Apr 1st 2019

Bureaucracy and Power in American Higher Education

 

The ongoing controversy over admissions to American universities has overlooked the one of the most telling aspects of the scandal—that it took place with the connivance and active participation of administrative bureaucracies able to act with impunity in the pursuit of their interests. Neither the professoriate, often the target of opprobrium from the left and the right, nor the student body, also the target of criticism from both sides of the political spectrum, bore any of the responsibility. 

Current debates over “what ails” U.S. colleges and universities consistently ignore the single most important dynamic of all institutions—their structure of power. I suggest that the way in which power is allocated within American universities is strikingly similar to that of Soviet-type regimes. Presidents, chancellors, provosts, deans, and their bureaucratic apparatuses preside over vast real-estate and financial holdings, engage in the economic equivalent of central planning, have inordinate influence over personnel, and are structured hierarchically, thereby forming an enormously powerful “new class” like that described by the renowned Yugoslav dissident, Milovan Djilas, in the mid-1950s. 

Most colleges and universities continue to educate students in a reasonably effective manner, but only because the power of the new class is still circumscribed by the existence of the increasingly weaker cohort of tenured professors. Although tenure has its critics, it remains indispensable within over-centralized universities run by the new class. Since tenure is the only mechanism that can balance the power of the new class, the abolition of tenure would not, as its critics suggest, revive higher education, but enable the new class to exercise unchecked power and subordinate education to its own interests. University reform must therefore aim, above all, at reestablishing a healthy tension, or balance of power, between administrators and tenured professors—between the new class and the dissidents. 

The Power of the New Class

Contrary to their own democratic self-representations, the power of university administrators is both vast and unchecked. The relations between presidents, chancellors, provosts, and deans on the one hand, and their bureaucratic apparatuses and faculty underlings on the other, are structured in a strictly hierarchical manner, with the result that power is concentrated at the very top of a tall power pyramid. Thorstein Veblen already made this point in 1918, when he wrote in The Higher Learning in America: “The chief … will be likely to draw about him from among the faculty a conveniently small number of advisers who are in sympathy with his own ambitions, and who will in this way form an unofficial council, or cabinet, or “junta”…. He will also, in compliance with charter stipulations and parliamentary usage, have certain officially recognized advisers, — the various deans, advisory committees, Academic Council, University Senate, and the like, — with whom he shares responsibility, particularly for measures of doubtful popularity, and whose advice he formally takes coram publico…. It is, further, of the essence of this scheme of academic control that the captain of erudition should freely exercise the power of academic life and death over the members of his staff….” 

Top administrators preside over enormous assets, engage in the economic equivalent of central planning, and have inordinate influence over personnel. These academic elites determine the budgets for all divisions of a university—often with only perfunctory participation by lower levels of the bureaucracy or the faculty—and control the payouts on endowments to research centers and institutes, thereby effectively appropriating monies originally intended for non-administrative purposes. Top administrators also determine which departments or programs will or will not exist or thrive; they control and distribute space and all other scarce resources, thereby being able to play off units of the universities against one another; they appoint the chairs of important task forces; and they often even weigh in on which students departments should admit. Finally, top administrators have virtually uncontrolled authority to expand their own ranks, to hire favored faculty, to privilege “superstar” professors, and to grant or deny tenure. 

Boards of trustees ostensibly hold sovereign power in a university and are supposed to control for such over-centralization and abuse, but they are usually powerless, indifferent, or incapable of affecting university power holders. Board members meet infrequently, usually lack pedagogical expertise, make decisions on the basis of information provided to them by university administrators, lack institutionalized access to faculty and alternative sources of information, and are too numerous to act easily in pursuit of “collective action” goals. Unsurprisingly, boards tend to defer to high administrators, and generally assert themselves only in times of manifest crisis, when “problems” are clearly visible, information is openly available, and solutions seem obvious. In sum, boards have as much difficulty counterbalancing, controlling, and supervising university administrations as they have counterbalancing, controlling, and supervising corporations. 

