University leaders cannot be public intellectuals

There are numerous reasons given here in support of the title. University leaders cannot be public intellectuals because:

  • It's too time consuming to deal with backlash on things they say

  • If they go against "prevailing opinions" they get shit on

  • There are no role models among their peer group for going against the grain so they have to agree with whatever everyone else says

Let me know how I've got it all wrong. Because it seems like this guy is whining about people disagreeing with him and that not enough people agree with him on things. The fact he spent time as Dean of some sort of university just means it eats into his time, but the same can be said of many jobs. Seems like concern trolling. The thesis here is a dog whistle for standard "universities are infested with liberals" anti-intellectualism.

Now incidentally maybe it is true that deans don't have enough time for PR work on top of everything else, but it's framed as this "university leaders have to stick to the consensus" thing which is just plain run-of-the-mill backlash on saying controversial things. How cruel!

/r/GGdiscussion Thread