...or at least reactionary boneheads who cry foul just because it's cool to cry foul.
So Marshall University accepted a million bucks in order to establish its BB&T Center for the Advancement of American Capitalism. They accepted the money from Branch Banking & Trust under the condition that Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged be "required reading" in a course on "the fundamentals of capitalism" (according to a Bloomberg.com article by Matthew Keenan available here: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=as6BR0QV4KE8&refer=home)
The CEO of BB&T says the book is the best defense of American Capitalism he's ever read and he just wants to make sure it remains part of academic discussion.
Funny, though I love Rand's books, when I first read them, I never knew there was any controversy about them. I didn't see them as philosophical or economical or political or about any "isms". They were just cool stories about cool heroes with both admirable and not so admirable qualities. As far as I was concerned back in high school, all this crap about her morals or her politics didn't exist. She was a writer of fun books to read.
I still believe that.
And while I think it's pretty trashy of Coca-Cola or other corporate sponsors to all but own public schools in exchange for a pittance of a return of the the tiniest percentage of their profits on products that are as addicting as most illegal narcotics, asking that a book be one part of a larger curriculum doesn't sound like like much of a concession to me.
For one thing, BB&T doesn't stipulate what anyone says about the book, only that it be read. Basically all they're asking is that one additional perspective be added to a much larger discussion. Students and professors can take from and contribute to that discussion as they wish. I really don't understand the controversy. Well, OK, I do get the notion that a donation with strings is more like a bribe, but so what. Have you seen tuition increases lately? The schools who joined Marshall in taking advantage of the BB&T offer could say no, but given the relative innocuity of the condition, it seems amazingly illogical for them to do so simply on the grounds of some artificially derived moral.
Ironically (to me anyway) logic (as a moral) is one of the evil philosophies Rand takes fire for espousing. How bat-shit illogical is it that capitalists would criticize taking cash simply because it is given on the condition of having to read a book? I can see insanely stereotypical academic types complaining. That's their job, but why would anyone else? If you're a student, go to some other school without a big new business department. If you're a local employer looking for new MBAs, hire from some other school where the discussions in B school prohibit inclusion of certain ideas. That always leads to more well rounded graduates. And hey, if you want some viewpoint that you feel contradicts Rand's to be included as well, offer up your own million.
BB&T didn't ask that other books NOT be taught, just that one book be included. The English teacher in me tells me that's more like a good suggestion than a condition or attached string. It's a freaking BOOK, not some plug and play port into a student's (or anyone else's) hypothalamus. I think the best comment I heard about it is that you can't propagandize students. Granted, the guy who said that is likely to become the head of the new department at Marshall, but it's true. The country may buy propaganda for several years, but the microcosm of the nation that is a student body is a lot quicker to realize they've been duped and a lot more vocal about it once it's discovered. They tend to be a lot more skeptical of crap fed to them from authority figures as well. That same department head went on to say that they only accepted the money and the condition because the condition didn't stipulate what they discussed about the book, only that it be read. Had there been some hidden agenda, the project would have been doomed from the start by both the officials to whom it had been proposed as well as by the students on whom such a hidden agenda would have been perpetrated.
What really gets me though, is the whole notion that Rand or anyone else's ideas, written on a page, represent any kind of threat to anyone. If the concerns about this kind of threat were ever accompanied by a balanced thought from the other perspective, they'd almost certainly result in real intelligence. Unfortunately, they always stop well short of that.
Luthy
4 comments:
Just one question, what if the stipulated book were written by a conservative Christian economist and used quotes from the Bible?
Several answers:
1) "...if you want some viewpoint that you feel contradicts...cough up your own million."
2) "The English teacher in me tells me that's more like a good suggestion than a condition or an attached string."
3) Atlas Shrugged will not be questioned as a work of fiction, or to put it less offensively to Bible fans, a work written by a human. The debate as to what light it sheds (if any) on capitalist fundamentals will proceed from that point. As long as the same stipulation is applied to the book you suggest and the Biblical quotes that support it, I'm cool with it.
The only issue I'd have is if the reasoning in the book you hypothesize is supported by myth rather than sound economic principles logically argued and supported by empirical data. If it meets that standard, then the support of Biblical quotes would be superfluous anyway, but I have no gripe with them being there just because they're not necessary to the argument.
Atlas Shrugged doesn't rely on any supreme input offered up as a given without any evidence in order to make what many feel are its political and economic implications. It proposes nothing as given but rather argues its points on their merits in terms readers of any religious background can accept or decline as they see fit. It is a work of fiction from which folks will take what they want to take based only on the words printed on the page, not by some greater meaning that must be accepted without reason.
But this isn't a discussion on the validity of Atlas Shrugged. The real point of the post was that if you've got the million, then it doesn't matter if your book lives up to that standard because reading a book, any book, isn't much of a condition to ask in exchange for a million dollar gift. Only a fool would turn down that offer.
Your last paragraph above really answers my question. What I was testing you on was fairness and willingness to maybe allow an opposing point of view.
It is interesting, in your reply to me in the 3 Amigos thread, you contend that the Bible actually supports socialism, which seems to be an admissionn on your part that the Bible can be used to learn economic principles. Also, interestingly many businesses over the past decade have adopted biblical principles in how they conduct their business. They have put more of an emphasis on taking care of their employees, treating them less like chattel and more like business partners. Businesses have developed a social conscience getting involved in various community activities.
But, this is not about what the Bible is or is not, it's about accepting different points of view. I have to admit, I am a little squeamish about the situation at Marshall that you write of, because it does seem to fly in the face of an unbiased approach to education. But, I don't think we can accused educational institutions of being unbiased.
On Marshall and unbiased educations...
There may be an appearance of bias, but simply including a book on a reading list doesn't mean you will endorse or even condone the messages in the book. Technically there's no bias. I'm not saying a university should bend over if the price is right, but this is a far cry from bending over. Reading a book and selling out are certainly not the same things.
What's really sad though is that most educational institutions are too broke to be unbiased anymore. The sad part of it is that it doesn't really cost anything to sit around and discuss topics and learn from the discussion. You could even throw labs together and perform research on a shoestring, but bring in the accreditation, the licensure, and the layers and layers of bureaucracy to administer all of it and the price adds up. (this from a guy who has made a living as part of that bureaucracy for over a decade!)
Again, it's a complex world and all operations require some form of management, but, something seems to be out of whack when the administration costs so much more than the product or the delivery. (check out teacher/professor salaries)
On economic principles in the Bible...
You got me there. That's a case where our nation's failure to follow the Bible has caused trouble even I have to acknowledge. Just look at all the labor struggles since we abolished slavery! Not to mention how cost prohibitive it is to build one of those antebellum plantation mansions. And how are we ever going to maintain our agrarian economy if we all don't start popping out enough kids to run the farm?!
Post a Comment