An Imbalance of Power

University administrators form an enormously powerful “new class” not unlike that described by the renowned Yugoslav dissident, Milovan Djilas, in the mid-1950s:  “[The] monopolists of administration … constitute a narrow and closed stratum…. But that is not all, since the Communist bureaucracy also has complete monopolistic control over material assets…. The ownership privileges of the new class and membership in that class are the privileges of administration.” Djilas’s insights rest on those of Max Weber, Roberto Michels, and Karl Marx—as well as, arguably, Plato and Aristotle. It is, after all, a truism of political theory that every class of power holders is primarily concerned with sustaining itself and with reproducing the conditions that sustain its power. Every class of power holders is primarily concerned with promoting itself and its own interests. 

This is as true of liberal universities as of communist dictatorships and capitalist democracies. Radicals often hope to negate this trend by constructing elaborate utopias; liberals and conservatives generally recognize that such self-aggrandizement can be limited only by a system of institutional checks and balances that, in democracies at least, tend to be anchored in constitutions. But universities have no constitutions. The nearest thing to a basic document is a contract signed with a teachers’ union, which can easily be disregarded if appeals to “higher interests” or “crisis situations” are made, or a university’s formalized “rules and procedures,” which always contain loopholes and fine print that effectively enable nimble administrations with significant resources and determined agendas to have their way. 

This gross imbalance of power means that the priorities of the administrative elite become the priorities of the university as a whole. This does not mean that the new class is opposed to “education,” while professors champion it. In fact, both sides often agree philosophically on just what a good education entails. But abstract agreement on abstract issues such as knowledge and critical thinking generally takes a back seat to questions of power whenever contentious issues regarding curriculum, departments, requirements, standards, hiring, tenure, promotions, and the like arise. Then, both professors and administrators generally propose answers that sustain their power. The resulting tension, which may appear destructive and counterproductive, is actually good for the educational process, precisely because it guarantees a functioning marketplace of ideas and genuine competition of visions and interests and ensures that no side can achieve hegemony. 

The problem is that this ideal “balance of power” has long since shifted toward administrators, who hold far more resources and power than professors and also determine the rules of the game. And inasmuch as the leading priority of every elite is self-perpetuation, the dominance of university administrators translates into the effective subordination of “education” to the self-perpetuation and power of the administrative elite. The central problem affecting higher education is thus not, as many liberal critics suggest, commercialization and corporatization. Nor is it, as conservative critics argue, the irresponsible behavior of errant professors. Although lamentable, commercialization, corporatization, and irresponsible behavior are only symptoms of the over-centralized power structure within American higher education.

 

Power, Privilege, and Pathologies

Over-centralization of power is always inefficient and, in both communist states and universities, it fosters a range of pathologies. First, it leads university administrations, like Soviet-type bureaucracies, to grow in a seemingly inexorable fashion. Higher-level officials are rarely fired, even during economic downturns and budgetary shortfalls, as the working assumption of the new class is that problems, crises, and pathologies naturally require more administrative intervention, not less. Over-centralization also leads to the accumulation of privilege. University and college presidents, provosts, and chancellors earn enormous salaries. Administrators earn more, on average, than professors, if only because professorial salaries are frequently frozen for long periods of time, while those of administrators are not. 

Over-centralization also leads to lack of accountability. Presidents, chancellors, provosts, and their inner circles of supporters can do just about anything they want, while lower levels of the bureaucracy, in the fashion of all over-centralized administrative apparatuses, invariably justify their inefficiency by passing the buck to higher authorities. The Lawrence Summers fiasco at Harvard University in 2001-2006—when President Clinton’s former secretary of the treasury almost managed to eviscerate a great institution—grabbed the headlines, but that kind of non-accountability is important precisely because it is not unique. Summers used the enormous powers of his office—financial allocations, personnel promotions, and simple bullying being his favored techniques—to cow the faculty and demoralize the students. 

