The rise of anti-intellectualism online
August 16, 2016 9:52 PM Subscribe
I found this site the other day: The Conversation: Academic rigor, journalistic flair. (Readable) articles by academics; I'm still evaluating it, but it seems to have merit.
posted by sebastienbailard at 10:32 PM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by sebastienbailard at 10:32 PM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
They were tampering with his food when he wasn’t looking, playing air siren noises when he went upstairs and threatening to shoot him with finger-gun motions. Eventually, Brian made a video revealing that he had been institutionalised in a psychiatric ward, which he now saw as part of the conspiracy.
That's not anti-intellectualism, that's actual mental illness, isn't it? Maybe the proximate cause was someone mentioning "gang stalking" but it seems awfully unlikely to be the sum total reason he lost touch with reality.
And to turn it around, anti-intellectualism isn't mental illness, either.
posted by BungaDunga at 10:41 PM on August 16, 2016 [14 favorites]
That's not anti-intellectualism, that's actual mental illness, isn't it? Maybe the proximate cause was someone mentioning "gang stalking" but it seems awfully unlikely to be the sum total reason he lost touch with reality.
And to turn it around, anti-intellectualism isn't mental illness, either.
posted by BungaDunga at 10:41 PM on August 16, 2016 [14 favorites]
One of the ways this becomes pernicious is simply a combination of wide ranging ignorance combined with Dunning-Kruger. The vast majority of people don't have any idea what good research looks like, but they're convinced they're able to accurately judge sources of information. Citing sources is basically pissing into the wind in my experience. And to be clear, I'm not just talking about people I disagree with vehemently: I've been running into that a lot with fellow Democrats, this election.
That's how I stopped talking to pretty much anyone on Facebook, and why it's unlikely anyone could pay me enough to *begin* talking on reddit. The way I see it, pushback does help on the front of 'what is socially acceptable,' but using it as the primary tool to combat this is Sisyphean. It absolutely never ends unless people can take it upon themselves to be better informed, and that's something that has to start with better schooling. (How to evaluate sources, how to recognize academic rigor versus emotional appeals and so on.)
Also:
That's not anti-intellectualism, that's actual mental illness, isn't it? Maybe the proximate cause was someone mentioning "gang stalking" but it seems awfully unlikely to be the sum total reason he lost touch with reality.
That's a good point too - I was pretty confused by the opening because it sounded like someone having a genuine disorder, being egged on. That doesn't have much in common with people I talk to who simply don't know things but also cannot be persuaded that they should read something or engage in good faith.
posted by mordax at 10:53 PM on August 16, 2016 [4 favorites]
That's how I stopped talking to pretty much anyone on Facebook, and why it's unlikely anyone could pay me enough to *begin* talking on reddit. The way I see it, pushback does help on the front of 'what is socially acceptable,' but using it as the primary tool to combat this is Sisyphean. It absolutely never ends unless people can take it upon themselves to be better informed, and that's something that has to start with better schooling. (How to evaluate sources, how to recognize academic rigor versus emotional appeals and so on.)
Also:
That's not anti-intellectualism, that's actual mental illness, isn't it? Maybe the proximate cause was someone mentioning "gang stalking" but it seems awfully unlikely to be the sum total reason he lost touch with reality.
That's a good point too - I was pretty confused by the opening because it sounded like someone having a genuine disorder, being egged on. That doesn't have much in common with people I talk to who simply don't know things but also cannot be persuaded that they should read something or engage in good faith.
posted by mordax at 10:53 PM on August 16, 2016 [4 favorites]
It's ironic that the author uses "gang stalking" as an example of a belief that is false, but which has been made effectively irrefutable because of its support from Internet echo chambers. Real stalking (which he does distinguish from "gang stalking" in the comments) is commonly disbelieved, but is enabled and encouraged through very similar echo chambers. In fact, I suspect that most Internet delusions persist specifically because they're propped up by a similar belief, true or not. For instance, would the myths about fluoridation have teeth (sorry) if it were not for things like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment?
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:54 PM on August 16, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:54 PM on August 16, 2016 [4 favorites]
And for that matter, holocaust denial can't be explained by anti-intellectualism alone. You don't need to believe an intellectual that it happened, you can just listen to a holocaust survivor tell you.
The problem the author seems worried about is bigotry, not anti-intellectualism. It strikes me as very strange to combine the two, as if intellectuals have always had the right answers on social issues. You can be bigoted and totally not anti-intellectual. There's quite a well to draw on of bigoted intellectuals (semantic satiation kicking in).
posted by BungaDunga at 11:02 PM on August 16, 2016 [11 favorites]
The problem the author seems worried about is bigotry, not anti-intellectualism. It strikes me as very strange to combine the two, as if intellectuals have always had the right answers on social issues. You can be bigoted and totally not anti-intellectual. There's quite a well to draw on of bigoted intellectuals (semantic satiation kicking in).
posted by BungaDunga at 11:02 PM on August 16, 2016 [11 favorites]
You're right that it's bigotry, not purely anti-intellectualism. The basic problem is that it's a waste of time arguing with people who aren't sincerely looking for the truth in the first place. But maybe you underestimate the intellectual requirement a bit. Yes, you can listen to a Holocaust survivor, but you can also listen to someone tell you how they were anally probed on a flying saucer. I think distinguishing between the two requires some intellectual tools and perhaps some trust in reputable academic sources.
