The Trump Effect

[eternallyephemeral]

22 hours ago, Bumblebea said:

Yikes. That's remarkably terrible.

As for the question of being an Americanist in Canada--I will say that for the past two or three years, there were a couple of really good jobs at Canadian universities for Americanists. These jobs were very difficult for US citizens to get. I assume that a degree from Toronto would better position you for those jobs. 

It's unfortunate, but there are many exclusively white, rural areas where these things are happening. This type of behaviour happens much less often in Toronto; being one of the most multicultural cities in the world helps with that a bit. Just recently, a man defended a woman who was being harassed (two other women were telling her to go back to her country and may have uttered the word "terrorist" about her). When the attackers went after the man who defended this woman, people thanked him and stayed with him to give reports to the police. I just moved from Toronto to a much more homogeneous and (dare I say it) backwater place, and I would much rather be back than be here right now. I even thought that before Trump won.

That is absolutely the case at some universities. The smaller and lower ranked schools have a clear preference for Canadian citizens. Based on the rules, all of the schools would choose a Canadian applicant over an American one if all other aspects were the same, but this rarely happens. For the best research schools, of which U of Toronto is at the top, they get many more good American applicants, and therefore end up choosing American applicants more often. The smaller schools do not have that caliber of applicants, so they end up going with Canadian citizens. Does that make sense?

A degree from Toronto would definitely help with that aspect (given you can also have dual citizenship), or you have the opportunity to go back to the US if you wanted to.

It's hilarious that the field is American studies and the citizenship of the applicant is still a concern. I guess there is no special situation when hiring someone with an expertise on another country. For example, would you want to hire a Canadian that does East Asian studies, or someone from that region? Maybe there is not as much of a difference as I would expect.

Sorry for derailing the other conversation. Feel free to PM me with questions about Toronto/Canada!

[rising_star]

To add to the wonderful posts from @Warelin and @Bumblebea, I'll just add that even celebrities who are Jewish are not immune to this, as Emmy Rossum has pointed out on Twitter. Here's an example of one of these tweets: 

 

[poliscar]

8 hours ago, eternallyephemeral said:

It's unfortunate, but there are many exclusively white, rural areas where these things are happening. This type of behaviour happens much less often in Toronto; being one of the most multicultural cities in the world helps with that a bit. Just recently, a man defended a woman who was being harassed (two other women were telling her to go back to her country and may have uttered the word "terrorist" about her). When the attackers went after the man who defended this woman, people thanked him and stayed with him to give reports to the police. I just moved from Toronto to a much more homogeneous and (dare I say it) backwater place, and I would much rather be back than be here right now. I even thought that before Trump won.

That is absolutely the case at some universities. The smaller and lower ranked schools have a clear preference for Canadian citizens. Based on the rules, all of the schools would choose a Canadian applicant over an American one if all other aspects were the same, but this rarely happens. For the best research schools, of which U of Toronto is at the top, they get many more good American applicants, and therefore end up choosing American applicants more often. The smaller schools do not have that caliber of applicants, so they end up going with Canadian citizens. Does that make sense?

A degree from Toronto would definitely help with that aspect (given you can also have dual citizenship), or you have the opportunity to go back to the US if you wanted to.

It's hilarious that the field is American studies and the citizenship of the applicant is still a concern. I guess there is no special situation when hiring someone with an expertise on another country. For example, would you want to hire a Canadian that does East Asian studies, or someone from that region? Maybe there is not as much of a difference as I would expect.

Sorry for derailing the other conversation. Feel free to PM me with questions about Toronto/Canada!

I think this is slightly misleading—at least in the context of English Literature. When it comes to jobs, the trend seems to be to hire Canadian citizens with American degrees. So it's really not particularly easy to separate applicants into "Canadian applicants" and "American applicants." If you were to complete a Canadian degree, but never acquire citizenship or permanent residency, you would gain very little advantage from that degree in the context of Canadian jobs. 

