I remember the comments made by many of the "conservative" ones in academia in 2015 and 2016 on candidate Trump. Probably they had little or no experience in politics or in real positions of authority. Being heads of departments and committees doesn't count - such departmental functions were handed to them by an institution and while academics engage in office politics, that is a shadow of tribal or communal raising men up to be leaders and the associated customs. I did not hear any of these Catholic academics who were not critical of Donald Trump and his behavior, which was the basis for their claim that he was unsuitable to be the Chief Executive of the Federal Government. They disagreed as to which of the other Republican contenders was the best candidate but they agreed that any of them would be preferable to Trump. They did not understand why Trump was needed to address certain questions facing the United states
Even among academics there is AMOG jockeying going on, though the basis of it is supposed "intellectual" power, but really is that intellectual power anything more than being a bookworm? How many of them would be able to admit that Trump would be more attractive to women than themselves?
Could any of them really inspire other men to follow them in battle or to build a community? How many of them read Aristotle's Politics and think they are worthy of being the intended audience for that lecture, of even better than that?
Such conversations among Catholic academics were probably not rare, and I felt revulsion at Catholic academia as a result of these experiences.
No comments:
Post a Comment