Overall I would say with due caution that it is possible to worry too much about people being wrong on the Internet.
posted by Segundus at 11:49 PM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
Overall I would say with due caution that it is possible to worry too much about people being wrong on the Internet.
posted by Segundus at 11:49 PM on August 16, 2016 [3 favorites]
"If people get drawn into a conspiracy theory or anti-intellectual movement, they may be digging themselves into a hole of self-delusion that they may never climb out of again. Brian’s belief in gang-stalking ruined his life and pulled him into a community where he no longer believed he could trust the people who could help him. If someone had commented “gang-stalking is bullshit and here’s why” on that 2010 Youtube video, maybe Godiscool2010 would have never gone down the road he did."
For someone who has spent so much time thinking about anti-intellectualism, the author seems to have some not-exactly-supported-by-intellectuals ideas about the causes of mental illness.
posted by thetortoise at 11:56 PM on August 16, 2016 [7 favorites]
For someone who has spent so much time thinking about anti-intellectualism, the author seems to have some not-exactly-supported-by-intellectuals ideas about the causes of mental illness.
posted by thetortoise at 11:56 PM on August 16, 2016 [7 favorites]
I think the "don't feed them" argument comes from an acceptance that fully fledged trolls are amateur or professional sociopaths who delight in hurting people's feelings and who will cheerfully ignore any piffle thrown in their path - such as a reasoned argument.
The wiser lesson is to learn to distinguish trolls from those who merely make an opposing argument. The latter group can indeed be reasoned with for the benefit of a wider audience.
posted by rongorongo at 12:03 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
The wiser lesson is to learn to distinguish trolls from those who merely make an opposing argument. The latter group can indeed be reasoned with for the benefit of a wider audience.
posted by rongorongo at 12:03 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
Yeah, I don't think calling this phenomenon anti-intellectualism is really the best way to frame things since "intellectualism" hasn't always had a stellar run either and many of the more committed deniers at least ape intellectually discursive forms, it's just that their words lack a base in truth at some level. Bigotry shares that element with other more unusual types of denial that seems based on an anti-societal viewpoint, where any claims perceived as weakening rogue individualism is seem as a threat to these "groups" consisting mostly of men who's signal interest is belief in their own superiority. All other concerns are secondary to the need to prove their difference from "the herd" with the specific battles for dominance just being the most readily suited to both boosting their egos and damaging the social contract.
posted by gusottertrout at 12:50 AM on August 17, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by gusottertrout at 12:50 AM on August 17, 2016 [3 favorites]
Relevant considering I got into an argument just today with someone who condescendingly informed me that the Nazis were "left-wing socialists," and that I was now identifying with the very movement that wiped out my entire family. I don't think a jury in the land would've convicted me.
posted by 1adam12 at 1:29 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by 1adam12 at 1:29 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
I found this site the other day: The Conversation: Academic rigor, journalistic flair. (Readable) articles by academics; I'm still evaluating it, but it seems to have merit.
Yes and no. yes, its good that ivory tower academics finally get a chance to get their words picked up and published on a variety of sites thus finally and at last propagating their opinions and research findings; but no, not when the over weening cred attributed to academia gets in the way of real life on the ground facts about things due to the gap in understanding PoC, developing world, etc. Sometimes these learned opinions just propagate ignorance, stereotypes and patronization.
posted by infini at 2:29 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yes and no. yes, its good that ivory tower academics finally get a chance to get their words picked up and published on a variety of sites thus finally and at last propagating their opinions and research findings; but no, not when the over weening cred attributed to academia gets in the way of real life on the ground facts about things due to the gap in understanding PoC, developing world, etc. Sometimes these learned opinions just propagate ignorance, stereotypes and patronization.
posted by infini at 2:29 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
Can you list a few articles there that didn't smell right to you? I'm a pretty naive reader on some of this stuff.
posted by sebastienbailard at 3:12 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by sebastienbailard at 3:12 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
Yes and no. yes, its good that ivory tower academics finally get a chance to get their words picked up and published on a variety of sites thus finally and at last propagating their opinions and research findings; but no, not when the over weening cred attributed to academia gets in the way of real life on the ground facts about things due to the gap in understanding PoC, developing world, etc. Sometimes these learned opinions just propagate ignorance, stereotypes and patronization.
So, academics work in an "ivory tower", fail to propagate their opinions and research findings (despite thousands of journal articles published every year, and countless other contributions to public debate), don't have a "real life" or any contact with "the ground", have no understanding of "PoC, developing world, etc." (even though many will be PoC, from the developing world, etc.), and are given "over weening cred" (if only that were true in Britain, we would have been spared the Brexit result).
Sometimes opinions just propagate ignorance, stereotypes and patronization.
The Conversation is a solid site that has provided useful reading since its Australian launch in 2011 (UK in 2013, US in 2014).
posted by rory at 3:19 AM on August 17, 2016 [8 favorites]
So, academics work in an "ivory tower", fail to propagate their opinions and research findings (despite thousands of journal articles published every year, and countless other contributions to public debate), don't have a "real life" or any contact with "the ground", have no understanding of "PoC, developing world, etc." (even though many will be PoC, from the developing world, etc.), and are given "over weening cred" (if only that were true in Britain, we would have been spared the Brexit result).
Sometimes opinions just propagate ignorance, stereotypes and patronization.
The Conversation is a solid site that has provided useful reading since its Australian launch in 2011 (UK in 2013, US in 2014).
posted by rory at 3:19 AM on August 17, 2016 [8 favorites]
The problem the author seems worried about is bigotry, not anti-intellectualism.
