1. Some repercussions from this that may not be obvious to non-academics. This is going to be a very big blow to the University of North Carolina. Universities live in a reputation system - and UNC has just taken a big hit to its credibility.
2. First - the Board has substantially damaged the university's ability to attract good professors. If you are a young professor, and you are lucky enough that you can choose among a couple of tenure track jobs, you are going to be less likely to want to go to to UNC.
3. Why would you want to gamble on the decision of a board of trustees that has to approve your tenure case, and will shoot down candidates because of their politics? It's an additional risk - especially in a country where political controversies can come out of nowhere.
4. If you are a tenured professor, whom the university is looking to recruit from elsewhere, perhaps to an endowed chair like the one offered to NHJ, you are even less likely to be interested. You have a good, secure job already, and accepting a provisional offer from UNC
5. Which then may be revoked by the board, could leave you in a nightmare situation, having to return to your home university with your tail between your legs, and your credibility badly damaged. It doesn't stop there:
6. UNC may likely lose professors it already has. It is wounded in the water, and other universities will come hunting for good people, knowing there is a high chance they will come - people are more likely to want to get away.
7. Finally, UNC's ability to raise money from foundations has been gravely harmed. The Knight Foundation, which funded this chair, is likely to be very unhappy. And other potential donors are going to wonder what will happen to their gifts under a politicized board.
8. All this, of course, is a side-story. But it explains why administrators in UNC - including those who aren't engaged in the politics of the 1619 Project - are going to be fearful and unhappy today. It's big news and bad news for a university that was already hurting.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Henry Farrell

Henry Farrell Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @henryfarrell

14 May
1. Kim Stanley Robinson has just posted his response - this completes the seminar that we've been running on his new book, The Ministry for the Future. crookedtimber.org/2021/05/14/res… . The contributions to the seminar, in order of publication were:
2. The initial organizing post, introducing the seminar, and with links to all the individual posts is here - crookedtimber.org/2021/05/03/the…
3. @OlufemiOTaiwo on the different trajectories of change depicted in the US and India, and what that says about global power and our collective imagination crookedtimber.org/2021/05/03/wha… .
Read 12 tweets
11 May
1. So an important story I've been waiting to see someone write up properly, and haven't, yet: How Fox News Grandpa Got His Jab. The numbers tell us that older Americans are getting vaccinated in high numbers. But lots of them are conservative Republicans. So what gives?
2. First - the numbers According to the CDC - usafacts.org/visualizations… - approx. 83% of Americans between the ages of 65-75 and 80% between 75-85 have gotten at least one shot. That is a thumping majority of a demographic that has tended Republican and has lots of Fox viewers.
3. There are obvious obvious provisos with trying to extrapolate too far. There may be problems with the CDC data. It's trying to capture the overall population, not the voting/politically-engaged/political-tv-watching population. And you can add your own to your heart's content.
Read 15 tweets
3 May
1. Thread. crookedtimber.org/2021/05/03/the… We’re running a Crooked Timber seminar on Kim Stanley Robinson’s extraordinary book the Ministry for the Future. This book has already gotten lots of attention (see @ezraklein vox.com/2020/11/30/217… and @BarackObama )
2. So what we want to do is to help the book start doing its practical work in the world. It's a novel that both sets out to make the consequences of climate change as viscerally as possible, and to think through what other economic, technological, political and social changes...
3. might help fight it and perhaps, over the longer term, even start to turn it back. It is in short, a book that is intended to be read as a novel, but also to start arguments and get people moving to start doing things. We've brought together a number of different people.
Read 6 tweets
12 Mar
1. @ANewman_forward and I have seen our term #WeaponizedInterdependence become a broadly used shorthand for describing the emerging world (article: direct.mit.edu/isec/article/4… , coedited book with @dandrezner amzn.to/2OnGNLO. Two new examples suggest it's going international:
2. One is @StevenErlanger new NYT piece nytimes.com/2021/03/12/wor… , talking about how the US has "weaponized" the dollar, and Europe wants to respond. In @GuntramWolff words, "To be credible you need reciprocity, and retaliation is the only way to do it." But as Guntram elaborates,
3. the problem is that ""the politics are more difficult,’’ ... given the asymmetrical power of the U.S. Treasury and the global role of the dollar. “The reality is that there is no united European power able to project power on that scale.’’"
Read 20 tweets
2 Mar
1. amzn.to/2MILMpM Today's the launch date for The Uses And Abuses of Weaponized Interdependence, which @dandrezner @ANewman_forward and I have co-edited. This is, for better or worse, a timely book - the issues that we all talk about are core problems in global politics
2. bloomberg.com/news/articles/… Take this @business piece by @NickWadhams that came out yesterday - it describes how the US-China rivalry is focused on fights over technology more than traditional military confrontation.
3. Wadham's piece is based on conversations with U.S. sources, who emphasize China's threat. The people he talked to describe "a sense that China has essentially forced the U.S. to start breaking off elements of business and technology relations in a pattern known as decoupling."
Read 18 tweets
10 Jan
1. Short thread - on the various claims we're seeing from Republican politicians over the last few days that the Democratic push for accountability is "divisive." Damn right it's divisive - that is what it has to be.
2. It is intended to enforce a clear division between those who accept and are committed to democracy and those who are willing to turn to violence when the vote doesn't turn out the way that they want it to.
3. One of the basic implications of Adam Przeworski's theoretic work is that democracy is made out of mutually reinforcing expectations, and those expectations are fragile. If some actors think they would be better off defecting from the democratic bargain, they will.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(