Finally, over-centralization encourages the new class to develop ties with elites within federal, state, and local government, foundations, and the business community. Rapidly expanding institutions such as Columbia University and New York University cannot avoid forging alliances with municipal authorities and powerful real-estate interests and thereby effectively joining what C. Wright Mills called the local “power elite.” Although the new class can take advantage of such connections to promote the university’s interests, the very existence of such extensive horizontal ties encourages the new class to see its own interests as part of the wider power elite’s interests. Moreover, when government authorities or business interests are corrupt, as they often are, it is hard to imagine that university elites implicated in their affairs can remain unaffected.

 

The Emergence of the New Class

The university new class emerged as the result of two “objective” mid-twentieth century developments in American higher education.  First, higher education expanded from the privilege of the few to the right of many. As student enrollments boomed, colleges and universities had to offer a variety of services ranging from dormitories to counseling to extracurricular activities. Budgets and administrative apparatuses grew apace. Second, external funding of higher education—by government, foundations, and a growing cohort of alumni/ae—also grew in leaps and bounds. Some money went to research and some to teaching, but much necessarily had to go to the bureaucracy that underpinned the new programs, the new buildings, and the new research institutes. The upshot of these two trends was the emergence of the “multiversity”—a huge institutional network possessing vast sums of money, large real estate holdings, and a sizeable labor force. All multiversities resemble city-states, and some, such as the Ivy League schools, have assets that are larger than the Gross Domestic Products of many bona fide states. 

These trends might not have led to the emergence of a new class were it not for the fact that, as the university became the multiversity, its over-centralized power structure, a basic feature of all American universities since the nineteenth century or earlier, as Veblen reminds us, remained intact. Past administrations also possessed much power, but, with vastly smaller fiefdoms and less extensive assets, they were institutionally limited in what they could do. The new class is therefore the product of the marriage of a hierarchical power pyramid with few resources to a multiversity with enormous resources. 

Facilitating the new class’s power is the inability of the tenured professoriate to offer resistance. Most analysts emphasize the individualistic, almost anarchic inclinations of professors as the key obstacle to collective action, but the real reasons are threefold. First, disciplinary and thematic specialization has taken off  since World War II—partly because knowledge has greatly expanded and universal expertise has become impossible, partly because a vastly larger student body demands a variety of different kinds of courses, and partly because external funding continually encourages scholars to “expand” their horizons by pursuing the research priorities of governments and foundations. 

Second, the professoriate has, like the student body, become diverse—developing from a largely white, male profession to one that currently encompasses a multiplicity of ethnicities, races, sexes, genders, religions, and the like. And third, the ranks of adjunct faculty, who get paid miserable sums per course, receive no health benefits, do not vote on departmental matters, and are disinclined ever to rock the boat, continue to grow: at present they teach about two-thirds of all courses taught at U.S. higher educational institutions. The number of tenured faculty members is thereby reduced, making them more susceptible to infighting over scarce resources and reducing their sense of corporate identity. The share of tenured and tenure-track professors in U.S. higher educational institutions has declined from one third to one quarter in the last twenty years. 

These three trends have created an almost insurmountable obstacle to collective action. As collective action theorists emphasize, it is rational even for like-minded individuals to “free ride.” Sometimes, cultural, linguistic, national, or other types of solidarities can override the free-riding tendency and incline individuals to act collectively. But the contemporary professoriate shares almost nothing but tenure. Professors feel beleaguered and isolated, and they know they are dependent on the new class for perks. Moreover, they live in different worlds. Physicists have little in common with deconstructionists, rational-choice theorists have nothing in common with post-modernists, and historians of food in medieval Russia inhabit a different world from that of historians of imperialism in Latin America. If and when tough decisions face departments, questions of gender, race, and so on almost invariably assume center stage and the resulting divisions make jointly formulated stands difficult to achieve. 