You're getting way too hung up on the example he's using and not the point he's using it to illustrate. Holocaust denial was started by bigots, for certain, but it is now believed by other people as well: the same kinds of people who believe that the Earth is actually flat, or who think that the government is in communication with extraterrestrial life and just won't tell us, or who think there's actually one world government orchestrating all wars and political events all over the world, or who believe in gang stalking. There's a couple of different things going on in each of these "movements" (for lack of a better word), but the one thing that unites all of them is the idea that anyone who might be considered an "intellectual" is definitely part of a conspiracy and as such is completely untrustworthy. I know some people like this (unfortunately, a branch of my family is... let's say "not intellectually rigorous") and they have what seems to me to be a powerful hatred and fear of people whose job it is to know things, to the point that if such a person says a thing they will assume it to be false even if they would accept it without argument were it said by you or me (well, not me, because I'm apparently in on the conspiracy now, but you know what I mean).
There's this idea that "the official story", whatever it is, cannot possibly be true and absolutely must have been put in place by some shadowy conspiracy and thus it absolutely must be harmful. It's not just triggered by things that disagree with their prejudices; they have no problem suddenly developing a stance on an issue that they had no feelings about before if it will allow them to be in opposition.
posted by IAmUnaware at 3:24 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
You're getting way too hung up on the example he's using and not the point he's using it to illustrate. Holocaust denial was started by bigots, for certain, but it is now believed by other people as well: the same kinds of people who believe that the Earth is actually flat, or who think that the government is in communication with extraterrestrial life and just won't tell us, or who think there's actually one world government orchestrating all wars and political events all over the world, or who believe in gang stalking. There's a couple of different things going on in each of these "movements" (for lack of a better word), but the one thing that unites all of them is the idea that anyone who might be considered an "intellectual" is definitely part of a conspiracy and as such is completely untrustworthy. I know some people like this (unfortunately, a branch of my family is... let's say "not intellectually rigorous") and they have what seems to me to be a powerful hatred and fear of people whose job it is to know things, to the point that if such a person says a thing they will assume it to be false even if they would accept it without argument were it said by you or me (well, not me, because I'm apparently in on the conspiracy now, but you know what I mean).
There's this idea that "the official story", whatever it is, cannot possibly be true and absolutely must have been put in place by some shadowy conspiracy and thus it absolutely must be harmful. It's not just triggered by things that disagree with their prejudices; they have no problem suddenly developing a stance on an issue that they had no feelings about before if it will allow them to be in opposition.
posted by IAmUnaware at 3:24 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
rory, if you can point to such wonderful instances from teh conversation for the African continent, I would be pleased to deconstruct them for you, with links.
posted by infini at 4:03 AM on August 17, 2016
posted by infini at 4:03 AM on August 17, 2016
The way I see it, pushback does help on the front of 'what is socially acceptable,' but using it as the primary tool to combat this is Sisyphean. It absolutely never ends unless people can take it upon themselves to be better informed, and that's something that has to start with better schooling. (How to evaluate sources, how to recognize academic rigor versus emotional appeals and so on.)
Sometimes, an effort can have a positive effect that's delayed, or not easily observable. Then it feels Sisyphean, but it's often very important and effective. I've been thinking that what many people miss by not going to a church every Sunday is the feeling that, in promoting love, tolerance, and empathy for others, they are not a lone voice in a wilderness of awfulness; that, in fact, there are many many other people who also believe that these qualities are essential and important, who also sometimes set aside their own needs to help others. That these selfless words and deeds are not lost, but have a great effect because they are part of an enormous grassroots effort of individuals helping each other and showing each other tiny bits of reason informed by empathy.
posted by amtho at 4:07 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
Sometimes, an effort can have a positive effect that's delayed, or not easily observable. Then it feels Sisyphean, but it's often very important and effective. I've been thinking that what many people miss by not going to a church every Sunday is the feeling that, in promoting love, tolerance, and empathy for others, they are not a lone voice in a wilderness of awfulness; that, in fact, there are many many other people who also believe that these qualities are essential and important, who also sometimes set aside their own needs to help others. That these selfless words and deeds are not lost, but have a great effect because they are part of an enormous grassroots effort of individuals helping each other and showing each other tiny bits of reason informed by empathy.
posted by amtho at 4:07 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
rory, if you can point to such wonderful instances from the conversation for the African continent, I would be pleased to deconstruct them for you, with links.
Read to your heart's content. You might want to start a new thread.
posted by rory at 4:29 AM on August 17, 2016
Read to your heart's content. You might want to start a new thread.
posted by rory at 4:29 AM on August 17, 2016
Note the authors of the "Analysis and Comment" pieces featured on that page at the moment:
Abdullahi Abubakar, City University London
Oyebola Oyesola, Cornell University
Clement Mensah, University of the Western Cape
Stephen Kofi Diko, University of Cincinnati
Penelope Andrews, University of Cape Town
Ahmed Essop, University of Johannesburg
Rudi de Lange, Tshwane University of Technology
Sam Allen, Loughborough University
André Guichaoua, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne
Oyewale Tomori, Nigerian Academy of Science
Alinah Kelo Segobye, University of South Africa
Michele Stears, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Angela James, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Edith Roslyn Dempster, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Pierre Clément, Université Aix-Marseille
Quite a few PoC and representatives of developing countries.
posted by rory at 4:34 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
Abdullahi Abubakar, City University London
Oyebola Oyesola, Cornell University
Clement Mensah, University of the Western Cape
Stephen Kofi Diko, University of Cincinnati
Penelope Andrews, University of Cape Town
Ahmed Essop, University of Johannesburg
Rudi de Lange, Tshwane University of Technology
Sam Allen, Loughborough University
André Guichaoua, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne
Oyewale Tomori, Nigerian Academy of Science
Alinah Kelo Segobye, University of South Africa
Michele Stears, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Angela James, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Edith Roslyn Dempster, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Pierre Clément, Université Aix-Marseille
Quite a few PoC and representatives of developing countries.
posted by rory at 4:34 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
I admit that I had a problem with this bit at the beginning:
Instead, these comments fostered a dangerous, paranoid idea that made Brian believe he was suffering from organised harassment or “gang-stalking”. This was, of course, a conspiracy. Gang-stalking does not exist. Conspiracy theory blog “Gang Stalking World” defines it as “a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individual’s life. Once a target is flagged, a notification is sent out to the community at large, and the target is followed around 24/7”.
