Designing the Future of Higher Education - will present ongoing work undertaken by Ann Pendleton-Jullian with students and innovative leaders in this domain to redesign the future of the university — not the master plan, but the model and mechanisms that form a university level learning and research ecosystem for the 21st century.
Originating in her own work on several projects, then transferred to a set of humanities studios at Georgetown University, and on to a set of multi-disciplinary studios at Ohio State, this project proposes more than incremental change. More than focusing on the fixing or repairing of problems, or the opportunities and challenges of disruptive technologies, these studios begin by asking: The event can be viewed here: In this essay, he explores these politics in Germany and Russia in order to illuminate the ways in which history is and might be engaged in Poland.
He argues that history cannot be overlooked with a focus only on the future, and rather that the past ought be engaged more thoughtfully. In particular, he proposes that Poland address much more substantially in its public culture the victims of communism, the heroes of that time, notably John Paul II, and finally the Solidarity movement itself. Indeed, this non-violent movement ought to be part of a global history of liberation movements alongside Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandela.
He concludes, "as Michael Kennedy, the superb American sociologist, says, 'Solidarity' is something too precious to leave to just the Poles. Singapore Management University paper available below and on its website: Oromaner, Book Review, Education Review 23 Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Scholar My publications and interviews extending themes from the book: Interviews with Contemporary Sociologists, in prep, ed. Kennedy and Linda Gusia. Our discussions then and subsequent have substantially improved this paper. The limits of this paper reflect, alas, the limited time for my learning from all these colleagues I so appreciate.
The University as a global form is typically conceived as a project of ever greater cosmopolitanism within a political imaginary defined by excellence in an increasingly interconnected world. But this transformational knowledge politics is not without conflict. We might also recognize more readily the paths along which we might more productively travel. What political imaginary enables greater university possibilities for public consequence? To answer that requires that we recognize the character of our challenges, on the one hand, and on the other, the means at university disposal.
While I have considered this question elsewhere Kennedy , especially in terms both of the global resonance and public engagements of universities, it is especially important for such a publication as that in which this article appears to consider the role of conflict in the transformation of universities.
After all, the very existence of the European Humanities University in exile is a function of its conflict with the authorities of the society in which it was born, to which it is first responsible. To be a university in exile demands understanding conflict as potentially a resource in the generation of university purpose and capacity.
Conflict, however, is not only critical for universities in exile. Not all conflicts are so generative, however. Indeed, many conflicts can be positively destructive, especially when there are social forces and political interests seeking to destroy the transformative politics universities necessarily, or at least ideally, embody. In what follows, I consider the challenge in general, and then how I might understand it at Brown University.
I take the lessons of my own Brown University in order subsequently to pose critical questions for the European Humanities University. We might begin, however, by recognizing the university as a global form. The University as Global Form Universities are extraordinary organizations — on the one hand, besides religious institutions they are the most enduring form of modernity.
On the other hand, universities have also become expressions of the world that is becoming. Indeed, for a society to move up in the world system means, in part, to develop ever more prestigious universities capable of producing research of global recognition and consequence. As much if not more than any other upwardly mobile society in the world system, Singapore exemplifies this investment Kennedy a,. But it is far from alone. China, the United Arab Emirates, and other rapidly changing societies have invested substantially in universities, especially around science, technology, engineering and management.
Why does the university occupy such privileged status in this discussion? Universities also provide the scripts with which we can recognize the future. Universities come to map reality and in turn help to constitute it by increasingly privileging a certain constitution with a global over local edge eg Frank and Gabler As this sociological school regularly demonstrates, one can trace many of the leading terms of our global society — human rights, climate change, and so on — back to university communities.
They document the mechanisms that produce this coordination too — the organization of prestige in the world and its consequent emulation. The increasingly global training and labor market, where scholars and students travel across the world in pursuit of their own academic recognition, helps to produce this very effect. This global process and its accompanying political imaginary works best for those parts of a university that are relatively unmoored from place.
Engineering, computer science, life sciences and many other disciplines appear to exist within epistemic cultures that are beyond context, without any publics other than similarly trained colleagues and those who might invest in the products that these scholars produce.
Office Supplies, Furniture, Technology at Office Depot
University excellence depends on climbing that reputational ladder. One could see that very process at work when Brown University sought to reimagine its own place in the world, and to become more of a research university. Brown University as a Global University In , and with a new president at the helm, Brown University embarked on a mission to rethink the purpose of the university in general, and in particular, with this question to start: How can our unique strengths be channeled to address local, national, and global opportunities and challenges?
This was truly a worldly endeavor.
