Culture wars cover up economic realities on campus – The Hill

Culture is often the reason given for campus conflicts over issues such as free speech. Butthey arent really cultural issues; theyre economic ones.

As the bad economic news keeps rolling in for U.S. colleges and universities (fromthe Big Quitandinflationary pressuresto thedemographic cliff), its important to keep in mind that economic realities, not cultural ones, largely underpin volatile campus political dynamics.

Take, for instance, the matter of free speech and academic freedom on campus, a political issue often chalked up to cancel culture. I dont mean to be evasive here. Sure, I know what people are talking about when they reference cancel culture and have experienced some of it first-hand. Its just as ugly as critics claim, if not worse. But the root of the problem is economic, not cultural.

The vast majority of university faculty in the U.S. are contingent faculty, meaning they are full-time and part-time workerswithouttenure. Over the past 40 years, the proportion of academics holding full-time tenured positions has declined 26 percent. The proportion holding full-time tenure-track positions (i.e. eligible for tenure) has declined 50 percent.

Today, close to75 percent of facultyare contingent faculty. Tenure for faculty is similar to lifetime appointments to the bench for judges. Its a mechanism for ensuring that we can build knowledge and seek truth independently, that we can teach, research and make public commentaries without external political interference.The Government Accountability Officeestimatesthat part-time contingent faculty make, on average, 75 percent less than full-time tenured and tenure track faculty. Full-time contingent faculty make, on average, 45 percent less than their full-time tenured and tenure-track colleagues.

In 2015,taxpayers paidalmost half a billion dollars in support of public assistance for families of part-time faculty. This is the so-called Walmart model, in whichtaxpayers subsidize low wagespaid by employers, permitting exploitative labor relationships to continue over time. The impact of this labor hierarchy and the economic insecurity it creates on the capacity of faculty to take risks, including risks regarding political speech, is difficult to overstate.

Contingent faculty generally understand very well that, if they are perceived as stepping out of line in any way, there is a high likelihood of not being rehired. It is pretty rare that faculty who engage in wrongspeak are fired flat out like somehigh-profile professorshave been. It is much more common for contingent faculty to just not be rehired for the next semester or the next year. Contracts wont be renewed. Courses will be given to someone else to teach. And even if the reason was politically motivated, theres little leverage for faculty in such situations. Its hard to prove that you werent rehired because of your social media posts as opposed to low enrollments. And lawyers are expensive.

And its not like there are many other jobs out there waiting for you if you lose the one you have. The academic job market has beentight and highly competitivefor a long time. Faculty jobs, even the contingent kind, are hard to find these days, especially if your expertise is in the humanities or social sciences.

Further, academics are a tight-knit, competitive and ego-rich group with a strong proclivity for gossip, meaning that bad news about you may travel well beyond your own campus, poisoning your ability to get work elsewhere. So, every time you decide to take a risk at work, for example by standing up for your own beliefs or for a colleague, you face the knowledge that this may be your last academic job. Full stop. Its a powerful deterrent and a super effective mechanism for worker discipline.

It is all the more so because most of us love our work, love working with our students and dont want to give it up (and also becausemany faculty are themselves student debtors). So, if faculty generally seem too silent on critical issues like this one, its not because we dont care. Its not because we all creepily agree with one another like the Borg from Star Trek. Its because were afraid that we wont be able to work, earn an income, feed our families or provide them with health insurance. Political freedom requires economic security.

Sasha BregerBushis an associate professor at the University of Colorado Denver and the author ofDerivatives and Development: A Political Economy of Global Finance, Farming, and PovertyandGlobal Politics: A Toolkit for Learners.For more of Sashas research and writing, visit herSubstackandwebsite.

See the rest here:
Culture wars cover up economic realities on campus - The Hill

Related Posts

Comments are closed.