Cultural Capital

Reflections on books and the arts from the New Statesman culture desk

Syndicate contentRSS

Philosophers united against cuts

Students and academics meet at Institute of Contemporary Arts to discuss university department closu

It was only a matter of time before the protests of 1968 were alluded to in the Nash Room at the ICA yesterday evening. After an academic year that has brought mounting opposition to cuts in higher education, an impassioned crowd of students and academics from across the country had convened at the arts centre for a debate -- "Who's afraid of philosophy?" -- to discuss how to oppose department closures.

Since January, when £2.5bn worth of cuts was mooted, joint student-staff protests have been staged at the University of Sussex, at King's College London and at the University of Westminster, all of whose humanities departments have borne the brunt of attempts at savings, with philosophy departments made to feel particularly vulnerable.

This month, plans to axe the highly regarded philosophy department at Middlesex -- one of the most successful in the university -- prompted a 12-day student occupation of the Trent Park campus. Among those expressing their support for the campaign were Alain Badiou, Judith Butler, Slavoj Žižek and Noam Chomsky.

Last night -- five days after the students were evicted from the building following a high court injunction -- Professor Alexander Garcia Düttmann of Goldsmiths, University of London, warned that the protests at Middlesex represented much wider discontent with a managerial culture that forces researchers to prove their worth in quantitative and economic terms.

"Many of us are fed up with the way in which philosophy, the humanities and higher education more generally is treated by university managers and administrators . . . Whatever [subject] cannot account for its measurable success and whatever does not bring in money has no longer a place in the university, we are told.

"[The idea] that every aspect of academic life, a life now determined by the imperative of getting external funding, can and should be assessed and monitored . . . is a fiction that leads to arbitrary measures, as can be gauged by the decision to close a centre for philosophy that was actually successful according to the adopted criteria," Düttmann said.

In the view of Peter Osborne, senior lecturer in philosophy at Middlesex (who stands to lose his job), closures are being made at the behest of "new university managers and administrators [who] are the organic products of a new capitalist regime" in higher education. And philosophy, "functioning emblematically for the open-endedness of experimental research and unmeasurable quality of intellectual inquiry", has become "the temporary resting place of a capitalistic dread".

Professor Alex Callinicos of King's College London praised the co-operation between academic staff and students in organising the protests. Nina Power of Roehampton University urged campaign organisers to probe funding bodies such as the HEFCE themselves.

"Academics live in daily morbid fear of not getting research grants and approval from these bodies," she said. "We need to find out who makes up them, what they stand for, and why on earth they are unelected."

Readers can follow the ongoing campaign to save the Middlesex philosophy department here.

UPDATE: Good news for academic staff at King's College London, who, after staging a walkout this month, have been told there will no longer be compulsory redundancies in the School of Arts and Humanities.

In a document accessible via the university website, university administrators said: "At the end of the Consultation period, the School has identified the savings required by means other than compulsory redundancies; these include a range of voluntary severance packages, relocations, early retirements, non-replacement of retired staff, and the replacement of retiring staff with early-career academics."

19 comments

9xzulug's picture

you may feel my comment unwarranted but here it comes,students and other academics who think deep about our society are muted from expressing their thoughts then the illuminati who control OUR society can CONveniently pursue their agendas with nobody CONfronting worrying position OUR society is in.DON'T EDUCATE THE UNEDUCATED COMES TO MIND

ROBERT TAGGART's picture

Nimby's come to our mind !

David Bouvier's picture

Public sector managers vs. public sector academics - fire both. The university does not have to turn a profit, but if you want your wages paid it has to have sufficient cash coming in to meet the cash going out.

If they are big on Critical Theory then such ideological question-begging tosh sounds ideal to cut anyway.

So which apprentices, minimum wage cleaners, and average office workers do you want to tax more or cut health/police/education services for in order to provide what precise philosophical benefits for society.

The dole will provide plenty of time for philosophers to write, though I am guessing few if any bestsellers will be forthcoming.

Chris's picture

Sad - and frustrating - that philistines now seem to be running things.

And ROBERT TAGGART, there's no apostrophe in Nimbys (or Nimbies).

ROBERT TAGGART's picture

re: Chris. Get a life's !

Aristattle's picture

If cuts did not exist it would be necessary to invent them.

diego's picture

Proposed first step to remedy: A compulsory reading of Arendt's The Human Condition for everyone even considered to hold a management position.

