George Will: Political Correctness in Social Work Departments
Whew. THIS is going to depress you.
I've said before that the farther you go from intellectually rigorous disciplines, the more PC/thought police/PoMo crap you encounter. Now, don't get me wrong, I think that social workers often do a great and indispensable job--one that I certainly could not do. I've known three social workers, two of whom were stellar human beings, and all of whom were injured and/or seriously threatened in the line of duty. But pretty much everybody knows that social work is not a very rigorous discipline, intellectually speaking. And it exists in that sector of academia that reveres the practical, including political activism (women's studies is like that, too). I thought I knew all of the highly-politicized disciplines, though, but I didn't know about this one.
So, let me say again: leftist/liberal bias IS a problem in academia. It's not as big a problem as the right would have you believe, but it is definitely a problem. And liberals, with their natural antipathy to bias and propaganda, should be as outraged about this as conservatives. I know that liberals tend to down-play the problem, partially out of frustration at the exaggerations of the Horowitz's of the world. But that is, obviously, a mistake. You can't let your opponent dictate your positions to you. Getting this stuff right is far more important than the psychological satisfaction you might get from contradicting Horowitz.
Whew. THIS is going to depress you.
I've said before that the farther you go from intellectually rigorous disciplines, the more PC/thought police/PoMo crap you encounter. Now, don't get me wrong, I think that social workers often do a great and indispensable job--one that I certainly could not do. I've known three social workers, two of whom were stellar human beings, and all of whom were injured and/or seriously threatened in the line of duty. But pretty much everybody knows that social work is not a very rigorous discipline, intellectually speaking. And it exists in that sector of academia that reveres the practical, including political activism (women's studies is like that, too). I thought I knew all of the highly-politicized disciplines, though, but I didn't know about this one.
So, let me say again: leftist/liberal bias IS a problem in academia. It's not as big a problem as the right would have you believe, but it is definitely a problem. And liberals, with their natural antipathy to bias and propaganda, should be as outraged about this as conservatives. I know that liberals tend to down-play the problem, partially out of frustration at the exaggerations of the Horowitz's of the world. But that is, obviously, a mistake. You can't let your opponent dictate your positions to you. Getting this stuff right is far more important than the psychological satisfaction you might get from contradicting Horowitz.
posted by Winston Smith at
3:06 PM
1 Comments:
If I admit that academia is liberal and that sometimes that's bad, will you admit that taking at face value anything George Will or David Horowitz has anything to do with is naive?
I know that George Will wants his readers to assume the definition of social justice supports his thesis - because advocates for minorities use it in a specific way. Does the textbook he refers to use it that way, too? And what words intervene between the tiny little quotes? I never assume that a right-wing propagandist is leveling with me on the facts.
Really, if you take the word social and the word justice literally, who could oppose them? I mean, other than Michele Malkin. Could that have been the intended meaning?
Some of the anecdotes in the Will column would be disturbing - if they are fairly rendered. I don't assume that they are; too many times I've seen Horowitless allegations turn out to be fart when he alleged diarrhea.
Last, who would want an Ayn Rand social worker!
"Suck it up and will yourself to victory."
"But I came here looking for marriage counseling!"
"Tough, and oh by the way, I charge psychiatrist's fees."
It's a caring profession. Sure, there are conservatives who could do it, but not any of the ones who have a nationally syndicated column.
I mean, Charles Krauthammer! He must have gone in the psychiatry because he enjoys screwing people up. Have you every known anyone as bitter and unpleasant?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home