perhaps a tad intellectually obscure but is there any UK example of this kind of list?

[zippitippitoes]

and what do you think of doing it anyway, \link{http://www.uclaprofs.com/articles/dirtythirty.html\ Dirty thirty academics}

[ItalianJob]

i would have thought it would be ill-advised to put such a list online - for data protection act reasons, and in case anyone decided to try and sue for libel!

[Kathy1972]

Libel laws in the US are much more relaxed than here. There is all kinds of offensive stuff posted online about US academics - there's a site called 'ratemyprofessor.com' where they students can put what they think of academics, which includes 'hotness' as one of the main criteria.
There was a case a few years ago where a US academic had all kinds of homophobic accusations posted about him by a student and tried to sue, but - get this - the student countersued under a law which prohibits you from interfering with someone else's rights to free speech!
There's lots of concern among the American right about leftwing control of the academy and this is one of the ways they fight back. Don't know if their fears are founded or not really, but my guess is that it's a very different situation here so probably wouldn't happen.

[zippitippitoes]

I was thinking the leeds case maybe indicated that we would be more likely to have a reverse version perhaps..

[Kathy1972]

Oh yes, good point Z - I could imagine that happening, though with a little bit more circumspection in what they wrote perhaps.

[edam]

Nasty. Is the reference HCUA to McCarthy? Amazed that anyone could still be using that as a slur, FGS. Only nutters could possibly believe McCarthy was right, surely?

[zippitippitoes]

i think mc carthy is still pretty much alive and kicking in a certain strata of US thinking

[edam]

Seriously? I thought McCarthy had been completely discredited. Do these guys think they are still fighting the Cold War? Madder than a basket of snakes.

[ruty]

uneffingbelievable.

[Nightynight]

The list is horrible, but then so were some of my university tutors, I have to admit.

[zippitippitoes]

Reading some of the linked material has me thinking couldn't this strategy have the opposite effect to that intended

[monkeytrousers]

I once farted as I watched George Bush on the telly. Its a fair cop. Put me on the list.

[ruty]

you're a windy traitor MT.

[NotQuiteCockney]

America is still quite strongly right-wing, certainly in some ways. Oh, and the fact the Soviet empire disolved is just more proof that the "Commies" were wrong, obviously!

I met an American this year who believed that the US is currently a socialist state. There really isn't any way to refute that sort of thing, other than to ask what colour the sky is on their world.

[Pruni]

OK, now I understand why the American academics I know laugh when I ask them if they're planning on going back to the States anytime soon.....

[monkeytrousers]

LOL Ruty

[DominiConnor]

Underneath the pile of loony right wing rant, there is a serious point that in US universities it is career suicide to even criticise the pseduo-liberal orthodoxy.
Not as bad in the UK, and I think it is the job of academics to attack whatever happens to be the prevailing norm.

[monkeytrousers]

What do you mean by pseduo-liberal orthodoxy DC?

[PeachyClair]

Surely it is the job of academics to rpesent a fair analysis of all perspectives to the students? We did Islamophobia today (great lecture) and he covered it from many angles... Westerm, Islamm (as a Western Professor of Islam he's well qualified to teach it) and then - and only then- he gave us his clearly defined personal view (oil hunger).

[DominiConnor]

I think it is the job of academics as a group to emit multiple views. That is best done by taking positions across the spectrum, not by fuzzy consensus building.
I regard any of my own views that I can't pick holes in as defective.
By pseudo-liberal I mean the cod-socialism endemic in partod the USA which is nothing to do with freedom, and more to do with social engineering.

Islam is mentioned in this thread, and an American style liberal will say that she respects it as a valid faith.
My view of liberalism is that you may like Islam or despise it, but that you deny yourself the opportunity or right to screw them around.

[monkeytrousers]

I agree about academics. You can see at the moment some movement within the humanities away from the french postmodernist approach to a greater concilience with 'harder' sciences, evolutionary biology for one, which I'm very pleased about. I also agree about examining your own views. I think critical self analysis is the most critical tool we have. But I'm always aware of my limits too - every time I learn something, another new void of unfathomable ignorance opens up behind it. Which brings me to my next point.

I'm still not sure what you mean by your last sentence about american style liberalism. (I know, 'your fired'!) I only vaguely know that liberal is a dirty word and that I have at times described myself as one, but my reading at the moment tends to suggest I'm not one at all as I'm too pragmatic. But then again paradoxically, as an atheist of the Richard Dawkins school, I have and do defend the rights of others to practice their religion, even though I know in practice religion is in essence the exploitation of human spirituality for the purposes of control. Where I disagree with Dawkins (if I'm reading him properly of course, I may not be) is that evil doesn't spring from religion, it springs from humans, as religion does and wiping out religion won't do anything to stop this. I'm 100% with him on the attempted religious encroachments into science however.

I suppose I'm a wooly liberal or not.

[monkeytrousers]

I suppose I'm just trying to figure out if I'm a wooly liberal or not, I mean.

[DominiConnor]

Liberal in the British context is lurching towards the US notion of communitarian social engineering.

For instance most people I see who refer to themselves as "liberal" are against free trade. Whereas traditionally the "liberal" position was a lack of government interference in wealth creation, indeed "liberal" has become synonymous with this idea.

Mark Oaten was a brief flicker of light in that darkness before self destruction.

[PeachyClair]

I'm not sure if I am a liberal or not, in soke aspects sure. But 'My view of liberalism is that you may like Islam or despise it, but that you deny yourself the opportunity or right to screw them around.'- I don't want to screw anyone around. And I do value Islam as a valid faith. And I am proud of that. In fact, at this point I m considering making Islam my speciality in my degree. If by 'screw thema round' you mean criticise then I am definitely not your definition of liberal, I'm all for that (beinga lso of the Richard dawkins school- and MonkeyTrousers I share your interpretation about the root of all evil thing).

My personal reason for interest in Islam is simple: it's the fastest growing religion on this planet, and one in which an awful lot of people feel marginalised, which in turn is a dangerous thing.

[DominiConnor]

I suppose my view of being "liberal" is that you don't impose upon people regardless of whether you like them or not.
It seems to me easy enough to treat those you respect well. The trick in forming a society is handling those people you don't.

To me this means drawing back the state's participation in such things. A big reason for this is that "multi-culturalism" seems to have ended up often being coercing people to be member of pre-defined "appropriate" silos of culture, faith or race.
To me a superior society is one where people neither care about other's religion a great deal, nor are in a position to do much about it if they do.

[PeachyLittleBunnyGirl]

Yes, I would agree with that. In which case I am a liberal (bt I wasn't going to vote for Mark Oaten even before he dropped out of the election- Chris and Simon got my votes, in that order)