Mathew Manweller: Conservative Academics Weigh In, Way Out
This op-ed piece by Mathew Manweller, a political scientist at Central Washington University, has been making the rounds of the internets. As an argument for reelecting Bush, it's excellent fishwrap. The "don't change horses in midstream" argument worked in 1944 because FDR was winning the war against Germany and Japan - notably, in alliance with numerous powers, including Britain and the Soviet Union. Contrast October 1944 with October 2004, when every day brings more proof that the MBA president is utterly incapable of understanding, much less winning, the "war on terror." See, for instance, the revelations about giant quantities of missing high explosives in Iraq. America will be safer if Bush is fired and Kerry hired.
But then again, you can't expect much careful reasoning from an academic - even a poli sci type - who can make ludicrously unhistorical comments like this one: "America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the costs or appeal. If we turn away from that legacy, we turn away from who we are." God.
Manweller goes to assert that if we elect John Kerry, "Bin Laden will recognize that he can topple any American administration without setting foot on the homeland." You'd think someone who teaches courses on the Constitution would understand the distinction between a lawful election and "toppling" a government, but I guess not. By way of winding this up, he states that being an American means that "you accept a set of values and responsibilities," but offers no examples of such values and responsibilities might include, short of voting for Smirky and Snarly. I won't (preemptive wars) even guess (slaveholding) what else might be in there (interning Japanese-Americans), for fear of proving my own bias (disenfranchising black Floridians).
(Interestingly, Manweller himself is also proof that the "liberal academy" is as much a mirage as the "liberal media." Look for instance at this hyperlink from his home page: a Michael Moore-style documentary purporting to show how lib'ral them universities are? Give me a break, wingnut kids. Go use your Mini-DV tapes for something interesting, like a study of beer bongs.
Engineering programs, economics and poli sci departments, business schools, and religious colleges are all typically much more conservative than the liberal-arts departments that come in for so much criticism as bastions of tenured radicals. More to the point, at least nowadays, business and engineering schools are often far richer than history or English departments, and thus far more influential in shaping undergrad minds. Anyone who has taught undergrad business majors knows this. And it's not a bad thing! Trying to teach American history to marketing and accounting undergrads is fascinating and rewarding, and, in my experience, one which has reciprocal rewards. I can better understand the world they are shaping by choosing to become entrepreneurs, IT experts, managers, and so forth - the world I share with them - and they can, hopefully, learn that that world is not coterminous with forecasting spreadsheets, XML code, creative briefs, or business plans.)
But then again, you can't expect much careful reasoning from an academic - even a poli sci type - who can make ludicrously unhistorical comments like this one: "America has always been a nation that rises to the demands of history regardless of the costs or appeal. If we turn away from that legacy, we turn away from who we are." God.
Manweller goes to assert that if we elect John Kerry, "Bin Laden will recognize that he can topple any American administration without setting foot on the homeland." You'd think someone who teaches courses on the Constitution would understand the distinction between a lawful election and "toppling" a government, but I guess not. By way of winding this up, he states that being an American means that "you accept a set of values and responsibilities," but offers no examples of such values and responsibilities might include, short of voting for Smirky and Snarly. I won't (preemptive wars) even guess (slaveholding) what else might be in there (interning Japanese-Americans), for fear of proving my own bias (disenfranchising black Floridians).
(Interestingly, Manweller himself is also proof that the "liberal academy" is as much a mirage as the "liberal media." Look for instance at this hyperlink from his home page: a Michael Moore-style documentary purporting to show how lib'ral them universities are? Give me a break, wingnut kids. Go use your Mini-DV tapes for something interesting, like a study of beer bongs.
Engineering programs, economics and poli sci departments, business schools, and religious colleges are all typically much more conservative than the liberal-arts departments that come in for so much criticism as bastions of tenured radicals. More to the point, at least nowadays, business and engineering schools are often far richer than history or English departments, and thus far more influential in shaping undergrad minds. Anyone who has taught undergrad business majors knows this. And it's not a bad thing! Trying to teach American history to marketing and accounting undergrads is fascinating and rewarding, and, in my experience, one which has reciprocal rewards. I can better understand the world they are shaping by choosing to become entrepreneurs, IT experts, managers, and so forth - the world I share with them - and they can, hopefully, learn that that world is not coterminous with forecasting spreadsheets, XML code, creative briefs, or business plans.)
1 Comments:
I completely agree with everything you write. But I also take offense. I myself am a History grad student at Central WA University. I am also a liberal. And I have taken several poli sci classes from Manweller. I disagree with him politically, but he is an excellent teacher that is highly respected by his students for his intelligence, objectivity, and dedication to creating independent thinkers.
Post a Comment
<< Home