I'm not entirely sure why people, including Jason Soon, should be so concerned over ANU or Sydney University saying "no thanks" for funding for a degree in "Western Civilisation".
Brian Schmidt says it was due to it being clear that the funders wanted an "unprecedented" level of influence. Given Tony Abbott's comments in Quadrant, I find that far from an implausible claim. Can you imagine Tony taking it well if some academic or student on the course started writing articles cynical or critical of aspects of the civilisation that, apparently, hasn't been studied enough?
As for the complaint that if universities take funding from foreign governments for "research centres", why do they baulk at conservative's money?: it probably does come down to whether it's a matter of soft influence, or hard influence. Surely, foreign money is given in at least the hope of encouraging sympathetic treatment; but if it is given on a clear basis that all studies are expected to be positive, well, I can understand universities rejecting it.
And besides, isn't the money going to be accepted by some university or other (wasn't the Australian Catholic University saying "pick me", or what about Bond University?) Or is it that the Ramsay Centre is wanting to deliberately annoy only universities with a Leftist reputation by buying their way inside?
Talking up a need for somewhat old fashioned study of the glories of Western Civilisation has been a thing coming from the IPA and its fellow travellers for some time now. Conservatives like the idea because they want to fight cultural relativism; libertarian/classical liberals tend to want it more so they can go on and on about how fantastic capitalism is, because that suits their own small government/low regulation/low tax agenda. (You have to give capitalism free space to breath - how could you want to hurt something that has done so much for you?)
I have some sympathy to the anti-relativism view, but I can't really see that this is likely to be a successful way to promote it. And libertarians can always comfort themselves with already owing RMIT - where Davidson, Potts, Berg and even Trump's world champion suck up Kates make a living.
I don't really see the Ramsay plan being a good use of money...
ANU and Sydney uni can do whatever they want. they may well have good reasons not to host the centre. My tweet was more directed at those writers (not necessarily affiliated with university mgt) who are saying 'yay! this is a victory against white supremacism/racism' who at the same time and unlike, may I add, principled lefty Clive Hamilton, expressing concern at the profusion of Confucius centres funded by an aggressive nation intent on undermining our institutions
ReplyDelete"Talking up a need for somewhat old fashioned study of the glories of Western Civilisation has been a thing coming from the IPA and its fellow travellers for some time now."
ReplyDeleteLike Kim Beazley and Joe Dr Bruyn
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/21/howard-beazley-western-civilisation-one-nation-greens
now we know why Soony is always confuciud
ReplyDeleteand on about how fantastic capitalism is, because that suits their own small government/low regulation/low tax agenda.
ReplyDeleteI think that is a very constrained view of capitalism. In some modern circles there is the idea that capitalism must meet their particular standards regarding taxation and government intervention. Capitalism is much more flexible than that and I think that is the great strength of capitalism. It can change as times demand, or at least should, but when we start arguing that a specific iteration of capitalism is the only true capitalism aren't we making the same mistakes as doctrinaire socialists?
As for that course, I have no problems with a course in Western Civilisation but obviously the educational institution must control the content and provision of the course. I'm a little tired of certain elements in academia which seem to thrive of demonising Western Civilisation. Nor do I have a problem with people arguing that Western Civilisation is a superior civilisation. I can't think of any other civilisation that has done so much for protecting citizens, enhancing prosperity, reducing poverty, increasing health and longevity, providing so many new things under the sun, and creating an intellectual, artistic, and creative boon the likes of which have never been seen. It can be improved upon but unlike so many other civlisations Western Civilisation has built in the capacity for change.
".. but when we start arguing that a specific iteration of capitalism is the only true capitalism aren't we making the same mistakes as doctrinaire socialists?"
ReplyDeleteYes, which is exactly my criticism of the IPA/LDP vision of capitalism.
As for your paragraph about WC: some academics are making the point that the elements of WC are already dealt with across a field of studies anyway.
It's not at all clear what a study of Western Civilisation is meant to encompass. If it's a reaction against history getting too interested in the esoteria of some cultures while neglecting teaching students the basics of Western world history: well I understand the motivation, but how on earth is providing for a small number of Caleb Bond/James Paterson/Tim Wilson look alikes from the IPA Youth League to spend a few years reinforcing their pre-existing views going to help?
The graduates of that course would at least find employment in the IPA. However it would be a waste of time employment wise and over time probably be perceived as a waste time degree. It is ironic that the right wing now wants to promote another Arts degree that is not relevant to employment.
ReplyDelete