Unions can address some of these issues and promote some degree of solidarity—as they do outside the ivory tower—but only at levels far removed from the day-to-day operations of a college or university, where fragmentation and competition usually rule the day. Political parties, which usually mobilize people in pursuit of certain causes in the society at large, are also absent from universities. In other words, universities lack already existing institutional vehicles for collective action: everything depends on professors, and if they cannot overcome the centrifugal forces pushing them apart, collective action will not take place and the university administration can rule unopposed. Significantly, it was only after Harvard’s Summers had enraged every single faculty constituency that professors were able to unite in opposition and, in effect, oust him. 

Divide et impera

The professoriate is highly susceptible to new-class “divide and conquer” manipulation. The promotion by the new class of “superstar” professors—with vast salaries, enormous expense accounts, large offices, and minimal teaching loads—enhances professorial divisions by creating a privileged stratum directly beholden to the administration and dependent on its good will. The superstars, who could lead faculty resistance to the new class, are thus coddled and coopted and are part of the class, in all but name. Dissent in universities is thus the luxury of the few. Lower-level administrators are beholden to the new class, students are fearful of expulsion, adjuncts keep a low profile, and non-tenured professors worry about being denied tenure. Contrary to their own self-image as fearless speakers of truth to power, tenured professors rarely dissent—especially as conformity with administrative designs can bring extensive material benefits and usually harms faculty competitors with whom one feels little solidarity anyway. 

Because the professoriate is weak, and getting weaker, it tends to adapt to the encroachments of the new class—but usually in ways that enhance the pathologies besetting over-centralized systems. All too often, professors feign agreement with new class pronouncements while engaging in quiet individual resistance. Like lower-level administrators in centrally-planned economies, professors hoard information, provide misleading data, and employ the language and logic of the prevailing university ideology to hide the reality within their departments. The resulting breakdown of communication and information flows between administration and faculty leads to calls by administrators for still greater control—hence the incessant insistence that faculty produce more and more reports—and to equally great resistance by professors. But attempts to establish greater control only lead, as in all centrally planned economies, to newer and cleverer ways to assert the “power of the weak” and circumvent centralized control. 

Professors also adapt to the incentive structure created by the new class by retreating into research and downplaying teaching. Contrary to conservative critics, most professors are not fearless radicals who want to revolutionize the world, or even the campus. Indeed, pusillanimity and conformism may be rather more widespread professorial character traits. Moreover, most professors enjoy teaching and would be happy to do more of it—if they knew that teaching would be rewarded as much as research and publications. After all, professors are rational human beings who want to do what they enjoy—writing and teaching—while receiving just reward for their efforts. Despite its insistence to the contrary, the new class does not reward professors for teaching. Research and publications are the single most important criterion for tenure, prizes, and salary increases precisely because they bring in foundation and government grants and impress alumni/ae donors. I know of no instance of a university president “raiding” another university’s best teacher.

 

Is a Balance of Power Possible?

Can this extraordinary growth of new-class power be reversed or balanced? The hyper-centralized power structure of American colleges and universities is too deeply rooted to be changed anytime soon. The multiversity also appears to be here to stay. A reversal of new-class power is therefore highly unlikely. Some degree of balance can be reestablished—but only if the secular reduction in the number of tenured professors is halted and the professoriate, however specialized and fractured, is able to retain its autonomy. Since tenure is the only mechanism that can balance the power of the new class, the abolition of tenure would not revive higher education. Instead, abolishing tenure and transforming the professoriate into an army of overworked and underpaid adjuncts led by a tiny sliver of superstars would enable the new class to exercise unchecked power in its domain. 

Whether or not such enormous power would lead to still greater commercialization and commercialization may be debatable. But it would almost certainly end all pretense of democratic governance at universities, encourage the best and the brightest to avoid academic careers, and completely subordinate the educational process to the needs and priorities of the new class. If the experience of over-centralized Communist regimes is any guide, such an arrangement is intrinsically ineffective—producing bad products at high cost. Salaries may drop and some monies may be saved, but the pathologies of over-centralization discussed above represent massive hidden costs. Over-centralization is also intrinsically unstable—producing disgruntled subordinates, illegitimate rulers, and dysfunctional institutions. American universities will not, like the Soviet Union, collapse. But they just may come to experience a persistent condition of “stagnation,” similar to that which characterized the USSR under Leonid Brezhnev’s inglorious rule.

