The University of Calgary has lost its way..Never mind its egregious replacement of merit by race in a forthcoming wave of senior hires, surely one of the most retrograde directions it could possibly have chosen. It now appears to have become so bent on changing the world, that it no longer takes the time to understand what it seeks to sweep away and replace in a glorious wave of wokeness..Not what you were thinking as you sign up your son or daughter for the fall?.The evidence is in what they say about themselves..As do many major corporations, the University of Calgary publishes, five days a week, an electronic news bulletin called UToday. It reflects how the university sees itself and is a useful starting point for any discussion of how the administration — or senior leadership team, as they now style themselves — understands itself today. Most of the content is self-congratulatory. Much of the self-congratulation concerns how well the university compares to other post-secondary institutions..Foe example, last year the university was ranked globally as being among the top 50 in six “subject areas.” The U of C was first nationally in hospitality and leisure management (43rd globally,) second nationally in petroleum engineering (38th globally,) third in veterinary science (37th globally,) fourth nationally in “sports-related subjects” (19th globally.).In another ranking exercise, this one reported in Forbes, the university was listed at number 116 out of 130 Canadian employers, which would have included corporations, law firms, hospitals and so on. This achievement was characterized as reflecting the status of the university “as one of Canada’s best employers.”.Moreover, UToday helpfully explained the rank reflected the benevolent consequences stemming from employees’ health and wellness programs, the tireless work of the office of equity, diversity and inclusion, the green building program, the accessibility for employees and their families to “everything from business seminars to language and cuisine courses,” the existence of “tons of green spaces, trees, and views of the majestic Rocky Mountains,” and of course the general “livability” of the city of Calgary..You get the picture..Occasionally UToday provides an intimation of where the university is going, not of how far it has come. That was evident last week when a draft of the Strategic Plan (2023-2030) was released for general and community discussion. It reads like advertising copy, reveals a lot more than the (anonymous) authors may have intended and may explain why the university scored so high in such “areas” as leisure management and sports..The first part of the Strategic Plan dealt with the goal, mission and values of the university. This topic enframed the five detailed strategies that followed. If one grasps the assumptions that guide the goal, mission, and values of the University of Calgary, the strategies can be predicted pretty easily..The initial feature that strikes the reader is the authors’ rhetorical confidence and certainty. They seem to be oblivious regarding both the limitations and the implications of their approach. In fact, what they have in mind involves the profound transformation of the idea of a university and the destruction of its historical purpose, which even a relatively new operation such as the U of C was inherited as part of its civilizational patrimony..So, let’s take a look..The goal of the University of Calgary — or UCalgary as spokespersons usually call it — we learn in the opening paragraph is to create a place where “students, faculty, and staff take action to improve the world.” Indeed, students, faculty, and staff “will create a world that is healthier, fairer, safer, more prosperous, more sustainable, and more just” because they and the university are “nimble and action-oriented.”.The mission of the university is even grander: to “ignite global change” in such a way that the pyrotechnics “lift” everyone up. After making an expected woke gesture in the direction of “walking the better path” towards reconciliation with indigenous communities, the mission simmers down to creating and mobilizing “new knowledge.” The university can do this because it's an “entrepreneurial” place that, once again, inspires “action.” That is why the campus is littered with banners exhorting everyone who sees them to do, to invent, to disrupt, to start … “something.”. Disrupt something'Disrupt something' .This morning I asked my first-year class what they thought of these slogans. They looked blank. One said it was just “PR.” I said he was being polite. The students laughed..The values of the university — authenticity, diversity (of thought?), inclusivity, etc., are all directed towards the “goal of solving what is thought of as unsolvable” heretofore. Today we can solve the unsolvable because “in all things we do, we are future-focused.”.The various strategies follow directly from these assertions and aspirations. The only interesting question, so far as I can see, is: What does this discussion of the goal, mission and values of the place actually mean?.Consider first the progressive assumption, which is nowhere defended because, to the authors, it's self-evident the “world” is something that can be created and improved..The term “world,” in this context, has been used chiefly by Marxists — and before them, by Machiavelli — to refer to reality. For example, Marx famously said, in his “Eleventh Thesis on Feuerbach” that “philosophers have only interpreted the world (= reality) in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.” That does not mean the authors are Marxists or Machiavellians. Marx’s thought is far too subtle for them; Machiavelli’s is far too elegant. Rather, it suggests they didn’t really think about what they were saying.. U of C Build Something'Build Something' .Second, the assumption that knowledge is created and mobilized means that it is not discovered and contemplated. Such a commitment to activity rests on the first notion, that humans are in the business of changing the world..This same activism is expressed in the direction towards which the several “values” point, solving problems that were previously unsolvable. This is why the “focus” is on the as yet nonexistent “future.”.Now consider what such a “focus” means..First, and most obviously there is nothing to learn from the past. There is no useful tradition to indicate what universities have been for the past millennium, to say nothing of a deeper tradition that extends back to Plato’s Academy or Aristotle’s Lyceum — to mention only well-known Western examples. The message it clear: never look back because there is nothing to see..For these nimble entrepreneurs busy making a better world, there is no point in looking up or looking within either because there is still nothing to see. This is certainly a diminished world. There are no gods; or if there are any, they don’t care about humans; or it they do care, they can be bribed. All problems solved..More simply still: in such a world where all things can be manipulated, there are no mysteries because mysteries cannot be solved, but only contemplated. However, when knowledge is something created and mobilized to solve problems, there can be no reality worthy or capable of contemplation. Asking questions about the meaning of it all, about the meaning of life for a nimble entrepreneur or even for an ordinary human being, never happens..What does this juvenile exercise really mean? It seems to me that the goal, mission, and values of the Strategic Plan express the attitude that Jonathan Swift satirized in Gulliver’s third voyage to the beautifully named flying island of Laputa — that of an elite so educated in abstraction, that their knowledge produces no useful fruit..It's a sad commentary on the narrow vision of the authors of this document that a summary of its contents invites only ridicule..Students in my literature and politics course would immediately get the joke. Strategic planners never will.
