top of page
  • Writer's pictureSam Wilks

Discussing the taboo nature of certain conservative ideas in academic circles.




In an exploration of the vitality and acceptance of conservative perspectives within the halls of modern academia, one embarks on a nuanced journey through the ideological landscapes. This discourse seeks to unwrap the complex interplay between foundational ideas and their manifestation in contemporary academic settings.


The essence of this exploration lies in understanding the principles that underpin conservative thought across various disciplines. From the judicial realm, where the balance between individual liberties and the collective good is perennially debated, to the economic sphere, where the merits of free markets versus regulatory oversight are contested, the conservative perspective offers a rich tapestry of principles rooted in autonomy, tradition, and scepticism of centralised power.


In the domain of psychology and psychiatry, conservative thought often emphasises the role of individual responsibility, the importance of structured hierarchies, and the inherent complexities of human nature. These views contrast with more progressive stances that might prioritise systemic factors and collective solutions to individual maladies. Additionally, the conservative perspective on criminal justice, which takes into account the darker aspects of human behaviour, supports strong law enforcement and a judicial system that strikes a balance between compassion and deterrence.


Security, a field deeply intertwined with both the physical and psychological realms, draws upon the conservative emphasis on pragmatism and preparedness. The principles espoused by experts in this field underscore the importance of proactive measures, situational awareness, and a nuanced understanding of threat dynamics to ensure safety in an increasingly unpredictable world.


Transitioning to the arena of personality psychology, the conservative perspective appreciates the complexity of human traits and behaviours, recognising the interplay of genetic, environmental, and cultural factors in shaping individuals. This approach values the stability of personality over time while also acknowledging the capacity for growth and adaptation within structured frameworks.


In the context of modern academia, particularly within the Australian landscape, the reception of conservative ideas presents a mixed picture. The intellectual diversity that academia purports to uphold often finds itself at odds with the reality of ideological conformity, where conservative voices may be marginalised or dismissed outright. This phenomenon is not unique to Australia but is perhaps more pronounced in regions like the Northern Territory, where the intersection of indigenous issues, environmental debates, and economic development presents complex challenges that defy simplistic ideological categorisations. A common response from a young drunk intoxicated academic is "I feel," which we often retort with "the facts don't actually care about your feelings!". Unfortunately this subtle redirection just opens the floodgates for the emotionally unstable to cry, scream or shake, as modern academics have seldom acquired the ability to regulate their emotions.


Debates around land management and environmental conservation often pit traditional ecological knowledge and conservative land-use practices against progressive environmental agendas. Similarly, discussions on indigenous welfare and education reflect a clash between conservative approaches focused on personal responsibility and community engagement versus more progressive policies focused on systemic reparations and interventions.


The crux of the debate lies not in the outright rejection of conservative ideas but in the nuanced consideration of their applicability and efficacy in addressing contemporary challenges. The vitality of conservative perspectives in academia hinges on the ability to engage in open, evidence-based discourse that transcends ideological boundaries. This requires a commitment to intellectual diversity, where ideas are judged on their merits rather than their alignment with prevailing academic dogmas. However, in the modern academic identity driven era, whilst diversity of race, gender, and sexual preference creates additional promotions on an identity scale, diversity of opinion is seldom tolerated.


The question of whether conservative perspectives can thrive in modern academia is contingent upon the academic community's willingness to embrace true diversity of thought. The Australian context, with its unique social, cultural, and environmental landscape, offers fertile ground for testing the resilience and adaptability of conservative ideas. By fostering an environment that values critical enquiry and respectful debate, academia can enrich its intellectual tapestry, ensuring that all perspectives, including conservative ones, contribute to the collective pursuit of knowledge and understanding. That environment is not currently fostered, however, when discussing the matter with those about three years away from entering academia, their conservative ideas and processes are definitely going to make a comeback. From the author.


The opinions and statements are those of Sam Wilks and do not necessarily represent whom Sam Consults or contracts to. Sam Wilks is a skilled and experienced Security Consultant with almost 3 decades of expertise in the fields of Real estate, Security, and the hospitality/gaming industry. His knowledge and practical experience have made him a valuable asset to many organizations looking to enhance their security measures and provide a safe and secure environment for their clients and staff.


3 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page