Simon Deakin's picture

I think the update says it. The reason for the protest is that people are worried about their jobs. What University lecturer in the 21st century doesn't have to worry about performance evaluation? For decades science and engineering university departments have needed to find funding from industry in order to carry on research - this hasn't stopped them from doing scientific research. What's wrong with philosophy turning a profit? Does that mean love of wisdom will end? Unlikely I think.

AnonPhilosopher's picture

Why is it that something must turn a profit in order to be considered a part of the university? Shouldn't universities be pursuing wisdom for its own sake?

John Protevi's picture

Simon Deakin, please visit the FAQs at the aavemdxphil website to see that MDX Philosophy brings considerable funds into the university: http://savemdxphil.com/category/faqs/. Even on the university managers' own criteria, Philosophy is quite "profitable."

radicaldog's picture

Managerial bean-counters do not have the legitimacy to tell academics what to do, let alone to fire them. Senior army officers get where they are because they are good at fighting; business leaders get where they are because they are good at making money; most academic managers (especially at new universities) get there because they are failed academics who give up on their (unsuccessful) pursuit of knowledge to concentrate on hoarding money and power.

Iain Bailey's picture

It strikes me as ludicrous that the HEFCE funding won by the philosophy department will still be allocated to the university despite their axeing that department. Presumably HEFCE is bound to this? If so, perhaps this is a regulation that needs reforming - and a clamour made about it. Such brazen exploitation of other people's work is unjust.

And this on top of the worrying fact that the department seems not only sustainable but capable of doing more than its fair financial share- as well as giving Middlesex, until now, additional intellectual credibility as a university/brand. What more value does it need to be considered viable?

John Waters's picture

The real scandal is that management at Middlesex have been profligate with spending on consultants (over 3 Million Pounds last year!!!!) at the same time that they are proposing to close the Philosophy department, a successful and indeed profitable part of the university.

Indignation's picture

One does suspect that Middlesex's management aren't driven purely by financial considerations: the philosophy department is well known for work on critical theory, so I presume they have routinely given management a run for their money (or rather the other way around) during meetings. So those petty bean counters now want to use the economic crisis as an excuse for their pathetically short sighted revenge -- which only reveals their insecurity.

Daniele1's picture

This is a case of knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Britain as a place of advancement of knowledge is doomed if managers continue to be allowed to dictate what academics can and cannot do.
Managerialism is a cancer in British public life.
Power to the professionals must be restored.What is going on is close to what the Chinese cultural revolution did to professionals who were emasculated and neutralised by the regime, as they were posing a threat by challenging the dictatorship.
In this country professionals are turned into unthinking agents of the state by the use of philistine managers who constantly undermine and intimidate people who are the experts and who should be running the show. It's a total disgrace!

Bobby Wolverhampton's picture

Hi well let me say from the start that I have met most of the protestors at Middlesex Univ and had the privilege of participating with them on second Occupation. They are an imaging a bunch of people that lifted my heart in knowing that here are people that are fighting the GOOD fight not only for themselves but for the rest of us too! And with this in mind I believe we should be as kind and follow in their footsteps and support them too!
Bobby a Philosophy student from Wolverhampton Univ. :)

Ina Blom's picture

Simon Deakin: beyond the fact the Mdx philosophy is profitable, you need to consider the fact that, in every country I know of, the state funds that go to humanities research is but a tiny percentage of what goes to research in the natural sciences and technology. And the fact remains that these research areas DO have large industries eagerly awaiting their knowledge production. This is not the case with philosophy and I do not think this will change in the very near future. So the question remains: what types of learning will the educational politics and the new university management support?

Catherine's picture

I think that the humanities/sciences divide that people assume is in play here is very blunt. At Sussex, life sciences is actually bearing the brunt of academic redundancies. The assumption that sciences are somehow 'safe' from cuts is just wrong. In also misses the quite pernicious effects *on science* that recent funding structures have had. Yes Simon, for decades science and engineering departments have had to look to industry for funding. This has shaped the kind of science research that it is possible to undertake. Apart from shaping entire research agendas, recent changes to funding structures (eg the REF) make non-instrumentalised research even more difficult. "Blue skies" research, which is being made increasingly difficult is a vital part of critical, creative assessment of society and our world - just as philosophy is. We need to be wary of assuming a neat arts/sciences divide. Critical thinkers across the academy are being attacked.

swatantra's picture

What have philosophers got against cats? Its that old conundrum of a black cat in a darkened room. Is it really there and how do you prove it.

Latest tweets