What I've seen repeatedly in the past so many years is that Canadians are completing BAs, and often MAs, at Canadian institutions, and then going on to complete PhDs at top-tier American schools. You'll often then see them get hired for a lot of the top Canadian jobs—sometimes at their undergrad institution—because they have the double-whammy of citizenship + Harvard/Berkeley/Princeton, etc. I can also think of a few scholars (some recent hires) who completed all of their education in the US, but ended up with top-tier Canadian jobs because they had citizenship. These candidates are sort of "invisible" Canadians, because if you were to go by their educational background you'd likely identify them as American. 

There is a legal context here, in that Canadian schools—the vast majority of which are public institutions—are required to give preference to Canadian citizens, unless there is significant disparity between Canadian/non-Canadian candidates. So yes, you do see cases where Americans are awarded Canadian jobs over Canadian citizens, but it's not always as simple as it looks on the surface. Along these lines, as more Canadians end up at American schools for their doctoral studies, I imagine we'll see fewer American citizens hired for Canadian academic positions, at least at the Assistant Professor level. 

The legal context is also why the nature of the field in question, even if it's geographic, doesn't have as much weight as you'd imagine. And also, though an American seems like they'd be a better fit for a position in American Studies, there's really very little difference between a Canadian trained as an Americanist in an American program, and an American from that same program. The American isn't more qualified in the field because of their nationality—that's absurd. The same goes for East Asian studies, and besides, I have numerous Asian Canadian friends who are immigrants from Asian countries. They're fluent in the relevant languages, and identify as Canadian and Chinese/Korean/Japanese/Filipino. I mean, you did mention the multicultural nature of Canada, so I don't know why it's hard to imagine Canadians who are from East Asia and also deeply qualified in their field. 

[bhr]

So, I think it's worth saying that, in the short term, a Trump economic plan could actually benefit private schools and R1s. Reduced taxes on the rich, and an increase in charitable deduction credit, could see more large gifts given to the already-wealthy schools. Harvard's endowment isn't going to be hurt by rich people getting to keep more of their money, for example. Now, we all know that trickle-down economics are bullshit, and I fear for my friends in fields affiliated with social justice work (humanities, some social sciences, journalism). As a Rhet/Comp person, I already see how my field is seen as a service, rather than research based, by many in the university, and I don't think that's going to change any time soon (offering us some protection as a discipline, but not as individuals who could see tenure jobs disappear). As someone who has worked heavily in donor-funded programs the last couple years, I know that a Trump presidency could mean more money coming in to those programs, but also know that those programs only benefit a small subsection of our student body (that already tends to be white, middle class, and suburban).

[eternallyephemeral]

12 hours ago, poliscar said:

I think this is slightly misleading—at least in the context of English Literature. When it comes to jobs, the trend seems to be to hire Canadian citizens with American degrees. So it's really not particularly easy to separate applicants into "Canadian applicants" and "American applicants." If you were to complete a Canadian degree, but never acquire citizenship or permanent residency, you would gain very little advantage from that degree in the context of Canadian jobs. 

What I've seen repeatedly in the past so many years is that Canadians are completing BAs, and often MAs, at Canadian institutions, and then going on to complete PhDs at top-tier American schools. You'll often then see them get hired for a lot of the top Canadian jobs—sometimes at their undergrad institution—because they have the double-whammy of citizenship + Harvard/Berkeley/Princeton, etc. I can also think of a few scholars (some recent hires) who completed all of their education in the US, but ended up with top-tier Canadian jobs because they had citizenship. These candidates are sort of "invisible" Canadians, because if you were to go by their educational background you'd likely identify them as American. 

There is a legal context here, in that Canadian schools—the vast majority of which are public institutions—are required to give preference to Canadian citizens, unless there is significant disparity between Canadian/non-Canadian candidates. So yes, you do see cases where Americans are awarded Canadian jobs over Canadian citizens, but it's not always as simple as it looks on the surface. Along these lines, as more Canadians end up at American schools for their doctoral studies, I imagine we'll see fewer American citizens hired for Canadian academic positions, at least at the Assistant Professor level. 

