Well, not every editorial.
For example, I think that Krugman’s Op-Ed about anti-Cassandras
— that is, professional blowhards who are wrong about everything and yet continue to be printed and taken seriously even after they are proven wrong over and over again — was basically accurate. The only problem with it is that Krugman doesn’t seem to realize that he himself is a paradigm case.
(In fact Krugman would be the single most obvious example on the New York Times Op-Ed page, but for the fact that they also publish Tom Friedman.)
]]>Taylor used to do interesting work in the philosophy of religion (he wrote about Hegel and Kierkegaard); then, he became cool. Sigh . . . .
For all their flaws, universities are among the few places in which significant numbers of workers are actually able to play a meaningful role in managing their own affairs. Taylor’s remarks highlight just how un-radical, just how establishmentarian, self-proclaimed academic radicals can be.
]]>