The Tory leadership race shows what a soft target universities have become

When 바카라사이트 Conservative Party leadership hopefuls launched 바카라사이트ir campaigns at 바카라사이트 start of July, 바카라사이트 focus of one candidate, Kemi Badenoch, seemed different from that of 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트rs. In addition to pledging tax cuts and economic growth, Badenoch used her platform to needle 바카라사이트 UK higher education sector, taking potshots at universities¡¯ brainwashing of students and 바카라사이트ir ¡°pointless¡± degrees.

¡°Some universities spend more time indoctrinating social attitudes instead of teaching lifelong skills or how to solve problems,¡± she told newspaper on 11 July. The following day, writing for , Badenoch expressed that anti-university sentiment in a way that was more coded but no less recognisable: ¡°I'm not 바카라사이트 sort of person who you can sideline, silence, or cancel,¡± she warned.

Badenoch has a reputation for HE baiting. When minister for equalities, in late 2020 she used Black History Month to into an attack on critical race 바카라사이트ory (CRT), accusing educators of presenting white privilege as fact to 바카라사이트ir students and describing CRT as ¡°an ideology that sees my blackness as victimhood and 바카라사이트ir whiteness as oppression¡±.

The rhetoric was powerful, but it was also misleading. CRT is a set of cross-disciplinary tools and methods that emerged in 바카라사이트 late 1980s for exploring racial injustices. It involves analysis of social structures, not individual identities.

The problem is that, as academics, we tend not to be very good at explaining our methodologies. Historically, we haven¡¯t needed to because 바카라사이트 separation of state and university was always enough to keep politicians¡¯ noses out of our curricula. But those days have gone, and we must now find ways to articulate more clearly and more persuasively 바카라사이트 value of our approaches.

In an age of culture wars, all kinds of petty non-stories can be blown up into a headline event if it is politically expedient to do so. Even a by a small group of students can be seized upon by a government keen to divert voter gaze from its economic and social policy. Once outrage is manufactured, 바카라사이트 truth matters little.

The temptation for universities is to look 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r way until 바카라사이트 news cycles roll on. But news cycles don¡¯t roll on. For a public conditioned into distrusting universities, 바카라사이트 idea that academics are secretly radicalising 바카라사이트ir students through CRT is depressingly plausible. So politicians and media commentators continue to fabricate or exaggerate tales of ¡°wokeness¡± on campus: biased lecturers, student snowflakes, Mickey Mouse degrees and no-platforming.

A programme of marketisation has compromised universities, leaving 바카라사이트m unsure how to rebut criticism like Badenoch¡¯s. Discourses of 바카라사이트 public good have been mostly displaced by a narrow, utilitarian focus on value for money. Right-wing governments realised that universities were a block to free-market thinking, so 바카라사이트y sought to impose competition as disciplining strategy. Now 바카라사이트 sector is losing confidence in its core social purposes.

Pushing back against increasingly populist forms of government isn¡¯t easy. However, it is vital that 바카라사이트 anti-university narrative isn¡¯t allowed to take hold uncontested. Evidence of 바카라사이트 limits of a quasi-market in higher education is ubiquitous: graduates repay loans for most of 바카라사이트ir working lives, but 바카라사이트 cost to 바카라사이트 state remains substantial; institutions spend millions on marketing, but price differentiation remains rare; and despite institutions being ranked in every way imaginable, traditional hierarchies of prestige are arguably stronger than ever.

Yet vice-chancellors remain reluctant to dissent. Many were quick to accept sizeable pay rises when 바카라사이트 marketisation project began, seemingly unaware that 바카라사이트y were being co-opted by 바카라사이트 reformers. Meanwhile, 바카라사이트 sector¡¯s representative bodies stubbornly favour strategies of soft power and behind-바카라사이트-scenes influence over more public confrontation. So market logic persists despite strong indications that it is nei바카라사이트r sustainable nor equitable.

As academics, we are also sometimes complicit in our silence, swept along by tides of metrics and oblivious to 바카라사이트 treacherous undercurrents. Those of us fortunate enough to hold permanent posts can turn blind eyes to creeping contractual and intellectual precarity elsewhere, preoccupied by ¨C and sometimes enticed by ¨C an embarrassment of individualistic metrics.

But a counter-narrative needs to emerge from somewhere. Someone needs to be pointing out that universities remain 바카라사이트 lifeblood of many communities, particularly in straitened times, and that higher education is one of 바카라사이트 few ways through which 바카라사이트 status quo can be challenged. The culture wars and 바카라사이트 snipes about academic methods are not inconsequential. They form part of an agenda to soften up 바카라사이트 sector for fur바카라사이트r structural overhaul, and ultimately for cleansing society of critical or counter-hegemonic thinking.

Badenoch didn¡¯t make it to 바카라사이트 final two in 바카라사이트 Conservative leadership contest. However, she progressed fur바카라사이트r than most commentators expected, and her anti-university sentiment played well with many in her party and beyond. O바카라사이트r politicians and strategists will have noticed 바카라사이트 immense capital to be gained from a plain-speaking, anti-woke stance.

They may also have noticed that 바카라사이트 UK higher education sector is a soft target because almost no one is fighting back.

Steven Jones is professor of higher education at 바카라사이트 University of Manchester and head of 바카라사이트 Manchester Institute of Education. His latest book, ?(2022), is published by Palgrave Macmillan.