Browse articles by author

More Essays

Jul 29th 2022
EXTRACTS: "China uses incarcerated prisoners of conscience as an organ donor pool to provide compatible transplants for patients. These prisoners or “donors” are executed and their organs harvested against their will, and used in a prolific and profitable transplant industry."
Jul 29th 2022
EXTRACT: "In the first episode of season three of The Kominsky Method (2021), there is a funeral service for Michael Douglas’ character’s lifelong friend Norman Newlander (played by Alan Arkin). By far the most inconsolable mourner to give a eulogy is Newlander’s personal assistant of 22 years who, amid a hyperbolical outpouring of grief, literally cannot bring herself to let go of the casket. It is a humorous scene, to be sure, but there is something else going on here that is characteristic of employer-employee relations in this era of neoliberal capitalism. “Making him happy made me happy,” she exclaims, “his welfare was my first thought in the morning, and my last thought before I went to sleep.” That isn’t sweet – it is pathological. ----- Employee happiness is becoming increasingly conditional on, or even equated with, the boss’ happiness. As Frédéric Lordon observes in his book, Willing Slaves of Capital (2014), “employees used to surrender to the master desire with a heavy heart…they had other things on their minds…ideally the present-day enterprise wants subjects who strive of their own accord according to its norms.” In a word, the employee is increasingly expected to internalize and identify with the desire of the master."
Jul 20th 2022
EXTRACT: "For three decades, people have been deluged with information suggesting that depression is caused by a “chemical imbalance” in the brain – namely an imbalance of a brain chemical called serotonin. However, our latest research review shows that the evidence does not support it."
Jul 13th 2022
"But is he “deluded”? " ---- "....we sometimes end up with deluded leaders because we ourselves can be somewhat delusional when we vote." ---- "David Collinson, a professor of leadership and organization at Lancaster University, associates this predicament with excessive positive thinking, or what he calls “Prozac leadership,” in reference to the famous antidepressant that promises to cheer people up without actually fixing what is wrong in their lives. “ ---- "In politics, Prozac leaders come to power by selling the electorate on wildly overoptimistic views of the future. When the public buys into a Prozac leader’s narrative, it is they who are already verging on the delusional." ----- "Another potential example is Vladimir Putin, who has conjured a kind of nostalgic dream world for his followers and the wider Russian public."
Jun 25th 2022
EXTRACT: "Many veterans, refugees and other people who have experienced trauma and have mental health issues spend little time thinking about the future. Instead, they are narrowly focused on the negative past. However, people who have experienced trauma and developed a healthy future perspective report being better at coping with life, having fewer negative thoughts about the past, and getting better sleep compared with those who have a negative future perspective. So, instead of dwelling on the past, people who have suffered trauma should be encouraged to think about the future and set goals that help them develop hope for a good life."
Jun 8th 2022
EXTRACT: " The devastation of war is a recurring theme in Turner’s work, and unlike his contemporaries Turner is willing to forego the occasion to bolster national pride or the patriotism of its fallen heroes. In “The Field of Waterloo” (1818), Turner’s great tragic vision of war, “The…  dead of both sides lay intertwined, nearly indistinguishable surrounded by the gloom of night.” Near the bottom center there are three women. The one farthest from us is bearing a child and in her right hand a torch which illumines the sea of mangled bodies. Beside her is another woman struggling to keep a third (also with child) from collapsing outright. Turner reflects not only on the dead and dying, but on the widows and orphans that war produces."
May 19th 2022
EXTRACTS: "Thus experimental creativity could be witnessed, but not verbalized.  When five leading Abstract Expressionist painters founded an art school in New York in the late 1940s, they offered no formal courses, because, as Robert Motherwell explained, "in a basic sense art cannot be taught." ------ "Conceptual artists are ...... more inclined to use written texts to accompany their works in other genres.  In 1883, Vincent van Gogh wrote to his brother, "One of these days I will write you a letter;  I shall write it carefully and try to make it short, but say everything I think necessary."
