University of Queensland and the Ramsay Centre: the submission I couldn't make because of word limits on submissions
On Thursday staff submissions regarding The University of Queensland's expression of interest in hosting the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation. I wrote the following not realising that strict word limits were proposed and that different elements were separated for feedback. I love my University, and in an environment of ever increasing funding cuts I understand why the University has sought to find a way to receive this funding while trying to maintain its integrity. I still don't want the Ramsay Centre.
Rather than waste my effort, I decided to post it here:
I acknowledge that the University has devoted a great deal of time and energy to creating extended majors which have addressed many of the concerns that I had about pedagogical approaches to Western Civilisation as a concept. I have written in the past that the concept of the "great books" create a curated vision of the past which does not necessarily reflect the historical reality, so I am glad to see the intention to critically approach this concept.
Unfortunately all the work the University has done cannot address my major concern about the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation, and that is its name and the unfortunate associations within the current socio-political milieu.
Tony Abbott's comments in his Quadrant article that the "key to understanding the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation is that it's not merely about Western Civilisation but in favour of it" has to some extent made this Centre a poisoned chalice for all universities.
His comments imply that the Ramsay Foundation's board will have an extraordinary degree of influence over how courses are run and how staff are recruited. The reported behaviour of the Ramsay Foundation towards ANU last year has added to this perception. The University's decision to keep the material relating to what has been proposed from all bar University staff I think is also a mistake. By not being transparent with our students, alumni, and broader community, and not giving them a chance to see the proposed pathways, the University has done little to address this perception. Perceptions matter, and I think it would be unfortunate for the University to be perceived as allowing undue influence in relation to this matter.The other problem with Abbott's statement is that it fed into not just Australia's history wars, but into a broader misuse of the terminology "Western Civilisation" as an innocent-sounding code for many white supremacist ideologies. As someone within the discipline of classics and ancient history, this has become an even more contentious term. The most blatant and obvious example is the event which occurred at the 2019 Society of Classical Studies annual meeting which required a special statement from the Board of Directors to condemn racist acts and speech. At a panel devoted to the future of classics where much of the discussion was addressing the need for diversification within the discipline, an independent scholar during the discussion component spoke about the need to "protect the idea of Western civilisation" and then addressed Dan-el Padilla Peralta, a Dominican classicist, and informed him that he only got his position at Princeton because he was black (for more details see here).
Issues surrounding the concept of Western civilisation have become imbued with concepts of white supremacy in the areas of classics and ancient history and medieval history (and perhaps in other later historical studies for which I cannot speak). When you combine that with Tony Abbott's statement in Quadrant and his known position within the so-called culture war, the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation brings with it a metaphorical stain. That perceived stain is my greatest concern about entering this agreement. By adopting the Ramsay Centre, UQ will be perceived by many as aligning itself with one side of Australia's culture war, as well as seen as supporting white supremacist ideas. I would hate for my University to be seen as such, because as an extension, all staff and students, especially those within the aligned disciplines, might be viewed in the same way. It is a horrible situation for individuals, and I think it is a major risk that cannot be managed by the University.
Rather than waste my effort, I decided to post it here:
I acknowledge that the University has devoted a great deal of time and energy to creating extended majors which have addressed many of the concerns that I had about pedagogical approaches to Western Civilisation as a concept. I have written in the past that the concept of the "great books" create a curated vision of the past which does not necessarily reflect the historical reality, so I am glad to see the intention to critically approach this concept.
Unfortunately all the work the University has done cannot address my major concern about the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation, and that is its name and the unfortunate associations within the current socio-political milieu.
Tony Abbott's comments in his Quadrant article that the "key to understanding the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation is that it's not merely about Western Civilisation but in favour of it" has to some extent made this Centre a poisoned chalice for all universities.
His comments imply that the Ramsay Foundation's board will have an extraordinary degree of influence over how courses are run and how staff are recruited. The reported behaviour of the Ramsay Foundation towards ANU last year has added to this perception. The University's decision to keep the material relating to what has been proposed from all bar University staff I think is also a mistake. By not being transparent with our students, alumni, and broader community, and not giving them a chance to see the proposed pathways, the University has done little to address this perception. Perceptions matter, and I think it would be unfortunate for the University to be perceived as allowing undue influence in relation to this matter.The other problem with Abbott's statement is that it fed into not just Australia's history wars, but into a broader misuse of the terminology "Western Civilisation" as an innocent-sounding code for many white supremacist ideologies. As someone within the discipline of classics and ancient history, this has become an even more contentious term. The most blatant and obvious example is the event which occurred at the 2019 Society of Classical Studies annual meeting which required a special statement from the Board of Directors to condemn racist acts and speech. At a panel devoted to the future of classics where much of the discussion was addressing the need for diversification within the discipline, an independent scholar during the discussion component spoke about the need to "protect the idea of Western civilisation" and then addressed Dan-el Padilla Peralta, a Dominican classicist, and informed him that he only got his position at Princeton because he was black (for more details see here).
Issues surrounding the concept of Western civilisation have become imbued with concepts of white supremacy in the areas of classics and ancient history and medieval history (and perhaps in other later historical studies for which I cannot speak). When you combine that with Tony Abbott's statement in Quadrant and his known position within the so-called culture war, the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation brings with it a metaphorical stain. That perceived stain is my greatest concern about entering this agreement. By adopting the Ramsay Centre, UQ will be perceived by many as aligning itself with one side of Australia's culture war, as well as seen as supporting white supremacist ideas. I would hate for my University to be seen as such, because as an extension, all staff and students, especially those within the aligned disciplines, might be viewed in the same way. It is a horrible situation for individuals, and I think it is a major risk that cannot be managed by the University.
Comments
Post a Comment