Emphasis mine.
I'll grant that "they're getting into my food" and "the mental institution I'm in are part of it all" are far-fetched, but - the part I'm bolded sounds an awful lot like 8-Chan and Gamergate, no? I doubt Anita Sarkeesian would say that the Gamergaters "don't exist".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:42 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
Instead, these comments fostered a dangerous, paranoid idea that made Brian believe he was suffering from organised harassment or “gang-stalking”. This was, of course, a conspiracy. Gang-stalking does not exist. Conspiracy theory blog “Gang Stalking World” defines it as “a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individual’s life. Once a target is flagged, a notification is sent out to the community at large, and the target is followed around 24/7”.
Emphasis mine.
I'll grant that "they're getting into my food" and "the mental institution I'm in are part of it all" are far-fetched, but - the part I'm bolded sounds an awful lot like 8-Chan and Gamergate, no? I doubt Anita Sarkeesian would say that the Gamergaters "don't exist".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:42 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
Quite a few PoC and representatives of developing countries.
you are absolutely right. I was wrong in my framing due to my clumsy navigation of politically correct language and concepts which I'm not as familiar with, being outside of mainstream white culture.
To reframe my complaint - damn but I hate academics pontificating away on the informal economy of Africa based only on ignorant models from theoretical development economics and patronizing conditioning (regardless of their colour or ethnicity) to think that everything indigenous in the developing world is "bad" and everything "good" comes from down high of the university systems of their former colonial masters. The Conversation is a particular example of this propagation of ideology served up with the credentials of the gatekeepers.
Ever wondered why the prestigious Oxford conference on Africa is in Oxford? Keeps out the riff raff from Africa.
A dearth of economists from Africa?
No, surely, these manels aren't enough, where are the Africans in these prestigious academic research journals?
All of them are so terrible that they cannot make the cut?
It is enticing to descend into defensiveness or dismissiveness in the face of this kind of critique. A typical play is to interrogate the social position (e.g. race, class, gender, nationality) of the author followed by a personal attack. But that sort of deflection is an unproductive foray into liberal politics which atomizes individuals and elides the structural analysis I believe the author was seeking.
posted by infini at 5:09 AM on August 17, 2016 [3 favorites]
you are absolutely right. I was wrong in my framing due to my clumsy navigation of politically correct language and concepts which I'm not as familiar with, being outside of mainstream white culture.
To reframe my complaint - damn but I hate academics pontificating away on the informal economy of Africa based only on ignorant models from theoretical development economics and patronizing conditioning (regardless of their colour or ethnicity) to think that everything indigenous in the developing world is "bad" and everything "good" comes from down high of the university systems of their former colonial masters. The Conversation is a particular example of this propagation of ideology served up with the credentials of the gatekeepers.
Ever wondered why the prestigious Oxford conference on Africa is in Oxford? Keeps out the riff raff from Africa.
A dearth of economists from Africa?
No, surely, these manels aren't enough, where are the Africans in these prestigious academic research journals?
All of them are so terrible that they cannot make the cut?
It is enticing to descend into defensiveness or dismissiveness in the face of this kind of critique. A typical play is to interrogate the social position (e.g. race, class, gender, nationality) of the author followed by a personal attack. But that sort of deflection is an unproductive foray into liberal politics which atomizes individuals and elides the structural analysis I believe the author was seeking.
posted by infini at 5:09 AM on August 17, 2016 [3 favorites]
does this mean I finally get to write the pop article that explains why Hardin's "Tragedy of the Commons" is all correct re the ocean and the sky, but totally wrong on historic common pasturage and other communally managed resources?
actually, it's probably already been done.
posted by jb at 5:12 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
actually, it's probably already been done.
posted by jb at 5:12 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
And how many on this list are *not* from South African universities, which considers itself a part of Europe and the US? And how many are PoC?