Of course that was only a vision, but envisioning futures is critical to establishing possibilities. Indeed, if one were to compare that program with its operational expression Brown University , one could appreciate the real revisions of imaginations in practice. But that transformation does not only come from changes of leaders and their visions. Conflicts, Racism and Injustice at Brown University Brown University was founded with money made out of the slave trade. The first African American female president of an Ivy League institution, Ruth Simmons, made the founding of a center to come to terms with those origins one of her top priorities.
By the time her tenure ended, the center was established as the Center for the Study of Slavery and Justice alongside the naming of its director, Tony Bogues. It has been obliged both to recognize the ways in which past injustices and current struggles over human rights, justice, and freedom might be connected.
It mobilizes scholars who see that connection and therefore might reach out proximate publics https: But this is not just a question of wisdom from above. Like the rest of the USA, Brown has been engulfed in a series of contests over White privilege in the University, as have other universities Wong and Green Brown University was among those which moved most deftly in response, with new Provost Rick Locke figuring a way to engage the protest: Brown University developed the most comprehensive and responsive Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan I have seen, in response to student mobilizations https: Of the eleven action items set up, only two relate to publics beyond campus under these charges: This is especially evident when it comes to Native Americans.
As the university has increased support for Native American and Indigenous Studies at Brown, the university also connected with proximate publics too, especially among Narragansett and Wampanoag peoples. Elizabeth Hoover, an anthropologist and herself of Micmac and Mohawk ancestry, was most critical at the start of this revival in indigenous work with her support of Native American students at Brown. But the most demonstrable public event signals a new, desired relationship. Their annual powwow has improved the relationship between Brown and the local Native community. As a result, the powwow has become a popular regional event Sloan The relationship of Brown University to its core and proximate publics have not always been so positive and mutually beneficial, however.
In , various authorities associated with Providence challenged whether the university contributed sufficiently to the city. Other universities had been much more aggressive in making their environs more than a context for their work, and much more of a partner. This engagement is not simple, however, and builds on a substantial tradition of criticism. Some students have seen Brown take advantage of, rather than partner with marginalized communities in its most proximate city. The author puts it bluntly, echoing critiques of white savior industrial complexes Cole elsewhere: Strongly resembling neocolonial missionary work, the University lauds nonprofit work as a career path in which students can specialize and develop their skills and expertise in.
True to its mission, the University dedicates whole centers and programs — such as the Swearer Center for Public Service — to connecting students to community organizations throughout the city and state along with other mechanisms Teach for America, Americorps VISTA, etc. A significant number of grassroots, community, labor, and youth development orgs active in the city today have been started by Brown students in their activist phases and since then have been administered by the same ilk. Those not directly founded by Brown alumni, were founded by alumni of other Ivy League schools and maintain close institutional relationships with those from Brown.
One only need to dig into historical archives to find that numerous influential nonprofit organizations have consistently been initiated, led, or administered by Ivy League students and alumni: This question deserves more engagement to be sure, for as the author presents it, there are too many assumptions built into the study and not enough critical sociological research and analysis.
But that could require that we embrace a new kind of knowledge activism and engaged scholarship. Mayer Zald once argued that sociology split off from social work at the start of the last century in order to engage an upward mobility project. A decade later Michael Burawoy made this question of extra-academic audience central in his own manifesto for public sociology. In short, we need to recognize that debates within academic disciplines can create the space for extra-academic audiences to be recognized.
Engaged scholarship results from that kind of contest, within the academy, and between the academy and its various publics. Brown University has, itself, put that engaged scholarship to the center of its mission without losing its commitment to those themes of integrative scholarship. Its goal is to create high-impact learning experiences and collaborative educational partnerships that address major social challenges and produce tangible public benefits. Engaged scholarship is premised on the idea that reciprocal exchanges between academic and non-academic partners - in the classroom, on campus, in the community - create rich opportunities for learning, knowledge-creation, and problem-solving that will help to create a more just and equitable society https: With this emphasis the Swearer Center is changing its very sense by changing the character of learning they are to provide.
Even more, their intellectual and institutional move promises to challenge the very sense of what Brown University should be known for. Not only might Brown be recognized for world class scholarship, but it might be appreciated for its recognition of community agency and reciprocity Kennedy In this, universities are not missionaries. Its particularity is critical, but its broader world historical significance is worthy of additional reflection. Nevertheless, the greatest majority of its students, and its faculty, come from, and even still live in, Belarus.
This endeavor in higher education is both physically within and beyond Belarus therefore. It is also culturally within, and beyond, Belarus.
Am Ok In Ok
In everyday discussion as well as in official projections, one cannot lose sight of the EHU intention to be a Belarusian institution. There is, of course, debate about how Belarusian it is. Nobody says it is too Belarusian, but some charge that it is insufficiently so. But this is complex. A university in exile during the age of totalitarianism made sense, however, but in this world defined by transition Kennedy , EHU did not.
It has been, as Belarus has been, an anomaly. Most believed that was a temporary problem until the aberration that was Lukashenko would be supplanted by a more democratic and capitalist Belarus than he would allow. One might argue, however, that Lukashenko was no aberration. He was an anticipation of things to come.
Lukashenko is no Putin, but they are not dissimilar either. They hold onto power tenaciously.
They know that the law is used as a means of power, not as a means to regulate power. They know that dissimulation works well in managed democracies, as the latter term itself implies. But this style of governance is not only born out of former Soviet-type societies. It now grows out of those thought to be democratic, as Hungary and the United States itself suggest with their own leaderships. Some, however, have criticized the institution for being insufficiently focused on Belarus; while the number of courses in Belarusian language is not substantial but comparisons to courses offered in Belrusian in Belarusian institutions would help make the case appear more empirical than ideological , the references to Belarusian questions within a European framework are obvious.
In this the critics are right; Belarus is understood not as an isolated nation, but as part of a larger project of Europe, of modernity, that needs be engaged. And the same for EHU. Boundaries are not so important, as students and faculty regularly traverse the border between Belarus and Lithuania, and the European Union. In that Vilnius location, faculty and students feel as much a part of Europe as a part of Belarus.
Indeed, that sense of belonging to more than one space, simultaneously, that cosmopolitan disposition, is readily apparent. But it is not a cosmopolitanism at ease. In this, EHU must constantly demonstrate, even prove, that it deserves to be part of Europe, appealing to the sensibilities of its hosts, and its sponsors. It must demonstrate its European quality, and not, simply, assume it.
And it must, in order to earn that European support, also demonstrate its Belarusian essence even as some Belarusians work to undermine it. One should expect that Belrusian authorities would mobilize all sorts of resources against EHU, for its very existence is a reminder of what Belarus is not, and what Belarus cannot allow within its territory. In order to justify what was, perhaps, simply a policy decision made on impulse by an insecure political leader, Belarusian authorities must continue to justify why EHU is a threat. Rather, they must invent dangers, and create enemies.
It must work constantly at translating across cultural horizons. Alas, those horizons are not always in search of fusion. On the one hand, their principal public, their students, receive the most attention from staff and faculty. On the other hand, the principal base for prestige, research, demands that faculty spend as much time as possible in scholarly pursuit and its publication or even public engagement.
While research can benefit from teaching, and certainly teaching from active research, time is limited. Universities, as institutions, always must support this balancing act. EHU does too, except in this case with added political complexity. Life as a member of the EHU community is not easy. For many of the faculty, it involves maintaining a professorial life in Lithuania and a private life in Belarus. Even students face this challenge; they may thrive in the EHU scholarly atmosphere while acquaintances at home warn them that they will have no future in Belarus as an EHU graduate.
The simplest way to resolve that conflict is to decide one has no future in Belarus which is, in the end, a terrific loss for Belarus given the great quality of students I have encountered. Belarusian authorities must understand this quality point. Someone in those authorities must understand that it is good for Belarus to allow its students to learn at and its faculty to teach at EHU.
Perhaps some part of everyone, even some part of President Lukashenko himself, recognizes the value of this transnational learning for Belarus. At the same time, however, those authorities know they need to remain enemies in order to justify continuing to deny EHU its home in Belarus. This foundational contradiction means, then, that understanding the EHU project requires a different analytical lens than what we apply to Brown and other universities.
European Humanities University cannot be understood, simply, or even with that familiar critical lens as an academic organization where administration and faculty can be viewed in class terms. This class struggle approach is certainly part of the story, as it is in every academic setting.
But at EHU it is overlaid by another contradiction: EHU is defined by the contradiction between being a national body, dedicated first and foremost to Belarusian students and faculty, while on the other hand, its scholarship is defined by its openness to the world and its embrace of a mode of learning defined by a culture of critical discourse.
Open Society is one term for this commitment. In this sense, it is dedicated to a model of the global university defined by excellence itself. In this, therefore, we find the greater contradiction than even that which defines an approach rooted in class conflict. That is the foundational, existential, contradiction facing EHU.
It is, however, not an unusual problem for global universities. Indeed, even Singapore faces these challenges as the contest over global vs. And this contest structures how resources flow, and how various values contend in the definition of excellence and university purpose. Donor confidence must always be managed, regardless of whether these are private philanthropists, state agencies, or foreign aid organizations.
