Now that I look back on this, I realize that that faculty member could not have done otherwise. If you want to be taken seriously in academia, if you want anyone to listen to you, then you need to remove yourself constantly from the suggestion of being conservative. Conservatism is not an allowable position in academia, or at least not humanities departments in Canada. And so even those people who are not conservative--not even remotely conservative--must always be on guard to disavow conservativism in case any particular opinion seems to appear conservative or look like a particular conservative opinion.
There are a few problems with this, and I'm not sure how they rank in terms of destructiveness. One problem is that people who have conservative opinions are effectively barred from conversation (not necessarily because they cannot speak but rather because no one will listen). And while some might not lament the loss of their conservative opinions (more on this in a moment), we should certainly lament the loss of their other opinions, those that are either not conservative or that are not trackable on a conservative-liberal-socialist continuum. These lost opinions may be very good ones, ones we are in need of, but if we are too busy distancing ourselves from conservatism, we won't be able to take them seriously.
The second problem is that a conservative idea could, of course, be correct. I'm having a difficult time imagining a conservative idea which I could support, but then again I don't think much of that left-right continuum, so ideas I might think of as non-conservative could appear conservative to others. At any rate, I am at least willing to admit that there could be opinions which appear conservative that turn out to be rather valuable without turning out to be non-conservative. In fact, that certain positions which I am very certain are correct can be closely if not perfectly formulated in conservative terms (ie. conservationism and conservative are cognate for a reason) suggests that there are conservative ideas which, if slightly reformulated, could fit admirably within a non-conservative framework. All of this indicates that barring conservative ideas from the discourse is counter-productive. And yet, by making conservatism something we must necessarily distance ourselves from if we want to be heard, we have ensured that those ideas do not get aired. And that is bad news indeed.
2 comments:
Hello. Per my comment on Richard Beck's blog, you're invited to a blog party.
http://liberaljesus.blogspot.com/2011/10/game-of-agora.html
I would suggest that what is now called "conservative" is essentially a form of collective psychosis. Look at the fruit loops who are contending for the GOP nomination in the USA.
I would suggest the "conservative" response to the recent Avatar film gives a good indication of how toxic they have become.
Having already "created" a dying planet (just like we have), the obviously god-less techno-barbarian invaders were compelled by the inexorable logic and momentum of their "culture" of death to conquer and invade "virgin" territories (just like we always have) - exterminate the "brutes".
www.dartmouth.edu/~spanmod/mural/panel13.html
Those on the right, including and especially those who presume to be religious", almost universally loathed the film.
Post a Comment