Academic politics
Aug. 1st, 2004 07:29 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alexxkayA while ago, I was helping ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
kestrell look through the packet of fliers advertising student activities that gets sent to incoming MIT students. It was notable that a majority of activities on campus had at least two separate clubs. There were relatively few 'singletons', and a few with three or more. I infer from this that a majority of MIT student activities have gone through at least one political shcism.
I have heard it said that the reason politics in academia are so vicious is that the actual power at stake is so low. I guess that this inverse relationship continues below the faculty level as well.
kestrell look through the packet of fliers advertising student activities that gets sent to incoming MIT students. It was notable that a majority of activities on campus had at least two separate clubs. There were relatively few 'singletons', and a few with three or more. I infer from this that a majority of MIT student activities have gone through at least one political shcism.I have heard it said that the reason politics in academia are so vicious is that the actual power at stake is so low. I guess that this inverse relationship continues below the faculty level as well.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-08-01 11:33 pm (UTC)However, I'm not sure it's entirely that. A student organization probably doesn't have any strong reason to stay together if there is a big difference of opinion; the school holds the money, which would otherwise be a powerful force, and even the most dedicated person is only going to be at the school and in the club for a few years.
Finding out why the schisms would make an interesting sociology project, though.