“No Romanticist or Victorianist can excuse an ignorance of Scott. Back then, everybody read him. He was the first global superstar of the novel… Everybody read Scott, no exceptions”
—Prof Adam Roberts on Walter Scott
#BookologyThursday #C19
amechanicalart.blogspot.com/2016/06/some...
I've seen people trying to defend it today by saying "No, no, I just use it to brainstorm, bounce ideas, I do the actual writing" and with all the kindness in the world I need to tell you: if there is a stage of writing you are not good at, you need to get good, not use the plagiarism machine.
But a constitutional system is only as effective as the people who believe in it. You can write the constitution down in one place, as the Americans do, or have it hidden away all over the place, as we do. None of that matters. All that really matters is that people behave according to the social and moral norms it establishes. People must believe it to be true, or it is only paper. In the US, they ceased to believe it is true long ago. That is why the legislature, which lacks all self-confidence, refuses to stand up to him. It is why the judiciary, whose supreme body he partly appointed, does not restrain him. It is why the press, which is subject to its own institutional pathologies, is unable to meaningfully hold him to account.
"All that really matters is that people behave according to the social and moral norms [a country's constitution] establishes. People must believe it to be true, or it is only paper."
Spot on (and a nice 'Discuss' essay question quote) by @iandunt.bsky.social iandunt.substack.com/p/the-mad-em...
So I respectfully disagree. Based on my experiences in Leicester City, many are not integrating and it is deeply harmful (both to the communities themselves as the Leicester race riots in 2022 showed, and to wider British society).
Yeah, I can see that. I'm trying to be more optimistic, and hoping that dialogue with moderate Conservative MPs can persuade them of the need to de-racialise the discourse and push back against these lurches toward Reform. What else can you do? 🤷🏽♂️
One problem is keeping these silly labels (like “white British”) on official forms, which feed into policy discussions. I agree that this language gives his statements a racial dimension we could do without. But I always felt O’Brien was concerned about integration—which, I think, is reasonable.
Could I ask what the “preferred pronouns are white British” is a reference to? Neil O’Brien is my local MP. Even though I disagree with him on a few things, he has been a genuinely great MP.
No matter how they try to sanitise it, “remigration” is rooted in racism (at an AfD meeting, Martin Sellner used the term to talk about kicking out “non-assimilated” citizens). For CINOs with a track record of racism, like Hall, not being white will always tantamount to not being integrated.
90% of social homes go to UK nationals, so saying “millions of foreign nationals... live in social housing” feels coded. This coding is reinforced by the lack of a subject in “significantly more must leave than enter”—significantly more UK nationals, migrants or something else (non-white citizens)?
I say all of this as someone who has studied on four continents, and someone whose partner is an international postgraduate student at a great (albeit American) university in London. This isn't about prejudice, it is about returning UK universities to being global educational institutions.
India, Pakistan and Nigeria produce incredible students, many of whom attend Oxbridge, Durham, Imperial, LSE, UCL or NCH. But there is a difference between those universities’ application policies, and the policies of many ex-polytechnics whose VCs have reduced education to a grubby business.
We need an absolute ban on the use of agents, and to look seriously at barring applications from certain Indian states with high levels of fraudulent applications (as the progressive government in Australia has done).
AND we have to fund properly good, academic universities across the country.
youtu.be/xPt65FTMXk8?...
So happy to hear @rory-stewart.bsky.social discuss the problem with the practices of some universities! I have tutored students at UK universities, and I am appalled at the standards of some postgraduate courses (and the students were openly disinterested in the education).
One of the worst effects of successive govts' rhetoric on Higher Ed is that it's 'training for a job'. So 18yos get themselves (and are pressured) onto narrow technical courses. Yet employers are crying out for ppl who can read, think, write, speak! I've never met an employer who said different.
I have experience of Brunel’s MSc in International Business. I helped a neighbour on their assignments (their English wasn't great). For basically regurgitating the textbook, they received distinctions. Being generous, the content itself was about A-level standard. I was astounded.
Economic argument is what I'm describing as neoliberal (and will inevitably lead to the death of universities anyway). I don't agree with the appeal to popularity. Maybe “bullshit” is unfair, but degrees like business management at ex-polys offer nothing of value—no methodology, no critical thought.
One issue when advocating for HE spending is that people no longer see universities as educational. Fix this and there will be more support for increased spending. As for bankruptcies, you’re right. There needs to be longer-term plans to transition some unis back into community-based polytechnics.