The legal context is also why the nature of the field in question, even if it's geographic, doesn't have as much weight as you'd imagine. And also, though an American seems like they'd be a better fit for a position in American Studies, there's really very little difference between a Canadian trained as an Americanist in an American program, and an American from that same program. The American isn't more qualified in the field because of their nationality—that's absurd. The same goes for East Asian studies, and besides, I have numerous Asian Canadian friends who are immigrants from Asian countries. They're fluent in the relevant languages, and identify as Canadian and Chinese/Korean/Japanese/Filipino. I mean, you did mention the multicultural nature of Canada, so I don't know why it's hard to imagine Canadians who are from East Asia and also deeply qualified in their field. 

You're absolutely right. I should have clarified that when I meant Canadian applicants vs American applicants, that I meant Americans as in people from the US with US degrees. However, that wasn't clear, so you were right to misinterpret what I said.

It is the case that Canadians go to American schools and then get hired back in Canada. But it's also the case that you could get citizenship after being in Canada for your degree, though I know it's really difficult to do all of the PR requirements if you're not working full time (or so I was told by an international student). The citizenship and hiring thing is much more complex than just Canadian vs American applicants, but it is also rare that two applicants, one from the US and one from Canada, will have identical qualifications. What I meant here is that in my experience at U of T, the applicants from Canadian schools were not as attractive applicants as those from American schools. Many of the professors hired had no ties with Canada, so it's my assumption that they did not have Canadian citizenship. In this case, because of the higher-ranked schools in the US (like the ones you mentioned), the American applicant (who is more likely to be a US citizen) is preferred over the Canadian applicant (meaning a Canadian coming from a Canadian school).

Forgive my ignorance about cultural studies - I don't know what it would take to be qualified. I would find it difficult to be an expert in a region if I had never lived there or experienced the culture. You're absolutely right that people can be Canadian and their heritage could be another country; in the case I was thinking about (which isn't communicated well there), I couldn't see a person from one country who has no ties to the country they study or has no experience being immersed in that culture being a better candidate than a person who has personal experience with that area. But like I said, I have no idea what the study of other cultures entails, so it's possible one could be an expert without having personally experienced the culture. Of course, one can study other areas, like heart transplants or personality disorders, without personal eperience. What I intended to say was that it seems the legal requirement to choose a citizen of one's own country could be problematic if the country did not have qualified applicants with the right experience. For a country less diverse, I wonder if they have difficulty hiring for these positions if they are focused on or obligated to choose citizens of their own country.

Thanks for your clarification. I made a lot of assumptions when I was writing that weren't fully fleshed out, and based on my own experience. That wasn't communicated properly, so I unintentionally misled people and for that I'm sorry.

[knp]

@eternallyephemeral Just FYI, most people in PhD programs in cultural studies—history, art history, regional studies, anthropology, sometimes poli sci, English literature of the non-US, etc.—will end up spending a lot of time in the region they study by the time they graduate. This does produce a classist effect for anyone lower class who wants to study a region to which they a) don't have family, regional, or cultural ties, b ) have no work experience in and c) go to unsupportive PhD programs that only provide support for a few months' of work abroad, you're right. There may be ways to ameliorate that further, but because you can't be an armchair researcher of other cultures any more (i.e. studying it without leaving your metaphorical house), somewhere between most and all cultural studies PhD programs support their students getting significant experience in whatever region they're studying. You're right that you do, in almost all cases, need experience working in that region to get an academic job...but it needs to be professional experience, which most PhD programs should be designed to give you. Personal experience often helps, but you can also acquire personal experience with a culture even if you start doing so past age 18.

[Neist]

So I came onto campus this morning only to find that my building was plastered with Alt-Right racially-inflammatory flyers. 

Even as an optimist, my faith in humanity is slowly waning. 