And this challenge must always be managed alongside the other conflicts and contradictions facing universities in everyday life. But when a university is in exile, the commitment of donors to vision, and not just to practice, must be extraordinary. And that, it seems to me, is what these times require in order to manage the challenge closed minds generating closing societies yield. But a recent action clarified even further the ways in which founding moments can challenge, and even rearticulate, university priorities.
- John for Everyone Part 2: Chapters 11-21 Pt. 2 (New Testament for Everyone)?
- Full text of "The cumulative book index".
- An Education in Boston (Paperback).
On August 20, , a group claiming descent from the tribe associated with the martyred Metacomet, also known as King Philip II, occupied land that Brown University owned, claiming that this was sacred land to their people, to the Pokanoket. Although that encampment was itself, contentious, among the indigenous of Rhode Island, that conflict was kept off public stage even if frequently referenced in shadow conversations. The movement, nonetheless, made it difficult for those cognizant of the expropriations defining colonial and US history toward its native peoples to challenge those who held the most radical position in naming that injustice.
The Pokanoket ended their occupation on September Brown also offered a powerful symbolic point acknowledging the divergence between justice and the law. Hope lands to which it has record title in Bristol, Rhode Island, are historically Pokanoket and that part of the land contains sacred sites that are important to the present-day Pokanoket Tribe and Pokanoket people, who are dispersed among many tribes, and other Native American, American Indian, and aboriginal peoples of New England.
Brown University is dedicated to the continuous work of being a globally recognized research university, but that is not just in the work of its individual scholars and students. It also means ever greater awareness of the conditions of its own possibility, and the institutional rearticulation of those challenges into its practice and its rules. At one time, Brown might have asked the police to remove the Pokanoket protestors from the land to which it has record title, much as it did when students occupied university buildings in the last century.
But it did not this time, in part because it has come to recognize that conflicts and contradictions defining its university practice are not distractions from its mission. That struggle in knowledge activism, given the depths of injustices in which Brown and its various publics are embedded, is never complete.
Conclusions European Humanities University has faced its own conflicts and contradictions well beyond its founding as a university in exile. There are too many who would wish to undermine the European Humanities University, to complete the Lukashenko prophecy that Belarus needed no European ties to become all that it might be. Indeed, Lukashenko may have been right, for the kinds of free and open universities symbolized by the European Humanities University are now under assault, with the Central European University being the most obvious example now in European Union imaginations. Although this contest is painful at times, its product is a revaluation of what universities do.
People struggle over what ought to be taught, who ought to be the beneficiaries of learning, and above all debate what universities owe the communities of which they are a part. That takes administrators of vision, of courage, but also of caution. It takes knowledgeable publics mobilized in real and transformational solidarity. We have reason to fear the world that is becoming, one that attacks academic freedom in the name of national values known only to those who control the means of violence.
We face a world that is increasingly polarized; I have seen universities in various parts of the world become the captive of political forces, and lose their autonomy. That is a nightmare for intellectual responsibility. On the other hand, I would hope to see universities, as corporate agents, enter the political fray not as partisan, and not as arbiter, but as a kind of collective engaged scholar which poses new ways of viewing both immediate and wicked problems, modeling the kind of transformative practice we might see citizens and communities themselves take up.
Indeed, if universities are better partners, I wonder if civil societies might not produce better politicians, ones than find in dialogue and transformative vision the kinds of communities we need generate if we are to thrive, and maybe even survive. Both Brown University and European Humanities University are part of that future we need to see, but we need to work constantly to assure that commitment in practice, and in support.
This is not just about the fate of particular universities; this is about the value of learning, knowledgeability, and decency in the definition of our societies, of our futures. This is knowledge activism. Liberatory Thoughts, Reflections, and Analysis. April 21, http: Making a Difference in American Political Life. The Great American University: Public Affairs, , Cole, Teju. Worldwide Shifts in Academia in the 20th Century. Stanford University Press, Gusia, Linda and Michael D. Cultural Formations of Postcommunism: Emancipation, Transition, Nation and War. University of Minnesota Press, Intellectuals, Universities and Publics in Transformation Stanford: June 5, http: In this presentation, I juxtapose three: This comparison illuminates radically different assumptions about innovation's source.
More importantly, it moves possibilities in the design of knowledge networks and their public effervescence by establishing a different sense of connection among facts, objects, and visions in the design of globalizing knowledge. But they also function differently when cast in opposition to communist rule and in opposition to populist illiberal rule.
I synthesize various accounts of the forms of domination characterized by each of these anti-democratic governmentalities. In particular, I emphasize their modes of truth telling and knowledge denigrations. I also elaborate forms of learned resistance. Nonetheless, intellectuals and their institutions and networks could delight in their influence; in speaking truth to power, or accommodating power with compromised if not captive minds, knowledge and learning could also be painted as consequential.
