|I do not think the posting should be denied because the source is right-wing or even evil; the Left hand needs to know what the Right hand doeth.|
I do think Robt should preface his post with a note of his own as to the reason for sharing this (as you did, Michael, when you posted the nuke weapons article from a right-wing think tank (tho not so evil as some).
Based on his past statements and what he bold-faced, he has concerns about a weakening of academic freedom, some of it because of what he perceives as some sort of ideological hold of sinister feminist Post Moderns, or something.
The issue of academic freedom could be a question of general interest on this list; it is certainly relevant to science and society. Does ideological rigidity, even from a feminist or socialist perspective, actually inhibit freedom of thought? Even if so, how does that compare with the restrictions on direction of research as occurred during the USA administrations between Reagen and George W. As before science depts begged at the door hat in hand to the DOD, now they direct grants to appear to serve DHS as well.
Or is academic freedom a mere bourgeois value?
But don't just dump articles as if the intent is self-explanatory. Posted articles should be a resource, not the self-evident basis for discussion. I think the posters should at least let us know what issue they'd like to explore.
Greetings to all,
--- On Mon, 6/1/09, Michael H Goldhaber <[log in to unmask]> wrote: