Many CONservatives and LIEbertarians would like to see academic tenure abolished for a number of reasons. They range from ‘personal ideology’, ‘productivity’ to ‘entitlement’. However they reflect ideological conflict and power/control issues, rather than objectivity. In my opinion there is a much better and objective reason to abolish academic tenure. It is based on exposing a peculiar and loathsome aspect of academia- overwhelming hypocrisy.
Academic tenure was created to ensure that academics could hold and profess unpopular beliefs. It is conceptually similar to the life-long appointments of some judges in the justice system. However conferring academic tenure on a person makes the implicit, but unspoken, assumption that such a person is ‘fairer and more just’ than the average guy on the street.
But is that the case?
Many academics, especially in certain fields such as medical research, train many graduate students and postdocs with the full knowledge that there are no decent or stable jobs for them. I would further argue that they either CON or exploit everybody who works for them while paying them as little as is humanely possible.
To put it another way- academics behave in a manner that would shame Wal-Mart, Best Buy, 7-11, Office Depot etc. Academia has many non-white students and postdocs for the same reason factory farms and landscapers employ mexicans- cheap, disposable and often indentured labor.
Academics criticizing corporations is similar to Nazis criticizing the treatment of blacks in 1930-era USA.
Such subhuman hypocrites have no right to demand stable lifetime employment, and should be treated in the same way they treat people who work for them-like disposable crap.
I am willing to say something that most scientists will never say, let alone admit to themselves:
Scientists are losers.
They are losers, not only in the more conventional sense of the word, but in a much more generic way. Here are my reaso
1. Scientists are losers first and foremost because most of them are functionally autistic.
I realized this fact when it became apparent to me that befriending and interacting with people who were not in STEM fields was much easier than those who were in such fields. Who wants to be surrounded with autistic people engaged in a constant and pathetic game of one-upmanship or incessant discussion about their obsessions? No sane person will, or should care, about such losers.
2. There is a huge gap between their achievements (or lack thereof) and their bloated and fragile egos.
The vast majority of scientists have not made any significant discovery or come up with an earth-shattering insight, yet they act as if they have made a major contribution towards the advancement of humankind. Ironically, those who have actually done that are often very down-to-earth people. Who cares about a pompous moron with a Ph.D, regardless of the institution from where it was obtained or their “pedigree? Let their work speak for itself.
3. They spend inordinate amounts of time and effort in zero-sum behaviors.
Most scientists spend too much time engaged in petty schoolgirl-type rivalries and politics amongst themselves. Why would any intelligent person expend so much effort and energy for such meager rewards? I can see people fighting over jobs and opportunities which pay much significantly more, but the vast majority of scientists make less than twice the median wage in developed countries.
4. They preach SWPL ideals and fairness, but do not practice them in their own lives.
Scientists talk a lot about fairness, decent behavior, giving opportunity, objectivity etc. But their personal behavior is in direct opposition to such lofty ideals. They will try to exploit and abuse students, postdocs, other researchers… well pretty much everyone they interact with on a professional level. Scientists make politicians and banksters look less hypocritical in comparison.
5. They suffer from the delusion of knowledge.
Scientists throughout the ages have been mostly wrong about pretty much everything, but few have the ability to even admit that they may not know enough- let alone be wrong. The willingness to admit that current knowledge is incomplete drives science forward — otherwise, science are no better than religion. Furthermore, many scientists derive their livelihood from being paid or unpaid shills for various causes and worldviews. Nobody likes a shill, especially one who is autistic, petty, pompous, hypocritical and delusional.
What do you think? Comments?