The limits of this hegemonic counter-hegemony only become evident when knowledge and learning is expected to defend democracy after democratic transition was thought realized. I review several ideas for that knowledge activism in conclusion. What is Globalizing Knowledge?
The form of GK will vary given the different historical and institutional contexts that shape such learning GK is, therefore, relationally composed. The Sociology of GK concerns the conditions, manners, and implications of that fusion. Knowledge matters, but for whom and for what? Clearly we cannot answer this question in general. But we need foundational methods to figure how we answer these questions for whom and for what knowledge matters.
Those methods include being able to understand A the meanings of particular questions on their own terms; B how different kinds of actors variably value those questions and answers; C the implications of different questions and answers for different kinds of actors; and D how engagements of these matters differ across global contexts.
This is clearly a hermeneutic sociology. Hermeneutics is a great method. I have developed my own method in Globalizing Knowledge by borrowing from hermeneutics; I was delighted to see that student Anastasiya Tumel declared yesterday it to be one of their favorite concepts, and even words! Language, Power and Identity: And that begins with learning languages. A Language learning is critical. English IS a global language, and thus Americans are privileged. Indeed, that you all discuss in English because of my lacks in Russian and Belarussian indicate just how much privilege there is.
B To ask what language beyond English Americans learn is different from asking what languages beyond Belarusian and Russian you learn. To figure that answer is meaningful — for what languages you learn ultimately determines your points of reference and what you value, what cultural treasures you celebrate, and what peoples will embrace you more readily than others. It seems quite appropriate to learn Lithuanian given the hospitality of this nation to you, even if it is less globally useful. C These questions of language are tied to the sociological imagination, a course I just taught at Brown University this past term.
What is the Sociological Imagination in the 21st century? Wright Mills wrote the book in the 20th, and identified three questions central to that imagination: B A decade and a half later, Anthony Giddens wrote in Sociology: A Brief but Critical Introduction, that sociology is composed of three kinds of imaginations: We might use other terms Giddens uses elsewhere for this too: Globalizing Knowledge is, itself, an exercise in this, an exploration of intellectual and institutional responsibility for those that believe knowledge matters.
D At the same time, it seems like these reflexive approaches could be enhanced by a more refined approach to thinking about structure and agency, or the conditions of social transformation. E I have synthesized his approach to transformation with five aspects that, for ease of reference, I call the Sewellian list in Globalizing Knowledge. The first three are especially helpful when it comes to structural approaches to transformation.
The latter two are useful when we emphasize changes in knowledgeability. This variety of structures can lead to conflicting claims and social conflicts. Those with greater authority in interpretation, with greater knowledge, have disproportionate power in this transformation. While this capacity is also universally distributed, those with a wider knowledge of different contexts, and different rules across those contexts, should have disproportionate influence in shaping change, ceteris paribus. This approach to structure and agency could help address the next thesis.
B That Anthropological awareness is also important for recognizing various points of view on your own project. Here, a critical note: While those from the Global South might critique EHU Eurocentrism, those from EHU might critique their naivete about how geopolitical epistemics works in this part of the world, where the most obvious imperial contest setting the conditions of possibility is one between Russia and the European Union; D As we introduce epistemology and reflexivity into our discussions, however, we must also introduce Normativity: Anatoliy regularly introduces these questions, asking you to consider why you consider the imagined future of EHU practice superior to that which Lukashenko offers.
You need a robust answer as to why, not only for the sake of philosophy, but for justifying your own investments here. E You are not alone: Among our conclusions were not only that he was introducing greater measures of hatefulness and white patriarchal supremacy, but also that he was destroying our confidence in our ability to recognize facts, and to value truthfulness.
Of course this is nothing new to those who have experienced communist rule, but it also means that those who know how to understand communist rule and its aftermath might be able to understand better the world that is being made more generally. F I would propose, in this globalizing knowledge problematic, that you think about how your own analysis of the EHU experience could in fact inform the analysis of places and spaces beyond EHU.
I certainly would help you in this. G Indeed, you can think about what your values are, your historical trajectory has been, and your comparisons are and how that could inform the open society mission. Given what has happened to CEU in the last year, and what has happened analogous to EHU on that, there is one and important place to start. A Most universities establish their structural location with reference to rankings in a globalizing world.
Can EHU play in that game? In some ways yes, but you also should think about how EHU is different. B It is not a state institution like most universities in Europe and many in the world. However, it does receive support from a variety of state actors, including Lithuania, Sweden, and the European Union. What does that mean?