May 17th 2022
EXTRACT: "Unfortunately, it’s common for dark triad personalities to become leaders. ..... their ruthlessness and ability to manipulate means they attain positions of power quite easily. When a “dark” leader attains power, conscientious, moral people rapidly fall away. A government operating under these conditions soon becomes what the Polish psychologist Andrzej Lobaczewski called a “pathocracy” – an administration made up of ruthless individuals devoid of integrity and morality. This happened with Donald Trump’s presidency, as the “adults in the room” gradually headed for the exit, leaving no one but staffers defined by their personal allegiance to Trump. A similar decay in standards has occurred in the UK."
May 11th 2022
EXTRACT: "The proportion of US electricity deriving from wind and solar in the month of April climbed to 20%. Thus, the renewables total was 26.5 if we add in hydro. This statistic is unprecedented."
Apr 24th 2022
EXTRACT: "Every year, around 12,000 men in the UK die from prostate cancer, but many more die with prostate cancer than from it. So knowing whether the disease is going to advance rapidly or not is important for knowing who to treat." ...... "For some years, we have known that pathogens (bacteria and viruses) can cause cancer. We know, for example, that Helicobacter pylori is associated with stomach cancer and that the human papillomavirus (HPV) can cause cervical cancer." ....... "....we have identified five types (genera) of bacteria linked to aggressive prostate cancer." ...... "We examined prostate tissue and urine samples from over 600 men with and without prostate cancer," ..... "....men who had one or more of the bacteria were nearly three times more likely to see their early stage cancer progress to advanced disease, compared with men who had none of the bacteria in their urine or prostate."
Apr 13th 2022
EXTARCTS: "Steve Jobs dreaded turning 30, because he knew it would be fatal to his creativity: "It's rare that you see an artist in his 30s or 40s able to contribute something amazing." ....... "When Ford introduced the Model T, he was 45 years old" ...... "Ford’s Model T arrived only after a series of earlier cars – Models A, B, C, K, N, R, and S." .... "Sam Walton opened Wal-Mart No. 1 in Rogers, Arkansas, at 44, and discovered “that there was much, much more business out there in small-town American than anybody, including me, had ever dreamed of.” At 53, Warren Buffett wrote in his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders that “your chairman, always a quick study, required only 20 years to recognize how important it was to buy good businesses.” "
Mar 29th 2022
EXTRACT: ".... Christie's web site calls Shot Sage Blue Marilyn [1964], to be auctioned in May, 'among the most iconic paintings in history', " ------ "Andy Warhol's annus mirabilis was not 1964, but 1962. This is recognized both by the market and by scholars. Thus in a paper published in the Journal of Applied Economics, Simone Lenzu and I found that in all auctions held during 1965-2015, the average price of Warhol's paintings executed in 1964 was significantly lower than the average price of those he made in 1962. And in a survey of 61 textbooks of art history published during 1991- 2015, whose authors included such eminent scholars as Martin Kemp and Rosalind Krauss, we found that fully 45% of the total of 137 illustrations of Warhol's paintings were of works from 1962, compared to only 12% of works from 1964. Thus not only do collectors value Warhol's works of 1962 more highly than those of 1964, but so do scholars of art history,.... "
Mar 29th 2022
EXTRACTS:".....there is plenty of space to scale. For internet-based businesses, the addressable total market is often large. In many areas, such as software, it spans the globe. Chinese estimates indicate that the average distance between seller and buyer on e-commerce platforms is roughly 1,000 kilometers (621 miles), compared to five kilometers for a traditional retail or service business." ------- "While the internet has removed many geographical barriers, high-growth companies cannot emerge just anywhere. In fact, though such firms can be found in more countries than ever, they remain concentrated in entrepreneurial hotspots. For example, of the 24 unicorns in Germany (as of March 2022), 17 are based in Berlin and five in Munich. Of France’s top 24 unicorns, 19 are based in Paris and one in a Paris suburb." ------ "Tech entrepreneurship has become global, but its beating heart remains local."
Mar 27th 2022
