But the article wasn't really double-peer reviewed, correct? In fact,
reviewers rejected it first and then the editors found some other way to
publish it...
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/09/20/much-third-world-quarterlys-editorial-board-resigns-saying-controversial-article
On Oct 12, 2017 4:56 AM, "Johann van der Merwe" <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
To all
Is this the total response to a threat of violence against a double-blind
review article?
The silence from academics on this list "spreek boekdele" = goes a very
long way to signifiy the strength of the social media mafia, a generic
group that wishes to test the resolve of the West when confronted by
uncomfortable "facts" from history.
What has happened to "Design for Democracy"? ... or any of the many calls
for design's intervention in social life, in order to add value to the
aspirations of ordinary citizens?
Nothing ... nada ... sweet blue all ...
Is anyone listening?
Johann
On 10 October 2017 at 23:41, Deirdre Barron <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> hear, hear- well argued
> Deirdre
>
> Sent from my iPhone:
>
> Associate Professor Deirdre Barron
> Centre for Design Innovation | Faculty of Health Arts & Design
> Internal Mail H31 | PO Box 218 Hawthorn Vic 3122<x-apple-data-detectors://
3/0>
> |
> Ph: +61 3 9214 6091<tel:+61%203%209214%206091> | [log in to unmask]<
> https://outlook.swin.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?C=p9W16Z_
> g9Ei8fT45gvt62nyBYkbUJdIIos8URgAbejba0tSY6PS4g2ep0Z6abOV2z_-
> lSC-WyG4.&URL=mailto%3arcooney%40swin.edu.au>|
> http://www.swinburne.edu.au/designinnovation<https://
> outlook.swin.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?C=p9W16Z_g9Ei8fT45gvt62nyBYkbUJdIIos8UR
> gAbejba0tSY6PS4g2ep0Z6abOV2z_-lSC-WyG4.&URL=http%3a%2f%
> 2fwww.swinburne.edu.au%2fdesigninnovation> http://www.swinburne.edu.au/
> designinnovation<https://outlook.swin.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?C=p9W16Z_
> g9Ei8fT45gvt62nyBYkbUJdIIos8URgAbejba0tSY6PS4g2ep0Z6abOV2z_-
> lSC-WyG4.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.swinburne.edu.au%2fdesigninnovation>
>
> On 10 Oct 2017, at 11:43 pm, Johann van der Merwe <
> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> Thanks to Gunnar’s post I managed to get a copy of Bruce Gilley’s article.
> I read two pages before thinking: surely, this man cannot be serious? The
> gist of what he argues for … reclaiming colonialism … is so wrong as to be
> laughable in academic terms. That is not to say that everything he writes
> about is wrong, or so objectionable as to be certifiably offensive (also,
> “empirically and historically inaccurate”), but that when he argues for
the
> return of an emotive situation that still elicits resentment today he
> misses an opportunity to make any case for the fruits of “colonialism”.
>
>
> That is exactly the point: Gilley mentions SA’s Helen Zille who, on
> visiting Singapore, wanted to make the point that the infrastructural and
> technological legacies of colonialism was something that nobody would wish
> away, indeed, that every person benefited by. Keep what is good and get
rid
> of the bad. However, the politically correct atmosphere is so bad that her
> message was completely lost under a barrage of insults and invective,
> despite the fact that she is one of SA’s best politicians “of and for the
> people”, with an anti-apartheid record bar none. It all counts for nothing
> in the contemporary social media marketplace … what Gilly should have
> argued for is the case to be made for building on, not the fruits of
> colonialism (the emotive trigger), but the fruits of the inherited
> structures when the colonists left (and good riddance to them). My own
> people, the Afrikaners, and the Irish, felt only relief when the English
> left (or were kicked out, aka., voted out), but we did not destroy what
> they left behind.
>
>
> Whatever the merits or faults of Gilley’s article, it is beyond belief
that
> our so-called modern world can countenance such political censoring … what
> is the difference between the West and all the examples we have seen of
> Eastern academic institutions blocking posts on this list because they
felt
> certain words or terms objectionable? Are we to import the political
stance
> of China, and severely censor what we do not like? Turn into an academic
> Breitbart News Network?
>
>
> I have to agree with Gunnar: it is wrong and utterly objectionable to
> retract articles of this nature that you simply do not agree with. If you
> feel strongly enough about the subject, then publish a refutation /
> rebuttal, without the invective, and with a solid counter argument. To
> shout your opponents down and call for banning, and, increasingly in SA,
to
> threaten violence is beyond being human. My building at CPUT, that I
worked
> in before retiring, was firebombed twice recently, as well as the church
> just across the way (the width of a road from my window), by student
> “activists” that believe in violence as a legitimate act … in KwaZulu
Natal
> the murder rate among ANC leaders is mounting almost daily, as caders
> jockey for position ahead of the December conference.
>
>
> I do not need a reminder, of the worst that people can do to each other,
on
> this list as well. We have to live with this reality daily.
>
>
> Johann
>
> On 9 October 2017 at 19:30, Gunnar Swanson <[log in to unmask]<
> mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Introducing threats of violence and giving in to threats of violence are
> > clearly morally wrong as far as I’m concerned. Just as, say, those whose
> > positions have been colonized (if you’ll excuse the term) by racists and
> > misogynists have a special obligation to clarify their objections, so do
> > those who demanded the removal of the article have a special obligation
> to
> > condemn the reasons the article was removed.
> >
> >
> > Gunnar
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Dr. Johann van der Merwe
> Independent Design Researcher
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]<mailto:
> [log in to unmask]>>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design<
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
Dr. Johann van der Merwe
Independent Design Researcher
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|