C Here, the idea that universities must be free and autonomous is a myth we need to preserve; we need to act as if we are free in order to maximize our value; at the same time, we need to be able to understand what enables actors with resources to support universities. We need to demonstrate the functional value of universities. Chapter 3 in Globalizing Knowledge discusses all this at length. D Here, then, we need to be able to establish how EHU is important; other universities typically demonstrate that with the STEM disciplines, for they are the value beyond politics, what the Chinese are increasingly investing in to elevate their universities beyond others in the world.
What can EHU do? E EHU has more purchase on, and potential access to, elevating the value of truthfulness in the world. This is not just a humanities question, as discussion yesterday suggested. It is also a question of looking at evidence critically; figuring how to research questions properly; and even figuring out what are the more important questions to ask. In our intro class, we asked not only about fake news, but how hateful speech distracts us from asking about more important questions about the allocation of resources toward a sustainable and just society.
A For the most part, EHU is considered as an institution exiled from a nation that has not taken the course of transition that the rest of Europe has. In this, for nearly 25 years, EHU has been seen as vanguard, Belarus as laggard, in the realization of democratic capitalism. B In recent years, however, Belarus seems to have anticipated some things to which the West has itself returned: EHU has itself experienced that too, but by virtue of its survival, indicates the problem of defining what the boundaries of a system are; F So much of social science is built up around the notion of stable boundaries — among societies, of individuals, of communities.
We need to think about the character of the world in which EHU finds itself, in order that it recognize better its universality and particularity. I use other terms. A In order to introduce truthfulness to the core of what you do, you need to think more about your own forms of cosmopolitanism and ethnocentrism, and figure out how to bridge your core questions to those others care about. B Open Society questions are clearly central to that; but that kind of cosmopolitanism will connect you to some and not to others. C Analysing Gender and Sexuality is one of the most effective forms of globalizing knowledge; to incorporate that into your work in the coming year seems critical, not only for an analysis of EHU, but also to analyze how gender and sexuality work in the region to structure power and privilege.
D Race is one of the most complex forms for globalizing knowledge — it is one of the most powerful vehicles for explaining how power works variously but coherently across the world; but its relationship to ethnicity is among the most important issues to consider. An interview with Linda is forthcoming in this series. E In short, you need to deepen your expertise on the arenas in which you are distinctive, which, to my mind, is on how to develop open societies out of more closed ones, and how to recognize that process of reversal that we see across Europe.
But that will be enhanced if you can think about how it relates to other forms of critical thinking, notably around gender, race, sexuality, and empires beyond those in which you are immediately implicated. I would propose that you consider researching what this actually means in the coming year, and move beyond the 20th century imaginations that have structured most university sensibilities of publics. You are tied to Belarus — in your mission; to Vilnius and Lithuania -- your proximate environ; to the European Union — your principal funder and reference; to Russia — who makes claim to owning the dominant language of your instruction and to protecting people who speak it; but what methods could you use to go beyond these apparent public relations?
B One of the most productive transformations in the social sciences over the last decade has been to move away from categorical thinking and toward relational thinking — the idea that the relationship among the parts is more important than the qualities of any part. Here, we analyze this in terms of networks and flows.
Can you map that travel? Consider, for example, with whom your professors collaborate in writing papers or conference participation? With whom do you collaborate in social media? Indeed, what your network might look like through selfies? Could you analyze your public engagements beyond categorical identities like nations or places? Even analyze what types of organizations, what distances from home and EHU, these ties represent? And how that itself reflects a more nuanced network identity than categorical identities?
D If we think about knowledge as a public good, which publics seem to benefit most from the production of EHU knowledge? How would you map that? Look at the readerships of its publications? The places that employ EHU alumni? The political figures and business leaders who invoke EHU itself? And how do they use and invoke all of these things? E Could you imagine producing a network that might itself elevate EHU status?
To report this review as inappropriate, please complete this short form.
This is not a public relations campaign simply, but consider the comparison: In my book, I discussed the case of Ashraf Ghani at some length. How might CEU learn from that trajectory? Or from that of Vaclav Havel? Even more, could you imagine developing something akin to Jadaliyya?
What most closely approximates that in the Russian and English speaking worlds? Why and how do such public humanities and social science networks vary across different global contexts in the way that they do? A To survive as an institution, yes, but also to exist as a reminder of what an alternative conception of Belarusian intellectual and political responsibility is.
