BY MATTHEW BOEDY
Amid our new national situation that officially began this week I hope readers of this blog find useful two books published this month.Asking you to forgive the self-promotion, I note from the start that I have chapters in both.
The first book is about exile, specifically in higher education. The collection of autobiographical snapshots of professors in the humanities at non-elite universities and colleges “explores the changes occurring at regional state universities and poorly endowed private colleges in the last several decades.”
Whatever your status and station, all of us should get used to its key concept: exile.
My chapter shows I’ve been living in exile in academia since I started a decade ago. While my situation may differ from yours, let me suggest some kind of exile is coming for all of us.
For those who need a refresher: Exile can mean underfunding, underinvestment, and a slow (or rapid) decline. These are all descriptors we in the humanities have used for a while.
But exile doesn’t mean being forgotten. Exile in academia is a choice by those powers that be who want you there.
Collectively we have some idea of what to expect from our new government. But much remains unknown. What is clear is that the attack on higher education will gain speed at the federal level.
There are many in both parties who still support and want to advance a mission for higher education. But there are quite a few who simply want to exile all of us collectively for the many sins they have imputed on us. And those few have substantially more power now.
We are set to learn what exile means.
Even if you don’t read the book, you should heed my lessons on exile from here in Georgia.
Exile has taught me no one is coming to save us. Exile is of course about cutting off support.
Exile though does not mean action is futile. But exile has taught me action does not always equate success for my discipline or profession. Exile means we lose for a season. But we act as witness to what can come later.
If all this is too much, too soon for some of you, remember exile also means you have time to organize and strategize.
What might a strategy look like amid exile?
This is where the other book comes in.
The second is a book designed for composition teachers. But I think its subject applies more broadly to all of us who will find ourselves in any space facing “the negative and extreme political discourse surrounding the Trump years of campaigning, rallying, tweeting, holding office, and the ongoing culture war in the US.” As we all know such toxic rhetoric has “challenged the foundational purposes of teaching” in all subjects. This is especially true in mine: writing and rhetoric.
The book is a collection of faculty narratives, case studies, and reflections that “bring to light the ruptures, resistance, and resilience of teaching amid the extreme polarization of partisan politics.”
In that organization are three strategies.
My chapter is on my pedagogical and public relationship with Turning Point USA. My more in-depth report on the vast plans for cultural dominion by Charlie Kirk and Turning Point is set for a book-length treatment this fall from Westminster John Knox Press.
Writing books for the public may not be your thing. That’s fine. And many of us are reluctant if not outright against being tagged as part of a resistance academy. You just want to do your job and go home. I respect that.
But as exile will come for us all, the last section on resilience is for all of us.
Higher education will adapt, is adapting. And we as faculty can and will play roles in that. But individual resilience is only part of the solution.
The tenets of the academy—a community of scholars built on shared governance—require us all to help the community. It’s also a good picture of democracy.
I hope these materials offer readers better ways to not merely cope with their subjects but help them to create “a vulnerable yet resolved” (to quote the collection on toxic rhetoric) belief in the future of democracy.
Contributing editor Matthew Boedy is the president of the Georgia conference of the AAUP and works at the University of North Georgia. He can be reached through email or his Twitter account @matthewboedy.
“Exile can mean underfunding, underinvestment, and a slow (or rapid) decline.”
Baked into this definition is your assumption of the exclusive institutional academic employment model for higher education and its never-ending cry for more money. How unoriginal and should you get increased funding, then the social pillar is only made further subject to the vulnerable troll-funding from government, business, philanthropy…
Here’s an original idea, try asking for less money: https://bit.ly/PSAFinanceCanada.
“There are many in both parties who still support and want to advance a mission for higher education. But there are quite a few who simply want to exile all of us[…] And those few have substantially more power now.“
What sort of power could be exerted over academics if academics had the sort of power that attorneys enjoy when contributing to their social pillar under the protection and direction of legislated professional models? If the adjunct faculty majority (the truly exiled) could disclaim the inheritance and open their own academic practice – as attorneys can and do in law – then how would this earning and learning independence, this liberty impact political and other undue influence in the academe? You don’t know, and you should (https://bit.ly/WeAllSufferHEIs).
What is the higher education mission, in the model you assume without challenge? Do both parties see it as some sort of ROI on vocational pursuits? Is your response: No, if only they (whomever that might be now or later) just give us more money (and don’t take it away)?
“Exile has taught me no one is coming to save us. Exile is of course about cutting off support.”
Academics can save ourselves and so in turn save higher education. To see this, you and the AAUP need to do your jobs as academics, as self-appointed stewards. Here is a start: https://bit.ly/InheritedAssumption.
“Exile means we lose for a season. But we act as witness to what can come later.”
How long is a season, Matt? Have a look at the history of this monopolistic McDonald’s model you assume, and I disclaim, to find loss-a-plenty among masters and scholars (https://bit.ly/PSAHistoryPart1). A generation ago, the same crap that we face now was being discussed with the same unoriginal, impotent rhetoric surrounding the collective assumption ( https://bit.ly/25YearsAgoTenure). Nothing you or the AAUP say or do is original in this regard, and this does not seem to bother either of you.
“What might a strategy look like amid exile?”
The Matt et al strategy: Until we get the increased funding and independence that we need and deserve, exercise resilience. Your plan reminds me of Xi Jinping’s message to the suffering people under his rule: Marshal your resilience, because no one is coming to save you, least of all the government.
“The tenets of the academy—a community of scholars built on shared governance—require us all to help the community. It’s also a good picture of democracy.”
The universitas of which you speak is only one version of earning, learning and stewarding in higher education, and it is not recommended (https://bit.ly/IronyAbsurdAAUP1). Only you don’t know that, and you should. Try some research before your next publication on saving higher education, which is not the same as saving the inheritance (https://bit.ly/AofResPSA).