Clement Mensah, University of the Western Cape
Penelope Andrews, University of Cape Town
Ahmed Essop, University of Johannesburg
Rudi de Lange, Tshwane University of Technology
Oyewale Tomori, Nigerian Academy of Science
Alinah Kelo Segobye, University of South Africa
Michele Stears, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Angela James, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Edith Roslyn Dempster, University of KwaZulu-Natal
posted by infini at 5:14 AM on August 17, 2016
Clement Mensah, University of the Western Cape
Penelope Andrews, University of Cape Town
Ahmed Essop, University of Johannesburg
Rudi de Lange, Tshwane University of Technology
Oyewale Tomori, Nigerian Academy of Science
Alinah Kelo Segobye, University of South Africa
Michele Stears, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Angela James, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Edith Roslyn Dempster, University of KwaZulu-Natal
posted by infini at 5:14 AM on August 17, 2016
The vast majority of people don't have any idea what good research looks like
I think this is partly driven by the popular perceptions of what academic research looks like. Many know of nonsensical or impenetrable postmodern writing and think thats what most academics do. but few know what good empirical research looks like (hint: its done in very clear writing and is very easy to read). Fortunately many social science academics are now presenting their work in even more accessible formats (like the monkey cage at Wapo). But if everytime a student was assigned to read Derrida they were instead assigned a good example of empirical, well-designed research, we would be in a much better place.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:42 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
I think this is partly driven by the popular perceptions of what academic research looks like. Many know of nonsensical or impenetrable postmodern writing and think thats what most academics do. but few know what good empirical research looks like (hint: its done in very clear writing and is very easy to read). Fortunately many social science academics are now presenting their work in even more accessible formats (like the monkey cage at Wapo). But if everytime a student was assigned to read Derrida they were instead assigned a good example of empirical, well-designed research, we would be in a much better place.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 5:42 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm wary of the argument that university cultures or research cultures are so inherently flawed and colonialist that all academic work is inherently suspect. (I might be misunderstanding your argument, infini, but it seems to be broadly stated enough to mean this.) There's very valuable work to be done in critiquing specific academic projects/models/disciplines as inadequate, on particular grounds, eg because of empirical gaps ("ignorant") or normative mistakes (eg assuming everything indigenous is bad). But there's something dangerous in the slide from these particular critiques of particular projects to the general claim that it's all like that and none of it is worth taking seriously for that reason. If that's true, it implies that there is truly no such thing as expertise, and the whole idea of academic research, in every field, is just a disguise for power and self-interest. If that's true, and academic methodologies and academic credentialing systems are not just inadequate but always and inevitably meaningless - well, then, on what basis are we going to argue that there is such a thing as truth in some field and that we have a method for accessing it? If, for example, historians possess no reliable systems for assessing the validity of historical claims - if their supposed systems are just a disguise for their self-interest - then the Holocaust deniers are ultimately right on some deep level. Whether or not the Holocaust happened becomes a question inaccessible to reason; the only question left is who has the power and whether we want them to keep it. It just becomes a contest about power and access to power, which is exactly what the Neo-Nazis want it to be. I'm not willing to accept that argument in any form, whether the underlying intellectual system is Marxist or postcolonialist or fascist or whatever. Our expertise is incomplete, and our methods are flawed, but the only way to improve them is to actually do the detailed work of finding the data and refining the methodologies, not by throwing out the whole system.
posted by Aravis76 at 5:46 AM on August 17, 2016 [9 favorites]
posted by Aravis76 at 5:46 AM on August 17, 2016 [9 favorites]
The Conversation is a particular example of this propagation of ideology served up with the credentials of the gatekeepers.
infini, (without having read them all yet) I'm sure your links make some important points, but I'm not seeing any links to The Conversation's own articles among them, so it's hard to tell what your evidence is for this specific charge about that specific site. Yes, South Africa is over-represented in that front-page sample, but without going through the 1339 Africa-related results revealed by their "more articles" link it's hard to say how over-represented it is on the site overall. You also ask "how many are PoC?", but then give a shortened list omitting people like Oyebola Oyesola - do PoC at Western universities not count?
I'm sure you have good cause for feeling that Africa has been relatively under-served by academia (some of my own work in the past decade has touched on African development issues and it's an impression I get too). My objection to your initial comment - which didn't mention Africa as such - was that it contained the same sort of stereotyping of academia that fuels the anti-intellectualism being discussed in the main link of this thread.
posted by rory at 5:54 AM on August 17, 2016 [8 favorites]
infini, (without having read them all yet) I'm sure your links make some important points, but I'm not seeing any links to The Conversation's own articles among them, so it's hard to tell what your evidence is for this specific charge about that specific site. Yes, South Africa is over-represented in that front-page sample, but without going through the 1339 Africa-related results revealed by their "more articles" link it's hard to say how over-represented it is on the site overall. You also ask "how many are PoC?", but then give a shortened list omitting people like Oyebola Oyesola - do PoC at Western universities not count?
I'm sure you have good cause for feeling that Africa has been relatively under-served by academia (some of my own work in the past decade has touched on African development issues and it's an impression I get too). My objection to your initial comment - which didn't mention Africa as such - was that it contained the same sort of stereotyping of academia that fuels the anti-intellectualism being discussed in the main link of this thread.
posted by rory at 5:54 AM on August 17, 2016 [8 favorites]
Aravis76, you point out the flaw in my emotionally laden diatribe. Perhaps a better question would be "What would be the findings from looking at academia (as you've framed it so well in your comment) from the lens of institutionalized racism?"
posted by infini at 5:59 AM on August 17, 2016
posted by infini at 5:59 AM on August 17, 2016
That's a good question. I'm aware of some good work on the question in my own field, as it pertains to research; I've come across some good attempts to think about it in relation to teaching as well. But the people doing the work tend to be academics themselves, formally credentialed within the existing system and using a methodology developed in dialogue with the existing scholarly tradition. There's a real difference between what they're doing and the generalised distrust of academia and the idea of academic expertise found all over the internet.
posted by Aravis76 at 6:09 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Aravis76 at 6:09 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
I spent an hour patiently discussing the holocaust with a student. This kid, a high schooler and latino, was convinced that Hitler was just trying to help us, it only affected Jews who needed to be dealt with, and everyone else ganged up on Germany. This kid was also very comfortable believing in a long list of other conspiracy theories around New World Order type ideas that I won't detail to save you all your sanity.