And by virtue of that practice, create an alternative future for Belarus. The institution as such is defined by this, but can this be more than a condition of gratitude and appreciation? And rather an object of investigation that itself might inspire more examples of this? D Those associated with EHU have already experienced so much of this solidarity and hospitality I celebrated in my address to your graduation ceremony. I had not sufficiently appreciated, however, that this even preceded your arrival in Lithuania, and that you also experienced this when EHU was closed down and so many students were able to complete their degrees elsewhere, most notably with some 60 students in Smolny.
E It is not easy to develop the notion of solidarity in scholarly work given how much we are encouraged to think first of ourselves and our own careers, about how good our ideas are rather than think about what ideas are best for all, and how to recognize that Aufhebung. But if any place could benefit from such disposition, it is EHU for EHU needs solidarity to thrive, and perhaps, we should say frankly, to survive.
It has already enjoyed a substantial commitment over these nearly 25 years from scholars and students within the institution, and from a variety of actors across the world. That commitment is even more important, how, for the future. You tell me how EHU does it. And might do more of it. You, my dear graduates, are those we honor today. But because you are all listening to me now, you already know that. So let me tell you something you may not expect. This is how professors dress in the summertime.
This is how we dress at our graduations. And depending on where we received our PhD, we have different colors in our gowns, and even in the styles of hat we wear. This is Carolina Blue. But I just wore it at Brown University when we graduated our students a month ago. I know this outfit may be a little gaudy, but I asked your president whether it might be ok. He said it would be great.
When I think about the future, when we think about the future, we think about you. We put our trust, our faith, in you. You represent the future. But you are also grounded. You are grounded in the venerable tradition of great European Universities. But great universities cannot remain content with tradition; they thrive when that tradition enables consequential innovation and creativity. European Humanities University does just that. It must do that. In this year you graduate, EHU is approaching 25 years of its existence, with over the half of that time being here in Lithuania, a country which has offered EHU wonderful hospitality, and solidarity alongside other supporters from the European Union and others who appreciate what the EU has become, and still might be.
Hospitality and solidarity are not things one typically hears in commencement addresses. And that is because we too readily take for granted that universities are part of the world we have received, and part of an obvious future that is a smooth extension of the present. But you know different. Universities, although centuries old in conception, feel at risk in this world that is becoming. That is because ideas are becoming more powerful than they have ever been before. Our science and technology find new partners in the imagination cultivated best in the arts and humanities.
Our social sciences are not only mapping the world, but they are also helping to design it. And when we do that, we are not only doing what we are told, but we are figuring what ought to be. The highly educated can be dangerous, and universities, the producers of the highly educated, can be dangerous.
That wisdom is long standing, but it is becoming even more true today, for those who are afraid of the future can find their anchor in repressing universities, in telling them what they can and cannot teach, what is useful and what is frivolous knowledge. But we can see that contest much earlier in the story of this university, in your story. I take inspiration from it. There, I learned what solidarity meant. There I learned what integrity means. There I learned what resilience is. There I learned something I could not have learned in America.
But I learn that from you too. And this is why your education may be more suitable for the world that is becoming than you might imagine. That disposition is critical for the world that is becoming, that has recently been made. We no longer have to travel to information; information comes to us.
Our biggest and most powerful corporations are not only manufacturers of things, but the makers of dreams, if we see the digital economy as living in cyber space as much as real space. We are becoming increasing interconnected not just through technology, but through our fate. Global warming is not something the rich can simply escape, that America can overlook because its military arsenal is the greatest in the world.
Our security is common, and that is why solidarity is central to our future, and hospitality a disposition we need. But more, thanks to you. You are the future because you students of Belarus and your fellows in this Belarusian university in exile anticipate the future we might wish if you have learned well. This future of hope and creativity, of hospitality and solidarity, is by no means assured. Indeed, there are forces of reaction that threaten it in order to provide a false sense of security based on repression and fear. I see that in my country, and I see it closer to where we now stand.
- Voices from the Trail of Tears (Real Voices, Real History);
- Similar authors to follow.
But closest to me now, you graduates of EHU, are far more than this, for you have imbibed the qualities essential to your own personal success, to our own collective well-being. Yes you have all become great designers, lawyers, media managers, political scientists, cultural heritage specialists, sociologists, and other vocations, but 1. You have developed a sense of resilience that the creative need to persevere; 2. You have cultivated a sense of responsibility that learning at EHU demands.
Whether you reside in Vilnius or in Belarus and learn at a distance, studying at EHU has demanded more effort, more awareness, more intention, than at most universities. We cannot have a world for the better without the resilient, creative, responsible, and intentional graduates of the European Humanities University leading the way. Congratulations on what you have accomplished in this graduation, but more, thank you in anticipation of what you will accomplish. And when you accomplish those things, think back on the solidarity and hospitality you have enjoyed in this university, and anticipate how you might extend those qualities in the future.
