|
|
Post by gadio on Nov 13, 2011 20:56:48 GMT -5
Piggybacking on the Penn State thread, would the recent handling of the protests at UC Berkeley impact your decision to accept a position there? In case you missed the video, here it is: www.youtube.com/watch?v=buovLQ9qyWQ |
|
|
|
Post by faculty on Nov 14, 2011 12:52:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by yeahright on Nov 14, 2011 13:15:11 GMT -5
Hell and No.
What would lead me to not accept the position is the redunkulous cost of living in the Bay area. Berkeley would be a great place to be a full professor, not sure I'd want to be an assistant there. yes they pay decently but unless you have a partner with serious income you can forget owning anything other than a dinky 1 bedroom condo.
I would take UNC or Duke over Berkeley, Stanford or UCLA in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
|
Post by TelegraphAve on Nov 14, 2011 21:04:32 GMT -5
Don't take the Berkeley job if your plan is to build a tent city in the middle of campus. The Chancellor said no tent city, but other protests are okay.
Have you been to Berkeley and seen the characters that wander the city streets? Want to lure them to settle on campus and share a pleasant community like that in other Occupy encampments -- crime, filth, harassment -- next to or in your classroom buildings?
|
|
|
|
Post by dont think so on Nov 15, 2011 13:21:35 GMT -5
To TelegraphAve--wow, are you actually a sociologist or were you hired by the UC Regents? I'd really like to take any class you would teach on poverty and inequality in the U.S. Let's take your approach and teach all of our students to stay away from the "crime and filth" on the streets directly outside of the campus gates. It's a slippery slope to saying that inequality is a result of individual pathology.
|
|
|
|
Post by Telegraph Avenue on Nov 15, 2011 14:48:26 GMT -5
A sociological approach emphasizes formation and structure of a community. This is not individual pathology (read your Durkheim on social facts). Should a tent city of mixed itinerants and students be constructed in the midst of an academic community? Would that be a plan that a potential faculty member would support?
A lit review might check how activist takeovers have affected scholarship and teaching at universities -- Columbia, Kent State, 1960s Berkeley, for example. Does it matter if classes are disrupted and faculty shun campus to work at home or even leave for other departments as at Columbia and Berkeley.
|
|
|
|
Post by think again on Nov 15, 2011 22:11:53 GMT -5
While the aforementioned protests may have disrupted classes and scholarly productivity for a temporary period, they also brought about broad social change through questioning the authority of the state in regards to the war in Vietnam. What is occurring now at UC Berkeley is similar in drawing public attention to the skyrocketing of tuition costs and the crisis in higher education. And, rather than top faculty fleeing for less contentious pastures, the overwhelming sentiment is of support for the student action. More than 2000 faculty and graduate student instructors have signed a petition condemning the recent police violence, and the number is going up daily. The issue is not about whether tents can be erected on campus, it's about whose interests are being represented at this so-called "public" institution. www.ipetitions.com/petition/uc_berkeley_teachers_condemn_ violence/ |
|
|
|
Post by SoThere on Nov 16, 2011 10:51:16 GMT -5
The student protests of the late 60s and early 70s had little effect, other than to get Richard Nixon elected on behalf of the silent majority, and Ronald Reagan in California. S.I. Hayakawa was elected U.S. Senator after climbing atop a van to unplug an illegal loudspeaker. The public loved it. Most citizens get annoyed by disruptions at work and by blocked traffic, not rallying to the barricades behind student leaders. Protesters should have a clear and realistic goal in mind, not use tactics that have the opposite effect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occupy on Nov 16, 2011 17:49:02 GMT -5
You guys are missing the point -- this movement started to call attention to the fact that the only rights being protected were those belonging to the economic elite in society. We simultaneously hear "Raising taxes on anybody in this economy is wrong!" and yet "The problem is that 46% of families don't pay income taxes!" The discourse had gone so far astray that it took the Occupy movement to even get people back to talking about the glaring inequality in our society and pull back on the BS talk about protecting the money of "the job creators". The Occupy movement has no formal demands because all it demands is that the interests of others beside the filthy rich are taken into account and that we not accept a structure that is rigged to their benefit.
As for the reaction of the public to the movement, it is silly to complain about the inconvenience caused by the Occupy protesters; by definition, protests are SUPPOSED to be inconvenient. People tend to easily overlook the complaints of others unless they are somehow impacted, so the movement has been a success in this regard.
|
|
|
|
Post by inspired on Nov 16, 2011 18:56:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by wow on Nov 19, 2011 18:47:10 GMT -5
Now it's UC Davis. PR nightmare for them. My guess is that the officer, commanding officer, and chancellor all resign/are fired.
|
|
