I am currently in my last year of University. This summer I read Man, Economy, and State, Human Action, tons of Walter Block’s articles and essays, and a lot of other essays in the Journal of Libertarian Studies. My first three years of University I hardly showed my libertarian beliefs. However, now that I consider myself well versed in Austrian Economics (I know that I’m still a rookie but I am learning fast) I can’t help but write from the libertarian perspective. Today I got back an essay I wrote about economic freedom in Europe. My professor commented that libertarianism is not a formidable enough theory in order to analyze politics. She said realism, liberalism, constructivism, etc., are considered “legitimate points of view, legitimate theories” but libertarianism is just an opinion. I got a D. I’m disputing the grade with the head of the department.
My issue is: how on earth am I going to make it through next semester? I am taking 6 history classes (my minor, the econ major was enough of an issue, a huge issue to be honest). Should I forget my views? (apparently they are an opinion, not a theory) Or should I battle out it to the bitter end? How have some of you dealt with the plague that is academia.
Yeah, it’s something I struggle with every day. My school is one of the most liberal institutions in the country, with a leading post-Keynesian as the head of the economics department. We butt-heads a lot in class, and I usually have to pull back before I become a distraction. If you’re going to take a heterodox view you need to create an extremely powerful argument which is well supported by facts and logic, but that may not be enough. I usually size up my teacher during the first few weeks to see if he/she will tolerate opposing views.
Was in similar situation years ago. Best to just grin and bear it till you graduate. Don’t forget your views, instead improve them by constantly comparing them to what you are being ‘taught’.
Hope you have better professors in the future, the one you mentioned deserves a good career ending scandal sting … hint hint wink wink nudge nudge
As a time investment you’ve placed too much into it and at this point your probably too far in dept to stop. Finish what you started. Continue reading austrian economics and learn. Don’t beat yourself up because you learned about this stuff late. Just get your degree and move on!
If you are going to stay, just do eulogies of Marx was or something to get good scores and then erase the horror from memory after you graduate. Ignorant employers won’t know the difference and the people who do either don’t care or don’t matter.
Just keep your head down and don’t write to change these people’s minds. It is not as if your professor is going to one day pick up your paper, read it and have a complete paradigm shift. Get the grades, graduate then work towards liberty.
Write two versions. One that blasts the issue wide open, and another that will get you an “A” for the assignment. Then, submit the version that blasts the issue wide open to Lew Rockwell.com.
Actually can you upload your essay to us? We can check it to see what areas you might need improving on. No offense, but we don’t know you. You could have written a naive and shortsighted essay, which we can help you with. Or you could have written a brilliant revolutionary gem that we would all like to see [:D].
I would not bother arguing your case to the school as they have complete control over the situation and you have none. I would ask/beg to take the exam again. At that point you can just lie (Lie like politicians and Keynesians do) to get a passing grade. You sound smart enough to lie all the rest of way to your degree.
As for your degree and coming from a person who has 2 of them who does not believe in their value, I recommend doing one of these two things if possible:
Chang from the school of humanities, or arts and sciences to the school of management and getting a degree there in management with heavy emphasis on economics.
Or better yet (You get a technical degree in the process) change in the school of arts and sciences and go the other way and get a degree in math with heavy emphasis or even a double degree in economics.
I wish you would have asked ths question earlier. You have to understand that education institutions ARE NOT places for free ideas. Just look at USA secondary schools that have metal detectors and force students to recite pledges to the god of the state represented by the flag in front of a hord of government employees. They are government controlled or at best government funded institutions. Most of their funding comes from government. So they have an enormous incentive to agree with their benefactors.
Yes, forget your views, and write what they want you to write, jesus.
99% of the people do not care about the integrity of your academic perspectives. The free man’s world values ability and desire to work hard and commit to your work, and as a free marketer, you can appreciate that much. When employers are mandated or brainwashed by the state to give more emphasis to your academic views on topics, then you start worrying.
Grin and bear it, while learning “real stuff” in your free time.
That’s what I’m doing. Also think of it as learning to know your enemy – think how much better you’ll be in a debate vs. Keynesians if you’ve actually studied Keynesian “theory” for three years.
I am having a tougher and tougher time taking grad school seriously because of the scientific community.
People apply for government grants and may or may not get them. Whether they get them or not is not determined by the quality or impact of their work, but by the arbitrary measures of government as to whether their work is considered important or not. The science could be great, but if the writing isn’t appealing, the funding is tossed. This creates an incentive to produce better writing as opposed to better science.
Also, the number of publications is a very important number. Instead of trying to solve a problem or bring about some solution, the goal is to “get as many publications as possible”
It’s dishonest and making me sick.
not to mention the changing requirements and the “moving bar” of what’s good enough or not good enough in the superfluous courses that are required.
I had the same problem when I was in school. I see two main strategies for dealing with this problem. Either smile in their face, repeat what they want to hear and get them to give you the grade you want or argue with them about their beliefs and theories and hope that some of them will be willing to take a minute and consider the libertarian argument. I’ve tried both and I found that the first option tended to work more often but sometimes the second worked too. Depended a lot on the teacher and the class I think.
I will not upload my essay, but I will explain what she had such an issue with. The thesis of my paper was that the European Union does not promote economic freedom. The first example I analyzed was the way in the Common Agricultural Program makes it more difficult for European farmers to be willing to trade because their labour inputs, and wages, are fixed through government subsidies. She had no issue with this example. The example she was upset with was when I said that the free movement of people throughout Europe (Schengen) is self defeating because the European Court of Justice has the final say on the interpretation of law across Europe, and as such it eliminates the “vote with feet” metric. The ECJ ultimately has the final say on matters of private property, so entrepreneurs have little opportunity to shift the supply of labour. She said that this was only my opinion, despite the fact that I cited more on that page than any other in the entire essay. Even if my arguments were weak (which I don’t believe they were) this in no way should drop me down to a D.