The problem I kept coming around to in our discussion was that this kid found conspiracy theories to be really compelling because they were always told with a storytelling flair and helped confirm his teenage bias that "adults never tell the truth anyhow." It was mostly the former, though, because the truth can be kind of boring, and it seems wrong to breathlessly talk about the genocide of millions of people. As the author points out, going around places like reddit to campaign for the truth is a pretty thankless and often unwinnable task, as well.
posted by lownote at 6:14 AM on August 17, 2016 [5 favorites]
The problem I kept coming around to in our discussion was that this kid found conspiracy theories to be really compelling because they were always told with a storytelling flair and helped confirm his teenage bias that "adults never tell the truth anyhow." It was mostly the former, though, because the truth can be kind of boring, and it seems wrong to breathlessly talk about the genocide of millions of people. As the author points out, going around places like reddit to campaign for the truth is a pretty thankless and often unwinnable task, as well.
posted by lownote at 6:14 AM on August 17, 2016 [5 favorites]
rory, when I slow down long enough to think over what my beef with the Conversation is, I find that it is that the opinions written there are picked up and propagated as being far more credible than the findings and discoveries that people not part of the conversation are actually talking about, presenting, making, discovering. That is, its become yet another way to impose a closed circuit discourse onto the general content field online.
Here is the press release of its launch in "Africa". Perhaps due to the time taken for them to spread their wings outside of SA, it has touched upon the nerve that SA tends to overpower discourse on "Africa", and that too with their own particular ... shall we say... slant.
And sugar-coat them they did. It is telling that in a Wednesday morning presentation at the University of Johannesburg, De Kock did not once mention the word xenophobia. Xenophobic violence is without doubt the most significant recent influence on South Africa's reputation, and most definitely has made it worse.
As a South African travelling in Africa, I have been challenged on South Africa's perceived hatred of foreigners wherever I go on the continent. Perhaps it was too much to expect a government-sponsored institution to engage critically with the issue, however.
Commenting on the research, University of Johannesburg Chair of African Diplomacy and Foreign Policy Chris Landsberg said negative perceptions of South Africa should be understood in a historical perspective. "We had a crude, hard, bullying, aggressive reputation pre-1994 that was very well earned. If you bear that in mind, to see how far we've come... even when we have in some quarters a lingering reputation about bullying behaviour, the one thing that's not out there is that this is a country that seeks to behave like its apartheid predecessor. We've put that reputation to bed," he said.
posted by infini at 6:16 AM on August 17, 2016
Here is the press release of its launch in "Africa". Perhaps due to the time taken for them to spread their wings outside of SA, it has touched upon the nerve that SA tends to overpower discourse on "Africa", and that too with their own particular ... shall we say... slant.
And sugar-coat them they did. It is telling that in a Wednesday morning presentation at the University of Johannesburg, De Kock did not once mention the word xenophobia. Xenophobic violence is without doubt the most significant recent influence on South Africa's reputation, and most definitely has made it worse.
As a South African travelling in Africa, I have been challenged on South Africa's perceived hatred of foreigners wherever I go on the continent. Perhaps it was too much to expect a government-sponsored institution to engage critically with the issue, however.
Commenting on the research, University of Johannesburg Chair of African Diplomacy and Foreign Policy Chris Landsberg said negative perceptions of South Africa should be understood in a historical perspective. "We had a crude, hard, bullying, aggressive reputation pre-1994 that was very well earned. If you bear that in mind, to see how far we've come... even when we have in some quarters a lingering reputation about bullying behaviour, the one thing that's not out there is that this is a country that seeks to behave like its apartheid predecessor. We've put that reputation to bed," he said.
posted by infini at 6:16 AM on August 17, 2016
Mod note: Comment deleted. Please just address the topic or points of someone's comment rather than making personal and/or insulting sideswipes.
posted by taz (staff) at 6:22 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by taz (staff) at 6:22 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
away on the informal economy of Africa based only on ignorant models from theoretical development economics and patronizing conditioning (regardless of their colour or ethnicity) to think that everything indigenous in the developing world is "bad" and everything "good" comes from down high of the university systems of their former colonial masters
Care to point to specific examples? Take the literature on foreign aid to Africa, for example. If what you say is correct (that Western Europe & the US==good, Africa==bad), then we should expect that the literature on foreign aid says as much. But it doesn't--much of the empirical work concludes that Aid isn't that useful. Maybe that's because there's nothing inherently anti-African about finding correlations between aid flows and growth.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:28 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
Care to point to specific examples? Take the literature on foreign aid to Africa, for example. If what you say is correct (that Western Europe & the US==good, Africa==bad), then we should expect that the literature on foreign aid says as much. But it doesn't--much of the empirical work concludes that Aid isn't that useful. Maybe that's because there's nothing inherently anti-African about finding correlations between aid flows and growth.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:28 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
First of all, there's been a huge shift away from "Aid to Trade", so your example of foreign aid's efficacy is irrelevant to the point from my comment you've highlighted re: ignorant models on informal sector. Secondly, there's an ongoing shift away from 'best practice' to 'best fit' thus models based on historical premises (such as the efficacy of aid) are inherently themselves becoming obsoleted. You are conflating my issues with misconceptions of informal economy/formal economy vs aid money flows from donors. These are not the same thing.
Clarify your key question on the current thinking on the political economy of development in Africa, and I will attempt a coherent answer.
posted by infini at 6:35 AM on August 17, 2016
Clarify your key question on the current thinking on the political economy of development in Africa, and I will attempt a coherent answer.
posted by infini at 6:35 AM on August 17, 2016
That's not anti-intellectualism, that's actual mental illness, isn't it? Maybe the proximate cause was someone mentioning "gang stalking" but it seems awfully unlikely to be the sum total reason he lost touch with reality.
One may view the activity of browsing the web as a kind of psychological traversal. Different kinds of people engaged in diverse activities give rise to an enumeration of psychological states. This is something like the meme'ing of human psychology: discourse that clarifies and refines certain modes of thought.