[eternallyephemeral]

5 hours ago, knp said:

@eternallyephemeral Just FYI, most people in PhD programs in cultural studies—history, art history, regional studies, anthropology, sometimes poli sci, English literature of the non-US, etc.—will end up spending a lot of time in the region they study by the time they graduate. This does produce a classist effect for anyone lower class who wants to study a region to which they a) don't have family, regional, or cultural ties, b ) have no work experience in and c) go to unsupportive PhD programs that only provide support for a few months' of work abroad, you're right. There may be ways to ameliorate that further, but because you can't be an armchair researcher of other cultures any more (i.e. studying it without leaving your metaphorical house), somewhere between most and all cultural studies PhD programs support their students getting significant experience in whatever region they're studying. You're right that you do, in almost all cases, need experience working in that region to get an academic job...but it needs to be professional experience, which most PhD programs should be designed to give you. Personal experience often helps, but you can also acquire personal experience with a culture even if you start doing so past age 18.

Thanks for your explanation! It makes perfect sense that this would be a part of some PhD programs. I had previously heard of exchanges for these kinds of programs in undergrad, but I falsely assumed that you were on your own once you got to graduate school.

It seems like a good move to take, having professional experience as opposed to only the armchair academic study of an area (I'm also in an applied field that suffers from being too detached from what we study, so I can understand that). I also made the false assumption that PhD programs are not so concerned with the real world, and with real professional experience. I'm glad that's not the case for these programs!

[Bumblebea]

• On 11/14/2016 at 1:40 PM, Neist said:

  So I came onto campus this morning only to find that my building was plastered with Alt-Right racially-inflammatory flyers. 

  Even as an optimist, my faith in humanity is slowly waning. 

  The Chronicle's got a run-down of the campus incidents that have happened since Trump's election: http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/ticker/heres-a-rundown-of-the-latest-campus-climate-incidents-since-trumps-election/115553

And this incident at Ohio State (which I'm sure everyone has seen on social media or the news) wasn't racially motivated, but it was stunning and brazen nonetheless: http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2016/11/14/1115-osu-student-pushed-at-protest.html

 

[whodathunk]

So just to follow up on my previous post, I might have been a bit too conservative. Turns out radical academics are Trump's first target for pillaging.

Scary.

 

[tvethiopia]

if it's helpful, i've been maintaining a site that's tracking events following trump taking office. yesterday there were some especially worrisome executive orders that could have a very serious impact on anyone seeking to enter the US without citizenship:

https://tvethiopia.github.io/after-trump/index.html

[Yanaka]

Thank you for your website, @tvethiopia! Very helpful. I'm terrified at this point. I knew there would be damage done, but I didn't really want to believe it. 

About the scientific twitter accounts protesting censure, do you know if the Trump administration had been really following protocol, or if they are 100% right to be rebelling? I thought I read something about them all being asked to not communicate during the transition, but I'm now I don't trust any source on the internet or even in newspapers.

[KikiDelivery]

I am terrified. Not only because of the state of the humanities per say, I knew that was already looking grim. I am talking about as someone as someone who is going to be severely impacted by some of his policies. I just feel like I do not have the energy to concentrate on my graduate studies right now with all the anxiety I am feeling.

[tvethiopia]

2 hours ago, Yanaka said:

About the scientific twitter accounts protesting censure, do you know if the Trump administration had been really following protocol, or if they are 100% right to be rebelling? I thought I read something about them all being asked to not communicate during the transition, but I'm now I don't trust any source on the internet or even in newspapers.

while some things--like changes to whitehouse.gov and some of the early executive orders--are typical of a transition period, there is really no reason to silence groups like NASA or the national park system. the media blackout being called for in organizations like this is certainly not just a matter of course, and is particularly extreme in its barring the use of social media as well as halting more formal press releases.

[pippi]

I wonder if anyone else is considering giving up their U.S. grad school ambitions because of the political climate. I'm an American living abroad, and I knew Trump would be bad, but I didn't realize how bad it could really be until he was inaugurated. (And the scariest thing is, we still don't *really* know how bad it will be.)