This trilemma is precisely designed to make you think that the least worst option is to carry on accepting the economic exploitation of huge numbers of international students (most of whom have no interest in studying anyway). With a little bit of vision, there are much better options.
3) the small, academic colleges can then form part of federal universities, like London’s, which share overheads and research costs (i.e. combined research institutes). Esp. with devolution, imagine a University of the East Midlands with good liberal arts colleges for undergrads in each city.
2) we need more small, selective colleges (I went to a Dutch university college, and the level of education was better than any RG for a third of the cost), and set up vocational colleges with better links into jobs (i.e. teacher/nursing training centres that partner with schools/hospitals)
1) scrap bullshit degrees (business, management, nursing, teaching, law*... basically anything vocational), and refocus resources into real subjects.
* jurisprudence should be available as a postgraduate option, but we should be shifting the cost of training lawyers back onto firms and chambers.
The “trilma” (trilemma?) reflects deeply neoliberal assumptions about higher education. If universities are going to survive at all, they need to be funded properly. But that also means they have to behave like places of learning (rather than businesses). So there are other options:
Two guys—one on the left wearing sunglasses (my brother), and me on the right squinting at the camera and holding my medal up.
Email reading: congratulations Omar Mohamed on completing the Rutland Spring Half Marathon (HM Run) in a time of 01:38:22.
Ran the Rutland Spring Half Marathon this morning. Been having some niggling issues with my knee, so super happy with the time. Weather conditions were amazing, and Rutland Water (as always) was beautiful.
Who becomes a trustee? At Columbia there are 21, all of them from business, law and technology, with the exception of a former journalist. Although they are in charge of an academic institution, none of them is an academic. None as ever led a classroom or a lab meeting or medical rounds with interns. None has gone through the process of tenure, where their teaching, publication record and service are rigorously assessed by colleagues in the field both from within the institution and outside it. None as ever had their work peer-reviewed by anonymous readers or panels of experts. None has ever published in academic or scientific journals or presses and had their ideas debated in the public sphere. None has ever framed a hypothesis and tested it on the basis of evidence they have collected. None, in short, has sought truth and had their search confirmed by objective scholars and scientists.
Arjun Appadurai and Sheldon Pollock on boards of trustees: “Who actually runs Columbia University?” www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
Image of the podcast for BBC History extra, special issue on Funding cuts and culture wars.
In a new episode of the BBC History Extra podcast, the Society's President, Lucy Noakes, considers the state of history in UK higher education today bit.ly/4cwSiaJ
Lucy discusses the impact of cuts, restoring a student numbers cap, and history's contribution to national culture #skystorians 1/2
🚨 EMERGENCY DEMO – US EMBASSY, LONDON 🚨
🛑 Stop Putin – Stop Trump
🇺🇦 Stand by Ukraine
🌍 Europe, wake up!
📅 Wed 5 March ⏰ 5:30–7 PM
📍 US Embassy, 33 Nine Elms Lane, SW11 7US (Vauxhall)
Called by USC, Ukrainian orgs & @johnmcdonnellmp.bsky.social Be there with us! ✊ #StandWithUkraine
Affiche pour un emprunt de la victoire, 1917 pour illustrer la série d'émissions que Xavier Mauduit consacre à l'histoire de la sécurité entre les États-Unis et l'Europe dans Le Cours de l'histoire sur France Culture
États-Unis & Europe, histoire de sécurité ? ⚔️🛡️
4 épisodes ! Le Cours de l'histoire tous les jours en direct à 9h @franceculture.fr @radiofrance.fr puis podcast
Quasi-guerre
Sauve-moi si tu peux !
"America first"… déjà en 1941
Est-ce toujours l'Otan des copains ?
www.radiofrance.fr/francecultur...
IF the US wants Russia to be independent from China, it needs to end Putin’s oligarchy... not support it. We need to ensure Ukraine’s security and defend international law (opposition to which aligns Russia and China). This requires Rubio working with the EU, not skipping meetings with Kaja Kallas.
If the aim of the balance of power is peace (which, for all its flaws, it was in the 19thC), then Trump/Rubio selling Ukraine out to Russia is a dumb move. The balance of power cannot be maintained externally unless it is maintained internally (everyone from Metternich to Bentham understood this).
In 21stC, the US alone is selling Ukraine out to bring Russia out of China’s orbit. Not against China, but we did try incorporating Russia into the West... remember Putin’s state visit to the UK in 2003. The problem is that the current political system in Russia is inherently unstable/volatile.