A
U
S
T
R
A
L
I
A
N
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
I
E
S
’
R
E
V
I
E
W
Responsible academics The Responsibility of Intellectuals: Reflections by Noam Chomsky and others after 50 years by Nicholas Allott, Chris Knight & Neil Smith ISBN: 9781787355514, paperback, London: University College London Press (free PDF download from www.uclpress.co.uk), 144 pp., 2019. Reviewed by Thomas Klikauer
In 1967, the distinguished MIT linguist Noam Chomsky published an essay on The Responsibility of Intellectuals in the New York Review of Books (Chomsky, 1967). Nicholas Allott, Chris Knight and Neil Smith’s book presents eight chapters that reflect on Chomsky’s original essay. In the preface, the editors’ note that ‘by 2004, even the New York Times – not the greatest fan of Chomsky’s political writings – had to admit that if book sales are any standard to go by, he may be the most widely read American voice on foreign policy on the planet today’ (preface, p. x). (Chomsky’s key work – Syntactic Structures (1957) – is on Martin SeymourSmith’s list of the 100 most influential books ever written (thegreatestbooks.org)). Perhaps Chomsky’s vital thought in his 1967 essay is that ‘it is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and to expose lies’ (p. 1). At many universities, we find academics, but one also finds intellectuals. Some might like to distinguish between an academic – a teacher at a university or institute of higher education – and an intellectual – a person possessing a highly developed intellect. These are by no means synonymous. The latter are ‘people to whom [we] refer as intellectuals’ (p. 2). To illuminate the academicsvs.-intellectual distinction, one might think of an academic as someone who teaches a university class as demanded by the managerialists placed above her or him, as someone who publishes diligently in so-called A-star-top-ranked journals for reasons of ‘impact fetishism’ and promotion (Fleck, 2013). Perhaps one of the clearest expressions of the academic vs. intellectual difference is Henry Giroux’ (2017) graduation address at UWS Hamilton. Another dividing line between academic and intellectual might be detected in this (p. 3): In the face of the temptation not to make a fuss, not to rock the boat and not to endanger one’s livelihood, it is almost always easier to serve the interests of the powerful, or to say and do nothing, than it is to stand up for what is right by speaking out.
vol. 62, no. 1, 2020
A similar thought had been expressed by Upton Sinclair 30 years before Chomsky. Reflecting the gendered realities of the day, Sinclair said, ‘it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!’ (Sinclair, 1935). In almost any of the 15,000 business schools globally one can find examples of Sinclair’s thought. ‘Stand up for what is right’ has a long history. Conceivably, it all started with Socrates’ trial (Nails 2018). Much later, it was none other than Italian natural philosopher, astronomer and mathematician Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) who made a fuss. Galilei did not give in to the Catholic Church even when shown the instruments of torture. Of course, it would have been by far easier to serve the interests of the powerful. Instead, Galilei ‘stood up for what is right’ even when this meant not being able to publish any longer. His daughter Suor Maria Celeste carried on his work. Unaware of Galilei and Maria’s achievement, many of today’s academics say and do nothing while focusing on the next 7,500-word journal article boosting journal-science. They join the academic rat race never realising that even when they win the rat race, the winner is still a rat. From PhD to comfortable retirement, they achieve the rather dubious grandeur of A-Star publications – euphemistically known as having academic standing and having a track record – rewarded by lush titles on their doors and business cards, hefty perks and salaries. Slowly they have been wheeled into becoming what Baritz (1960) called the Servants of Power seven years prior to Chomsky’s seminal essay. These academics are busy. They hardly ever have a moment for reflective thought – never mind self-reflection. They console themselves with hallucinations like ‘there’s no need for intellectuals in general to speak the truth and to expose lies, as mainstream journalists will do it anyway’ (p. 7). In times of fake news and ‘digital fascism’ (Fielitz & Marcks, 2019), the general public almost as much as academics has simply been Outfoxed (Greenwald, 2004). A gigantic and highly manipulative media apparatus ensures as much Responsible academics Reviewed by Thomas Klikauer
75