For me, it might not make sense to come back, even if I get into a great program. I want to have a kid in the next few years: the social safety net was bad enough under Obama; I can only imagine how much worse things will be in Trump's America. It would be delusional to expect any sort of positive government action in terms of health care, parental leave, daycare, or education. There are problems everywhere, of course, but I suspect I would be better off having a baby/raising a child where I'm currently living. (And *particularly* as a harried grad student earning somewhere near the poverty line.)

Anecdotally, one of my professors here told me that he's heard that U.S. applications to European programs are waaaay up this cycle over previous years. 

On the other hand, I do feel a sense of responsibility. It's unreal to be here and not there while this is all happening. 

Edited January 27, 2017 by pippi

[Yanaka]

Yeah, I've also thought about not moving to the US anymore. However, wanting to attend a US grad school is motivated by reasons other than academic interest, and I decided that my personal reasons were stronger than Dump's presidency (which I hope to be shorter than the expected 4 years). As a queer woman, I feel threatened of course--but in a way I feel it is important that the progressive and "smart" people stay in the US and fight.

[Dr. Old Bill]

57 minutes ago, pippi said:

I wonder if anyone else is considering giving up their U.S. grad school ambitions because of the political climate. I'm an American living abroad, and I knew Trump would be bad, but I didn't realize how bad it could really be until he was inaugurated. (And the scariest thing is, we still don't *really* know how bad it will be.)

As much as I tried to distance myself from Plan B discussions, I can safely admit that I was seriously considering moving back to Canada if I didn't get in to any graduate programs. I'm technically an immigrant, after all (though naturalized a year ago), even though being an immigrant from Canada is a far cry from being an immigrant from Syria or Mexico or, let's face it, any country in which the dominant race isn't white. That being said, since I have the option to live and work in another country, I may very well have taken it had my Ph.D. plans not panned out. Since they now have, I will be sticking it out down here and hoping like hell that the situation doesn't escalate into a global war.

50 minutes ago, Yanaka said:

Yeah, I've also thought about not moving to the US anymore. However, wanting to attend a US grad school is motivated by reasons other than academic interest, and I decided that my personal reasons were stronger than Dump's presidency (which I hope to be shorter than the expected 4 years). As a queer woman, I feel threatened of course--but in a way I feel it is important that the progressive and "smart" people stay in the US and fight.

First of all, massive kudos to you, Yanaka. Seriously, that takes guts, and it's incredibly admirable. And second...I have to believe there's a chance that his presidency will indeed be less than four years. Democracy is power by the people, and what he is perpetrating is NOT democracy in any sense of the word. In the past I've thought that the liberal / democrat / left-leaning folks are a bit too soft when it comes to demonstrating outrage over ludicrous policies...but I don't think that's the case anymore. More marches, more demonstrations, more vehemence, and more good old fashioned resistance may well lead to impeachment and the ouster of the current leader. Here's hoping...

[louisamae]

Jumping feet-first into this convo because it's something I've been thinking a lot about.

I have definitely been amongst those thinking that perhaps a PhD isn't the right move considering the US's swift demise into a fascist state--not out of fear for the humanities/higher education (though, Betsy Devos will be the death of public education, which poses an immediate threat to higher education/tenure), but rather, for fear that my time and energy might be better spent elsewhere. I'm having a hard time justifying spending the next 6-8 years in a classroom. Of course, I know the bulk of my PhD work will be with an eye towards decolonizing museum spaces, etc., but even that feels trivial at this point. Feels like we need boots on the ground, not heads in the clouds. Though I'm sure my pessimism is getting the best of me, in some regards...

[biyutefulphlower]

39 minutes ago, louisamae said:

Feels like we need boots on the ground, not heads in the clouds. Though I'm sure my pessimism is getting the best of me, in some regards...

I guess that depends on what you consider 'the ground'.  Part of the reason I'm gung-ho about getting a PhD is that I feel like the humanities are going to need as many stewards as possible now.  And just because you're working towards a PhD doesn't mean you can't find other ways to fight.  (Personally, I think your discussion of museums sounds fascinating and I'm sure there are ways your research ties into what the country is going through.)

