History departments and the search for truth
This post is based on a NY Sun article about Mark Moyar who is the author of Triumph Forsaken.
It discusses the academic hostility Moyar has faced for challenging the liberal narrative about Vietnam.
Quote:
Mark Moyar doesn't exactly fit the stereotype of a disappointed job seeker. He is an Eagle Scout who earned a summa cum laude degree from Harvard, graduating first in the history department before earning a doctorate at the University of Cambridge in England. Before he had even begun graduate school, he had published his first book and landed a contract for his second book. Distinguished professors at Harvard and Cambridge wrote stellar letters of recommendation for him.
Yet over five years, this conservative military and diplomatic historian applied for more than 150 tenure-track academic jobs, and most declined him a preliminary interview. During a search at University of Texas at El Paso in 2005, Mr. Moyar did not receive an interview for a job in American diplomatic history, but one scholar who did wrote her dissertation on "The American Film Industry and the Spanish-Speaking Market During the Transition to Sound, 1929-1936." At Rochester Institute of Technology in 2004, Mr. Moyar lost out to a candidate who had given a presentation on "promiscuous bathing" and "attire, hygiene and discourses of civilization in Early American-Japanese Relations."
It's an example, some say, of the difficulties faced by academics who are seen as bucking the liberal ethos on campus and perhaps the reason that history departments at places like Duke had 32 Democrats and zero Republicans, according to statistics published by the Duke Conservative Union around the time Mr. Moyar tried to get an interview there
Links to the Sun article and my review of Moyar's book are at the post.
No need for Caesar crossing the Rubicon
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Patriot
I'll be honest - I hate liberals. Not because I'm a hateful person, but because they are so pathetic.
... I do believe this, though - I believe that liberals can be counted among the domestic enemies of the United States. As a patriot, sworn to defend the Constitution, what am I to do with these people? I think I know the answer, but the answer is harsh and unthinkable to most people. Left unchecked, though, I believe they will undermine the Constitution, our way of life, and our nation. :mad:
...Just a few thoughts from a concerned citizen.
I don't know how many or what percent of the American population you hate. If it amounts to those with a different political preference, it could conceivably rise to 50% or more of the population, depending on the issue. Why a man would even want to defend a citizenry he so despises is a question to ponder.
As for the unspecified "harsh answer." Well, specify it, for us, if you please. Are you advocating some sort of overthrow of the Republic, perhaps a military dictatorship?
I doubt what this country really needs or desires is a Julius Ceasar. If I'm wrong, and that is what the American people eventually call for, then I'll peacefully leave for some other place that pays more than lip service to liberty.
Military Culture - Liberal or Conservative
Curious as to what the thought out there is. Sec Gates recently advised some Academy grads to be apolitical (I think he was constraining the remark to when it comes to judging the motivations of Congress, the Admin and the Press). You can use any definition you want, but is the militiary culture more conservative or liberal? How about individual service cultures? Does this translate readily as Republican and Democrat? Is this good or bad? Does it impact important debates like being able to criticize the war without being critical of the troops? Could the military alienate itself from society if it were decidely "conservative" while the public was more "liberal" in its attitude toward war? Could the military become a symol of "conservatism" or uniformly identified with a sole political party? Is this good, bad or does not matter?
We were discussing civil-military relations, and allot of great points came up (many are abve). I've never really questioned where I stood, or why I stood there. I never really considered the dangers of alienating any group outside of the green suiters - I mean we have lived on base pretty much the entire time and when I was enlisted I was always on base. Even in ROTC (APSU) the people I identified most with were other former enlisted making the transition. It was pointed out to me recently the military's role is to "preserve" and "defend" - that seems like a "conserve" role to me.
Since we have so many folks on the outside on this forum, it seemed like a great place to discuss it - since I saw this thread, it beat starting a new one.
regards, Rob