EXTRACTS: " We are supposed to be living in a post-ideological era, where everyone one is a cynic, not so gullible as to believe in anything anymore, least of all in the quaint notion of objective truth. This rejection of truth as such is among the great disasters to have befallen our relations with each other and between nations.  We appear to be beyond truth’s demise – we are now witnessing its unpleasant putrefaction and decay." ------ " If we want to grasp how ideology functions in America today, there is no better place to look than at the phenomenon of Trumpism. While he may be only a symptom, Trump himself is the quintessential embodiment of America’s moral and epistemic decline. " ------ "By its disavowal of truth and perpetuation of lies for the sake of self-aggrandizement, Trumpism represents an existential threat to this country and to the future of the Republic. It is a cancer that threatens whatever is good and decent in American life. " ----- "All they know is negative freedom – freedom from – but ignore the need for positive freedom, the freedom to… as in the freedom to flourish, to realize oneself in the world; to make and re-make oneself and the world through action."
Feb 14th 2022
EXTRACT: "In the decades since its inception, there has been heavy criticism directed towards the War on Drugs. These complaints include the increased incarceration rates, the increase in the number of prisoners in jail due to nonviolent offenses, uneven sentencing guidelines often based on the drug type and race, and suggestions of a racist component in terms of who was targeted by law enforcement. Various studies show that instead of reducing crime, the strict sentencing guidelines created more criminals and undermined many of the communities most strictly targeted by law enforcement. Long sentences for non-violent offenses made it difficult for those released to find work and weakened their bonds with family and their broader community."
Feb 2nd 2022
EXTRACT: "......... there are countries that have had a relatively high number of infections but which have still managed to keep their death numbers low – countries like Japan. It’s had 17,612 infections per million people yet only 146 deaths per million. This is despite almost one in three people in Japan being over the age of 65 and so at greater risk of severe COVID (the average age of people dying from COVID is over 80). What has kept the death rate there down? A recent Japenese study has proposed an answer. It reports that the risk of people dying of COVID in Japan is related to the microbes present in their guts. "
Jan 26th 2022
EXTRACT: "Then there was a revolution. In 1964, Bob Dylan created a new kind of popular music. The simple, clear love songs ...... were replaced by complex and opaque lyrics, filled with literary allusions and symbolism. Dylan rejected the role of craftsman: "I'm an artist. I try to create art." Nor were his songs intended to be universal: "My songs were written with me in mind." "
Dec 13th 2021
EXTRACT: " We all know that Father Christmas would struggle to deliver presents to everyone around the world without the help of his magical reindeer. But why were they chosen to pull the sleigh rather than any other animal? It turns out that the biology of reindeer makes them ideal for the job. Here are five reasons why."
Dec 4th 2021
EXTRACT: "Planting more forests is a potent tool for mitigating the climate crisis, but forests are like complex machines with millions of parts. Tree planting can cause ecological damage when carried out poorly, particularly if there is no commitment to diversity of planting. Following Darwin’s thinking, there is growing awareness that the best, healthiest forests are ones with the greatest variety of trees - and trees of various ages."
Nov 19th 2021
EXTRACTS: "At a time when the struggle between authoritarianism and democracy is so intense, if not fateful for the future of democracies, NATO and the EU must warn these countries [Editor's note: Poland and Hungary, EU and NATO, Turkey NATO] that they are on the precipice of being kicked out if they do not change their governing practice. They must be required to restore the principles of democracy by upholding universal human rights and abiding the rule of law, or else they will forfeit their membership and suffer from the consequences of their crimes." ------ "A narcissistic leader, such as Trump, whose hunger for power seems to know no limit, has happily sacrificed the good of the country on the altar of his twisted ego. America’s democracy cannot be repaired unless he and those who helped him are held accountable and face the weight of the law."