Why Academia is Rife with Politics

Academia, often seen as a haven of intellectual discussion and critical thinking, is not without its own set of political dynamics. In stark contrast to the fast-paced and competitive nature of the corporate world, where market pressures force pragmatism and innovation, the academic environment often becomes a breeding ground for personal vendettas and petty disputes. This article explores why academia often fosters a more political atmosphere and the underlying reasons behind these dynamics.

Corporate vs. Academic Environments: A Contrast

When comparing academic institutions to corporations, it becomes clear why the former can be more politically charged. In the corporate world, companies face direct competition from market rivals. This competitive environment necessitates a pragmatic approach, where companies often adapt to market demands, even if it means bending traditional norms.

Consider an Italian running a pizza restaurant in the USA. If there is a market for pineapple pizza, despite the perils of Italian culinary orthodoxy, he might have to serve it to remain competitive. The management in such companies usually aims for consistency in profit generation, which often means that disagreements are primarily about the details of how to reach those financial goals.

The Absence of Market Pressure in Academia

In academia, however, the lack of market pressure creates conditions ripe for pettiness and interpersonal conflicts. Institutions in academia are not driven by the need to compete for market share, but rather they are perpetuated by the intrinsic pursuit of knowledge and discovery. This environment can sometimes fuel more personal and politically charged dynamics.

Academia is often portrayed as a place where one’s ideas must work, and failure can be detrimental to one's career. However, the reality for many academics is very different, as Thomas Sowell pointed out decades ago: ‘it’s the only job in the world where one’s ideas never have to actually work.’ This absence of critical feedback or immediate market validation can lead to a breeding ground for personal agendas and pettiness.

The Marxist Takeover of Academia: A Legacy of Subversion

The influence of Marxists in academia has a long and murky history, intertwined with the Soviet KGB’s “Subversion Project.” For nearly a century, these ideologies have permeated academic institutions, subtly reshaping the landscape to promote certain ideas and marginalize others. This legacy has not only changed the curriculum but also altered the social dynamics within these institutions, fostering a more politically charged environment.

The entrenched nature of academic hierarchies, which mirror feudal structures, further exacerbates these issues. Once hired, professors can become almost immobile within their institutions. This immobility is starkly different from the transient nature of corporate environments, where churn is the norm, and people move frequently.

Churn in Corporate vs. Academic Settings

In the corporate world, churn is a significant factor. People join and leave companies, teams form and disintegrate, and promotions and terminations are commonplace. This dynamic fosters a more fluid and less politically charged environment. If an individual encounters an asshole in a corporate setting, they can reasonably expect that the situation will change within a few years due to turnover.

Contrast this with academia, where profiles of professors remain stable. It's common for professors to stay in the same department for 10 years, and the case of professors who remain in the same department for their entire career is not unheard of. Imagine how it feels to have to confront the same people for 10 years, especially if you have a personal or professional rivalry.

Academia’s long-term relationships can be particularly challenging. Some academics I know have been in the same department for 20 years and have been conflicting with each other for the past 7 years. The typical duration of an advisor-student relationship in the USA is 6 to 8 years, after which the student still requires a recommendation from the professor. Colleague relationships among academics can last even longer. The prolonged exposure to the same colleagues can lead to an environment fraught with tension and conflict.

The Irony of University Tenure

Universities often tout the benefits of tenure, which offer job security and academic freedom. However, this very tenure can contribute to the dynamics that make academia so politically charged. Tenured professors, with their long-term security, have the time and resources to engage in prolonged conflicts and vendettas without immediate consequences. This can create a culture where petty disputes and personal attacks become normalized, detracting from the pursuit of genuine intellectual progress.

The lack of a competitive market pressure in academia means that disagreements are not necessarily aimed at improving the institution's success. Instead, they often become personal and toxic, further entrenching the political atmosphere. Academia's unique combination of rigid hierarchies, prolonged relationships, and the absence of market pressure make it an environment ripe for political conflict.

In conclusion, while academia aims to foster innovation and intellectual prowess, the conditions created by its institutional structure, combined with the absence of market pressures, can lead to a politically charged environment. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for navigating the complexities of academic institutions and promoting a healthier, more productive scholarly environment.