as a ranking mechanism it’s zero-sum: the result is to enrich the accreditors and to discredit those who lack equivalent credentials.
More here.
Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 05:45 AM | Permalink






















Comments
Ah, yes, another inconvenient truth.
Posted by: Ken Pidcock | Jun 22, 2012 7:52:14 AM
And then there is this:
http://www.amcircus.com/politics/the-intellectual-situation-of-n1.html
Posted by: Larry Tate | Jun 22, 2012 9:10:48 AM
This is a breathtakingly stupid essay. First of all, it is full of pernicious false equivalents and conclusions: that the economic 1% equals the intellectual 1% in power and corruptness; that because we pay a great deal for education, education itself is bad; that labor unions form a corrective to a "guild-like" college education. These are thin, provocative statements that elide tremendous differences, and that the article fails to discuss the content of education *at all* makes it, to my eye, not worth the (all too flammable, to use the cute, smug phrase from the concluding paragraph) paper on which it is written. We have a very hard time getting money and credit to our teachers in this country and pieces like this are not helping.
Posted by: kara | Jun 22, 2012 10:01:49 AM
So banker billionaires hate the Ivy League "Art History Majors", the Art History Majors hate the bankers and the great unwashed hate both and are hated, in turn, by both. Sounds fair to me.
Posted by: Olavi Valo | Jun 22, 2012 3:52:13 PM
I reckon that kara is mostly right about this, but that doesn't mean that the chaff can stop resenting being seperated from the wheat. Those who can't send their kids to good colleges are liable to resent those who can.
Posted by: aguy109 | Jun 22, 2012 6:27:25 PM
Agreed. There is a good and necessary essay to be written about the exorbitant cost of higher education, about student loans, about preparatory schools and K-12 public education, and about other prohibitive "vetting" practices. But this essay throws education itself out with the bathwater.
Posted by: kara | Jun 22, 2012 7:33:37 PM
I can't agree. The focus of the essay is on elite education and its use as a marker for excellence.That's telling.I don't begrudge anyone's elite education; I'd love to have had one. But I'd love to have had one because I think it would have been cool to have been in that environment as a young adult, not because I think it would have provided me a superior education. Yet the trend is to assume that an elite education is prerequisite to a variety of career paths, especially in finance and law. That is toxic and deserves confrontation.
Posted by: Ken Pidcock | Jun 22, 2012 9:40:23 PM
Throwing the baby out with the bathwater? This essay throws out the baby, the bathwater, burns down the house, salts the earth, and moves in the with the raccoons down the street.
Posted by: ajay | Jun 23, 2012 1:03:09 PM
I recently went to my 50th reunion at what might well be called by these authors an "elite" university, where classmate after classmate of mine extolled the superb education we received. (Granted, we're talking about half a century ago, although everything I have heard about the present state of my alm. mat. suggests that it's still doing a very good job of education.)
This authors write as though everything "elite" tertiary ed institutions do is grant pieces of sheepskin that do nothing but give the recipients the right to prestigious, high-paying jobs. Of course, they are exaggerating their point so as to be heard over the Internet din, but even so a lot of the essay is a bit ridiculous, no?
I will grant that the "top-flight" law schools are pretty useless as far as actual education is concerned. If I have been arrested, I want a competent defense lawyer, even if she only went to the law school down the street. But medical schools? Are they so useless? Barefoot doctors are a great idea, but I would hope that they know what they are doing, and it takes a fair amount of study these days to treat a cancer patient well.
And even a discipline like medieval history, which everyone seems to want to put on the chopping block these days, is hardly useless. Medieval and any other period of history, rightly understood, is quite important for comprehending much of today's world, and I doubt that your average for-profit "university" on the Internet will help you get a solid knowledge of the subject through your smartphone.
As for foreign language departments, they seem to be dropping like flies. But heck, that's OK. Google Translate can replace them 100%!
Posted by: JonJ | Jun 24, 2012 8:45:21 PM
Post a comment