It is difficult to think of many, except recently President Obama. Is it because of the tired old dichotomy between those who think and those who act? Is there any genuine reason why an academic should not be a good politician? What reasons are there that academics would, by and large, make a poor job of leading a party or country, heading a government department, gauging the feelings of constituents?
In Academic field, politics is there; but the performers are not considered as politician.
Some persons acting in the political field having some high academic degrees. They are not considered as academicians.
It is perhaps a common trend of the people to consider these two fields as different.
As Politics is a profession where many qualifications are required except actual academic knowledge, it is not considered as an interesting profession by any academician having knowledge now a days.
Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren went on to become senator from Massachusetts.
She made the jump for election because
There was a person of the other party in a position as senator, who would likely not last long in liberal Massachusetts
She had strong convictions about regulating the financial industry, which were her raison d’etre in the world of politics
She had previous government experience, creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to regulate Wall Street
She didn't have all that much of a family life to get in the way. Her kids were grown and living far away.
Overall, I'd say the timing has to be right, and the intention strong enough.
By Matt Montt
Regards!
Thorough research is time consuming. A passionate researcher does not have much time for other aspect of life like issues of politics. Consumed with how to conduct research, attend conferences, collaborate with other researchers, seeking grants, if also a lecturer, attend to students research proposals among other things. That's my own personal view about an academic/researcher.
In countries such as the Middle East, academia, which enters the world of politics is certainly a failure scientifically and turn to find himself through the world of politics and sure will find himself in it
Olutosin, too right!
But my experiences as a minor politician are hopefully instructive.
I joined the Lib-Dems in South London, and after a year became Chair, so was effectively running the regional party-meeting all the top politicians. Unfortunately my colleagues were excessively egotistic and I quickly found I couldn't actually do anything. Political shenanigans were also going on and my fact-gathering, explanation seeking, discursive attitudes did not help in dealing with a fury of feelings, complex emotions.
So, although I consider myself as much equipped to do things as to think things, at that point in time cerebral overloding did not come to my rescue.
Food for thought, really.
Well, I wouldn't agree 100%. Proportionally speaking, there is not so much academics in the population neither. In Canada, many recent high level politicians had academic backgrounds (e.g. Thomas Mulcair, Michael Ignatieff, Stephane Dion, Bob Rae).
Woodrow Wilson and Barack Obama were academics. And (you're gonna love this) Donald Trump literally founded a University!
Beg to differ on the premise. It's really not that small a club.
Current PhD's in Congress:
Senator Ben Sasse, History, Yale (R-NE, President of Midland Univ. before running)
Senator Tammy Duckworth, Human Services, Capella (D-IL, not sure this counts) ;-)
Reps. T. Murphy, K Sinema, D. Brat, J. McNerney, B. Foster, D. Loebsack, T. Cole, D. Price (my intro to poli sci prof at Duke in 1978), D. Lipinski, D. Titus, R. Wittman. 4 poli sci, 1 econ, 1 clinical psych, 1 justice studies, 1 math, 1 physics, 1 British history, and 1 public health. All major universities (1 Duke, 1 Harvard, 1 Yale).
Some former (but within my lifetime except for the first one) members:
Senators Henry Cabot Lodge and George McGovern (both history), Gary Hart and Paul Wellstone (poli sci), Daniel Patrick Moynihan (int'l relations), and Harrison Schmitt (geology).
Ten former House members including Newt Gingrich (history, Tulane)
Three current and two recent former governors also hold PhD's. And one out of 45 presidents (Wilson), of course.
Plus, we have the beloved, but fictional, economist-turned-POTUS Jebediah Bartlett. :-D
I'll also BTD on calling Pres. Obama an academic. He's a JD who was a part-time lecturer while working as an attorney, activist, and legislator. Never an academic researcher.
Nevertheless, Obama has the air of one.
Here, in the UK, we have one Professor, I think. Many of UK's MPs went to Oxbridge universities, but that was or is more about class. All, I believe, have First Degrees but still occasionally we have unqualified MPs, bred on the bustle of life. The recently resigned head of one party testified that he was a Christian (no problem there) because the archaeology bore the religion out. That is often the level, I' afraid.
Your choices seem over a great deal of time so perhaps the USA is little different. In the UK, we've had a number of playwrights, such as Sheridan, novelists, such as Disraeli, and historians, Churchill, but intellectually few outstanding men or women. In fact the only other Dr I can immediately think of was Wilson, who lectured in Economics, died several decades ago and was PM. One of his Cabinet colleagues was a genuine, indeed well known, academic who apparently looked down on his colleagues, Richard Crosland.
A sorry bunch intellectually!
A sad list really.
Academics as a species do not usually make good politicians in my experience
They are often abstract and not good at the compromise of day to day politics
The counterargument is Finland where a succession of academic politicians have done real reforms and gained popular support
I'm sure they can make good politicians, but have got out of the habit of self-presentation.
Politics is about compromise and academics can't afford to compromise on principles, philosophical position, intellectual thoughts, and/or scientific truths. Most academics can't afford to lose credibility by changing positions!
I agree, Amir. Good academics are fixed on the truth. That's actually what occurred with me when I entered politics a few years ago. Also, I personally found my colleagues lacked vision. They kept on doing what they'd always done, whether it worked or not.
For academics it is more complicated to become good politicians because they can not lie ...
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Philosophy Of Science
- Reasoning