[louisamae]

@biyutefulphlower Certainly, certainly--the humanities will definitely need us/you, and other thoughtful teachers/thinkers--and that's what I've been trying to remind myself of. There's also something to be said for doing the best work you can where you can make the most progress. (Still, I can't help but feel like I could be putting in the grunt work for a more at-risk sector, yadda yadda yadda. I think my feelings also stem from the reality that so many sectors/communities/services are under siege right now, and I'm not sure where to begin (which is also why I'm trying to begin with what I know best--museums, etc.). Realistically, I know the usefulness of a risk/threat hierarchy has its limits, but still...Sigh...) 

Edited January 27, 2017 by louisamae

[Skyride Season]

I agree with @Louisamae about Betsy Devos being extremely harmful to public education (which will absolutely affect higher ed in the long run, especially for specific groups of already-marginalized people).

Now that we have the benefit of two months of hindsight since the election, I'm sure some of the original writers on this thread would want to amend their comments. We are standing at the brink of major changes in immigration, healthcare, and education, to name a few-- all of which will have ramifications for us as graduate students. Although various neoliberal forces have been impinging on the vitality of universities for years, we are about to see changes that will directly impact the lives of queers, Muslims, immigrants, POC, crips, and others who have been specifically target in Trump's rhetoric. The university for which I currently work hosted a (very well-attended) teach-in today where scholars talked about anti-antisemitism, racism and Black Lives Matter, the potential for a Muslim registry, and other issues that are currently affecting or in the near-future will affect the students here. Their remarks were surprisingly 101-- because, I think, unless one has already felt the effects of racism, misogyny, xenophobia, etc., then one has not necessarily been paying attention to what's happening nor imagining what could potentially happen. A lot of people in the crowd were cis, non-disabled, white kids. Evidently, it is not redundant for them to hear their professors say, "You need to pay attention. This is a poisonous political climate for Black people, Jews, queers, etc. This is happening to your fellow classmates. Fellow professors, you need to address these issues in your curricula. If you see Islamophobia, queerphobia, etc. enacted in your classrooms, do something about it."

There will certainly be very really political consequences coming out of Washington, but I am also worried about a rise in discriminatory and exclusionary actions in university settings from people emboldened by Trump's rhetoric. Eastern Michigan University (where I got my MA) is case in point.

</apocalyptic rant>

[loganondorf]

It's very worrying. I've recently come to the conclusion that if I turn aside from the academic route (as mentioned by others, the job market is already dismal, and I can't imagine it will improve in the next few years), there's quite a bit to be done in the field of student affairs. I have some background in this area, and from my experiences, I was able to reach more students through residential life and other areas of student affairs than in my time as a teacher. That might be well worth it -- having the ability to challenge and change hearts and minds was (alongside my love for the discipline) the big motivating factor behind my decision to teach, and in S.A. there's perhaps even more opportunity to do this.

[Yanaka]

Thank you @Wyatt's Terps, I have to say reading you yesterday --and having one or two beers too many-- made me cry a little <3 I still have much more privilege than other individuals, though, so I don't think I deserve so much credit. But one way or another... Let's do this, people!!! 

[Yanaka]

Double-post:

OK so now that he's banned immigrants from 7 muslim countries, should we expect more terrorism in the US? Are we going to DIE, folks?!

[eadwacer]

19 hours ago, louisamae said:

Feels like we need boots on the ground, not heads in the clouds. Though I'm sure my pessimism is getting the best of me, in some regards...

I've been considering this a lot as well--part of the reason it's taken me a while since undergrad to decide that I want to go into academia is that I've always worried it's kind of masturbatory and pointless when I could be doing actual material things that actually, materially improve fellow oppressed people's lives. But now I'm trying to balance that with a commitment to diversity of tactics.

If I can make my scholarship radical, and I continue resisting in more physical, boots on the ground ways through direct action and through political action as well, I'm contributing to resistance not LESS than I would be if I focused solely on material tasks, but the same amount, just through a more diverse combination of tactics. There's no reason scholarship must preclude other ways to help, and there's no reason scholarship can't also be a way to help in itself.