This is an academic tradition that assures a future of which we wish to be part. And I am grateful to have been able to be part of your sendoff. But I want you to remember this sendoff. And figure out how you wish to be part of the profkennedyselfie and check it out on Instagram later today!
Wright Mills described the sociological imagination as the articulation of biography and history; we might then declare him as the patron saint of your show. Stories are the things we tell to ourselves, and tell to one another, about how we all connect with each other. Those stories can be based on harmony or on contest. They can be open, or they can be closed. They can, knowingly or unknowingly, elevate some and deflate others. A sociologist likes to think about the different kinds of stories we tell, how they affect our public life, and what kinds of power, privilege, and solidarity that are sometimes out of public view.
Those stories, then, are not just about how we are connected, but reflect, and can even transform, the power and privilege organizing our society, and the ties that bind us in the public sphere. Indeed, the world is not prepared for the world of The social contract of democratic modernity organized around the trinity of liberty, equality and fraternity, or as I would rather say freedom, justice, and solidarity, is broken. While it had been fraying since and the end of the Cold War, the globalization of markets leapt ahead of the globalization of justice and solidarity over the last 25 years.
And it has been, at least until the world explicitly unravelling after After with unfulfilled Arab uprisings and abiding war in the Middle East and North Africa with their consequent migrations, after a failed democratic uprising in Russia, and a successful Ukrainian democratic uprising, we see the resurgence of authoritarianism with Putin in the lead. One word for this region conjures up a whole story of this region: I like to think of this region as my site of inspiration, for imagining the worst that this world might offer, and also the best.
We need pay attention to this part of the world not only for its own sake but to anticipate the larger world in the making. But Trump is of course peculiar. He is a businessman, and in that, he could represent that familiar American story of how the rich businessman rules American democracy. But that would be inadequate. He is also the celebrity, and of course America has been defined by its fascination, for love or hate, of the celebrity.
He is a know-nothing, and that anti-intellectual streak is strong in American culture. People like me could point to all his contradictory statements, his policy ignorance, but that would miss the ways in which he somehow is authentic for many Americans. But those are all abiding narratives of American history he channels. He is doing something that is part of a global narrative, reflecting a broader insecurity the world faces.
The complexity of the world is increasing exponentially. The world knows this, and even more, feels it. Like the memory impaired elder who is lost and wants to go home to find the security of their youth, publics across the world yearn for the stability they vaguely recall. Those who promise that control, whether with walls, deportations, travel bans or exits from transnational trade agreements or the EU, give the illusion of security.
When he declares the press the enemy of the people, he is setting up the conditions for civil war, not like we saw in the s, but for a war of position between those with different kinds of legal authority, to which Trump could only respond with more force. And yes, when I celebrate intellectuals, universities and learning, one can see that as elitism too. But I see it as profoundly different for two reasons, one empirical, and one moral. I learn so much from my friends, colleagues, and students of color, about what white privilege means, something universities like Brown themselves still work to learn.
Their scholarship rather embraces everyday folks whose stories and lives are not sufficiently recognize in our imagined community. Everyone has knowledge to share, and if we elevate that plurality of knowledge, if we can respect what a life of hard knocks, of abiding discrimination and dispossession teaches us, we might not only learn more but elevate a culture of mutual respect and dignity for all.
That culture is the foundation for the solidarity in which I believe. On Nationalism Nationalism is an ideology whose root is simple: That ideology organizes the world. Craig Calhoun once called it the trump card of all ideologies. Indeed, tell me what word stands opposed to nationalist and has a positive connotation: Multiculturalism comes closest, but for that to be legitimate, it always has to be described as somehow enhancing the nation.
Rather than define nationalism, we need think about how it varies. I fear that we cannot escape a profound legitimation crisis, a crisis defined by Trump having too little cultural authority to back up his legal authority I can only anticipate three pathways forward: That means two things: Two of her old boyfriends are in town and vying for attention - both of them trainwrecks but there just the same Claire Bryte Cloud begins work on her book at Quaker Meadows.
Similar authors to follow
She is certain she'll be able to have peace and quiet while she writes. Instead she has Leo Como sitting on the porch next door staring at her house and Ethan Grey Wolfe working just down Claire Bryte Cloud is relieved to be back home in Cherokee after spending two years away at college in Boston. Claire is up early the first morning and wakes to look out her bedroom window at her beloved home in Cherokee.
The first thing she sees is The summer turns out to be fun and Claire sails through Claire Bryte Cloud is experiencing her first summer alone at age eighteen. Claire and her brothers are orphans - turned over to the Qualla Boundary Orphanage in Cherokee, North Carolina at three days old.