Anti-intellectualism on the internet is an unprecedented self preservation of belief/values. Unprecedented in the sense of how fine grained and exhaustive the modes of anti-intellectualism have become. It's a dynamic system for sure, that depends heavily on new technology.
posted by kuatto at 6:50 AM on August 17, 2016
One may view the activity of browsing the web as a kind of psychological traversal. Different kinds of people engaged in diverse activities give rise to an enumeration of psychological states. This is something like the meme'ing of human psychology: discourse that clarifies and refines certain modes of thought.
Anti-intellectualism on the internet is an unprecedented self preservation of belief/values. Unprecedented in the sense of how fine grained and exhaustive the modes of anti-intellectualism have become. It's a dynamic system for sure, that depends heavily on new technology.
posted by kuatto at 6:50 AM on August 17, 2016
Foreign aid is far from a obsolete topic of current research. See here:
US Food Aid and Civil Conflict - American Economic Review, 2014
Foreign Aid Allocation Tactics and Democratic Change in Africa - Journal of Politics 2014
Doing Harm by Doing Good? The Negative Externalities of Humanitarian Aid Provision during Civil Conflict - Journal of Politics 2015
Multilateral Aid and Domestic Economic Interests- International Organization 2015
Moreover, I have no idea what this means:"models based on historical premises (such as the efficacy of aid) are inherently themselves becoming obsoleted"
What economic model is based on the efficacy of aid? Nearly all the formal models in the economic and political science literature try and model the determinants of aid based as a strategic interaction between the donor and recipient cf. Bueno de mesuita & Smith or Simone dietrich's latest paper in IO. Other's try and model how aid is disbursed based on the strategic incentives of leaders.
Again, care to point to specific examples?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:51 AM on August 17, 2016
US Food Aid and Civil Conflict - American Economic Review, 2014
Foreign Aid Allocation Tactics and Democratic Change in Africa - Journal of Politics 2014
Doing Harm by Doing Good? The Negative Externalities of Humanitarian Aid Provision during Civil Conflict - Journal of Politics 2015
Multilateral Aid and Domestic Economic Interests- International Organization 2015
Moreover, I have no idea what this means:"models based on historical premises (such as the efficacy of aid) are inherently themselves becoming obsoleted"
What economic model is based on the efficacy of aid? Nearly all the formal models in the economic and political science literature try and model the determinants of aid based as a strategic interaction between the donor and recipient cf. Bueno de mesuita & Smith or Simone dietrich's latest paper in IO. Other's try and model how aid is disbursed based on the strategic incentives of leaders.
Again, care to point to specific examples?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 6:51 AM on August 17, 2016
Informal sector / informal economy note that much of this definition is part of the objection I am making
formal sector/formal economy - what is the difference? again, my caveat on definitions applies
Moreover, I have no idea what this means:"models based on historical premises (such as the efficacy of aid) are inherently themselves becoming obsoleted"
formal model != formal economy
See here:
I am not seeing any links or authors so as to discover and provide you with specific examples in rebuttals.
We seem to be talking at cross purposes. If you care to continue this argument, reframe it in a couple of sentences without getting bogged down in the detail of my issues with the criminalization of the informal sector of the economies in SSA and then I'll try to respond.
posted by infini at 6:59 AM on August 17, 2016
formal sector/formal economy - what is the difference? again, my caveat on definitions applies
Moreover, I have no idea what this means:"models based on historical premises (such as the efficacy of aid) are inherently themselves becoming obsoleted"
formal model != formal economy
See here:
I am not seeing any links or authors so as to discover and provide you with specific examples in rebuttals.
We seem to be talking at cross purposes. If you care to continue this argument, reframe it in a couple of sentences without getting bogged down in the detail of my issues with the criminalization of the informal sector of the economies in SSA and then I'll try to respond.
posted by infini at 6:59 AM on August 17, 2016
infini, I can see the source of your objection to The Conversation Africa more clearly now, but given that they've only been running out of Jo'burg for 15 months the implication that they're dragging their heels in setting up their Kenya and Ghana offices seems a bit harsh. How about judging them against the 2-to-4-year timeframe mentioned in their press release? Also, The Conversation is more than just The Conversation Africa.
the findings and discoveries that people not part of the conversation are actually talking about, presenting, making, discovering
This points to a more fundamental problem with academic coverage of developing countries, which The Conversation Africa presumably suffers from, but which is bigger than them. To take an extreme example: we have a new country in the form of South Sudan, which presumably would benefit enormously from a greater focus on its social, political, economic and environmental challenges. It's in the throes of a civil war, and its capacity for developing its own academic expertise is therefore limited. At the same time, the capacity of academics from other countries to undertake research there is also limited. Just this week we've seen Western aid workers targeted and attacked in its capital, and Western academics are human beings just as interested in their own self-preservation as anyone.
Even in countries that don't present such extremes, though, the logistical challenges of undertaking research in many developing countries are often greater than they are elsewhere. For academics in the US or Europe, African countries are far more expensive to travel to than those nearby; they're harder to travel around once you're there; it can often take longer to get the work done, for bureaucratic or other reasons; there will be health challenges, such as having none of the immunity that locals might have to particular diseases; there will be language barriers in many places; and (depending on the subject of their research) researchers from other countries might be viewed with suspicion just because they're from another country. The grant funds that could help overcome such barriers would depend very much on which areas their own country's funding system prioritizes. These are not things that individual academics can easily control.
posted by rory at 7:01 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
the findings and discoveries that people not part of the conversation are actually talking about, presenting, making, discovering
This points to a more fundamental problem with academic coverage of developing countries, which The Conversation Africa presumably suffers from, but which is bigger than them. To take an extreme example: we have a new country in the form of South Sudan, which presumably would benefit enormously from a greater focus on its social, political, economic and environmental challenges. It's in the throes of a civil war, and its capacity for developing its own academic expertise is therefore limited. At the same time, the capacity of academics from other countries to undertake research there is also limited. Just this week we've seen Western aid workers targeted and attacked in its capital, and Western academics are human beings just as interested in their own self-preservation as anyone.
