The Neoliberal University

I usually dislike Stanley Fish's columns on academia a good deal. In fact, there is much about this column I dislike as well. But he is right on in describing the neoliberal university.

This new narrative has been produced (and necessitated) by the withdrawal
of the state from the funding of its so-called public universities. If the
percentage of a state’s contribution to a college’s operating expenses falls
from 80 to 10 and less (this has been the relentless trajectory of the past 40
years) and if, at the same time, demand for the “product” of higher education
rises and the cost of delivering that product (the cost of supplies, personnel,
information systems, maintenance, construction, insurance, security) skyrockets,
a huge gap opens up that will have to be filled somehow.

Faced with this situation universities have responded by (1) raising
tuition, in effect passing the burden of costs to the students who now become
consumers and debt-holders rather than beneficiaries of enlightenment (2)
entering into research partnerships with industry and thus courting the danger
of turning the pursuit of truth into the pursuit of profits and (3) hiring a
larger and larger number of short-term, part-time adjuncts who as members of a
transient and disposable workforce are in no position to challenge the
university’s practices or agitate for an academy more committed to the
realization of democratic rather than monetary goals. In short , universities
have embraced neoliberalism.

In a time when neoliberalism is increasingly discredited around the world, the university system is embracing it more than ever. This leads to the devaluing of the humanities. Since we don't bring money into the university through our work, administration, boards of regents, and state governments don't care about us. I know that at the University of New Mexico, which is currently experiencing a titanic battle between faculty and administration, the school's president flat out told humanities faculty that they were irrelevant. Whereas even in this bad job market, math, the sciences, and to a somewhat lesser extent the social sciences, still are hiring some people because they can fulfill a role in the neoliberal model, there are virtually no jobs in the humanities.

I am fully convinced that next year is my last in academia. There aren't going to be any jobs. The few universities that are hiring are going to have their pick of Ivy League graduates. Since I am unwilling to debase myself as a poorly paid and powerless adjunct, I am going to have to try and find something else to do. I have nothing to offer a neoliberal university. Of course, I am not giving up. Maybe a miracle will happen. I am certainly doing what I can to make that miracle take place. This is why I've been less active on the blog in the last 2 weeks--I have an article due on March 15 and I am incredibly nervous and stressed about it. So I'm doing what I can. But in a neoliberal academic world, what chance do historians have?

One final note--one reason why I dislike Fish is his opposition to politically engaged academics. He is totally wrong about this--many students want politically engaged professors, political engagement makes our work stronger, and most importantly, gives us a voice in the world where we can use our expertise to try and influence policy debates and larger social issues. Giving that up makes us irrelevancies that reinforce the neoliberal institution, which Fish seems to begrudginly accept. I do not accept this.

Happy Singles Awareness Day!

I woke up this morning to one of the best Valentine gifts I can think of.

Finally, congress and our president realize that we can solve two of the biggest problems in the U.S. with one bill. 

The bill includes $71 billion for clean energy programs—more than three times the current spending for these same programs... H.R. 1 also adds $20 billion in clean energy tax incentives. The bill would “spark the creation of a clean-energy economy” that President Barack Obama promised during his inaugural address.

This will put people to work doing what we need to be focusing on most: reducing our dependence on petroleum and reducing our contributions to climate change.  But instead of losing US jobs, we will be creating much needed jobs that cannot be outsourced.  The constructions markets have been hit really hard by the recession, but this bill could directly and indirectly create as many 1 million jobs that focus on energy efficiency in federal buildings and low income housing.  So not only will we be creating jobs that stimulate the economy and reducing our impact on climate change, the taxpayers will also be saving money on heating and cooling federal buildings - up to 2 billion dollars.  

The bill will also provide much needed money for public transit.  The $16 billion for transit projects and high speed rail will create up to 20,000 jobs for every $1 billion invested.  Public transit will also make it easier for people to get to work where they can find higher paying jobs and make it easier for people to stretch their paychecks.  

So, I may be alone on one of the lamest and cheesiest holidays ever, but I can think of at least one reason to be really happy.  <3

Collapse of the Academic Job Market

This is incredibly depressing.

There are approximately 1/2 of the tenure-track jobs in history this year that there has been in each of the last few years.

I assume the job market is equally grim in other fields.

Ugh. Hope the high schools are hiring in the next few years.

My Upcoming Anti-US Rant

As some readers know, I have a job interview next week at a Canadian school. One of the things I have to do is come up with a 15 minute talk about why to learn about U.S. history. It's not a hard thing to put together, but it's weird. I've never had to explain this question before. For Americans, I can just say that you should learn about your damn country. But for Canadian students, it's an interesting challenge.

I didn't really plan it this way, but the whole talk, and in fact just about everything I am putting together for this interview, is basically an anti-American rant. I don't want it to be necessarily, but if they want to know my feelings about these issues, well, I guess they are going to get them. My classes are notoriously depressing anyway. So I guess they will know what they are going to get. Still, I could see my images of lynchings, Wounded Knee, anti-Chinese riots, and massacres of Filipinos not going over well, particularly since there are exactly 0 images that view the US in a positive way.

On the other hand, maybe they'll think I'm trying to get out of the country! Which isn't really true, but whatever.

This is my first on-campus interview and I have this feeling of impending disaster. Who knows though. I am pretty underprepared. After a very hard year and a week after defending my dissertation, my energy to prepare three different talks is really not there.

In other news, the high in said Canadian city is supposed to be about 20 and snow. So that ought to be interesting at least.

And if anyone can suggest any good Canadian jokes to tell, let me know.