Politics and Academics

The esteemed Dr. Free-Ride has a post about politics responding to Sean Carroll's recap of Yearly Kos. Both of them say things about the practice of politics that nicely encapsulate why I'm not a political activist-- I'm too much of an academic:

Sean:

Deep down, though, I learned once again that an environment of political activism is not for me. I've volunteered and been active politically in very minor ways in the past, and I am always reminded that I should go back to academia where I belong. Of necessity, political action feeds on fervent commitment to the cause and a deep-seated conviction that one's opponents are worthless scoundrels. Even when I do believe those things, I can't quite give myself over to such stances uncritically. I'd rather contemplate the ins and outs of different aspects of an argument, even if I do end up resolutely on one side; politics (as opposed to governance) has little time for such nuances. At the same time, when I do take a position, I have little interest in softening its edges for political consumption, or reducing complexities to soundbites in order to convey a message. The complexities are the fun part! Don't get me wrong; somebody has to do it, and I have incredible admiration for those who fight for the right side with passion and perseverance in the political arena. I just don't want it to be me.

Janet:

Call it an ivory tower if you want, but one of the things I really value about academia -- and dream about exporting to the "real world" -- is our practice of taking arguments seriously. Who is making the argument is much less important than the assumptions it is based on and their logical connection. Who started out on the "right" side of the argument is much less important than ending up with a clearer understanding of what's really going on -- of which inferences the facts support, and of the uncertainties that remain. Unlike political discourse, intellectual engagement doesn't need to be gladiatorial combat (although some academics like it that way). You don't have to start with the assumption that the people who disagree with you are stupid and/or evil -- in fact, here in the ivory tower, we start with the assumption that there could be something right about the view that opposes our own and we do our level best to figure out what the merits of that argument might be.

That's exactly right, and it's why I not only find a lot of politics distasteful, but I also find a lot of political blogs well-nigh unreadable. When the whole thing starts to become more about scoring points on your opponents than anything related to the facts of the situation, I lose interest.

Of course, I'm not sure how true this is of academics in general-- I think this is only really true of a certain subset of academic personalities. If you look at those academics who do become politically active, or look closely at politics within the academy (decisions on campus policies and the like), you see exactly the same behaviors you get from political activists more generally.

Reagrdless, this is why I try to limit my political blogging, and even blog-reading. Kevin Drum is about as much as I can take, these days, because he's a wonk at heart, and spends as much time on policy as politics.

(This probably means I need to take a break from reading blogs for a little while, before the mid-term elections really heat up...)