Even in countries that don't present such extremes, though, the logistical challenges of undertaking research in many developing countries are often greater than they are elsewhere. For academics in the US or Europe, African countries are far more expensive to travel to than those nearby; they're harder to travel around once you're there; it can often take longer to get the work done, for bureaucratic or other reasons; there will be health challenges, such as having none of the immunity that locals might have to particular diseases; there will be language barriers in many places; and (depending on the subject of their research) researchers from other countries might be viewed with suspicion just because they're from another country. The grant funds that could help overcome such barriers would depend very much on which areas their own country's funding system prioritizes. These are not things that individual academics can easily control.
posted by rory at 7:01 AM on August 17, 2016 [4 favorites]
I posted the journal, title of the paper, and the year, surely that's enough.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:04 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:04 AM on August 17, 2016 [2 favorites]
Even in countries that don't present such extremes, though, the logistical challenges of undertaking research in many developing countries are often greater than they are elsewhere. For academics in the US or Europe, African countries are far more expensive to travel to than those nearby; they're harder to travel around once you're there; it can often take longer to get the work done, for bureaucratic or other reasons; there will be health challenges, such as having none of the immunity that locals might have to particular diseases; there will be language barriers in many places; and (depending on the subject of their research) researchers from other countries might be viewed with suspicion just because they're from another country. The grant funds that could help overcome such barriers would depend very much on which areas their own country's funding system prioritizes. These are not things that individual academics can easily control.
And perhaps all I've been saying is that I hear from numerous African researchers and writers daily on social media whose work goes unnoticed and unheard. They don't hesitate to voice their misgivings that one must be a foreign researcher to be credible.
posted by infini at 7:12 AM on August 17, 2016 [3 favorites]
And perhaps all I've been saying is that I hear from numerous African researchers and writers daily on social media whose work goes unnoticed and unheard. They don't hesitate to voice their misgivings that one must be a foreign researcher to be credible.
posted by infini at 7:12 AM on August 17, 2016 [3 favorites]
I doubt Anita Sarkeesian would say that the Gamergaters "don't exist".
The point seems to be the belief is itself of a form known to be invalid, a "conspiracy theory"--you know, crazy beliefs that are unhealthy to hold by their very nature, beliefs you'd have to be paranoid to have even if, in some sense, they are true. For example, suppose you believed there were a secret movement of radical antisemites determined to gain political power and slaughter and imprison members of an ethnic minority. As a powerless member of an ethnic minority, clearly you could only believe such a thing were even remotely possible or realistic as a psychological coping mechanism for your sense of powerlessness in society. Even if you happened to be right, the real point of your belief could only be to feel more powerful than you actually are. Therefore, the belief is paranoid whether or not it coincidentally happens to be isomorphic to the truth, because clearly, no minority actually has access to the information required to believe as they do for sufficient cause to become convinced.
It's anti-intellectual for not humbly and passively accepting the limits of human knowledge.
/hamburger, because, yeah, I don't see the connection to anti-intellectualism either and know for a fact that abusive mobs of people form and persist online pretty routinely
posted by saulgoodman at 11:45 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
The point seems to be the belief is itself of a form known to be invalid, a "conspiracy theory"--you know, crazy beliefs that are unhealthy to hold by their very nature, beliefs you'd have to be paranoid to have even if, in some sense, they are true. For example, suppose you believed there were a secret movement of radical antisemites determined to gain political power and slaughter and imprison members of an ethnic minority. As a powerless member of an ethnic minority, clearly you could only believe such a thing were even remotely possible or realistic as a psychological coping mechanism for your sense of powerlessness in society. Even if you happened to be right, the real point of your belief could only be to feel more powerful than you actually are. Therefore, the belief is paranoid whether or not it coincidentally happens to be isomorphic to the truth, because clearly, no minority actually has access to the information required to believe as they do for sufficient cause to become convinced.
It's anti-intellectual for not humbly and passively accepting the limits of human knowledge.
/hamburger, because, yeah, I don't see the connection to anti-intellectualism either and know for a fact that abusive mobs of people form and persist online pretty routinely
posted by saulgoodman at 11:45 AM on August 17, 2016 [1 favorite]
And perhaps all I've been saying is that I hear from numerous African researchers and writers daily on social media whose work goes unnoticed and unheard. They don't hesitate to voice their misgivings that one must be a foreign researcher to be credible.
That's definitely a concern, especially the second aspect. On the first, about African researchers going unnoticed and unheard, the problem could be magnified by Western academic research on Africa being lower than it might otherwise be because of the sort of challenges I mentioned - a smaller international community in a particular field will find it harder to get attention.
posted by rory at 2:55 AM on August 18, 2016
That's definitely a concern, especially the second aspect. On the first, about African researchers going unnoticed and unheard, the problem could be magnified by Western academic research on Africa being lower than it might otherwise be because of the sort of challenges I mentioned - a smaller international community in a particular field will find it harder to get attention.
posted by rory at 2:55 AM on August 18, 2016
« Older Fik-Shun at World of Dance | Hot f***ing Wheels Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
That said, I'm not sure it works quite as well as the author asserts, or that someone like that YouTuber would even listen to a dissenting comment. And if anything, Reddit just seems more polarized. For all the pushback I've noticed, it's not like the open bigotry has gone away.
posted by teponaztli at 10:19 PM on August 16, 2016 [8 favorites]