[R-G] Radical Scholar "Rejects" his PhD thesis

[Anthony Fenton]

http://michaeljamesbarker.wordpress.com/about/

On May 15, 2009, Michael Barker “rejected” his PhD thesis at Griffith  
University, Australia. The title of his thesis was “Mediating Social  
Engineering: Moving Beyond Elite Manipulation of Democracy.” Email:  
Michael.J.Barker [AT] Griffith.edu.au

Rejection Letter (dated May 15, 2009)

Dear Thesis Examinations Coordinator

Since January 2005 I have been enrolled as a Doctoral candidate at  
Griffith University, and in July 2008 I submitted a Thesis manuscript  
to the University for external examination. During the course of this  
period of study my political beliefs have substantially evolved, and I  
now consider myself a radical scholar.

The study I produced, titled “Mediating Social Engineering: Moving  
Beyond Elite Manipulation of Democracy,” critically examines how elite  
power-brokers, especially those assuming the guise of impartial  
progressive philanthropists, work to manipulate civil society to  
promote and sustain plutocratic political arrangements. In the final  
stages of this research, I examined how elite manipulation operates  
within academia – which led to my presenting a peer-review paper  
titled, “Progressive Social Change in the ‘Ivory Tower’? A Critical  
Reflection on the Evolution of Activist Orientated Research in US  
Universities,” at the Australasian Political Science Association  
conference that was held last year at the University of Queensland  
(July 6-9, 2008). This paper demonstrated how powerful liberal  
individuals and their philanthropic foundations have manipulated the  
university system to help bolster a capitalist political status quo. I  
concluded that:

     Sustaining useful autonomous activist research within  
universities requires that radical scholars who choose to remain  
within the system fight to retain vital connections with one another  
and with activists working outside of the university environs.  
However, in my view, undertaking such scholarship only lends a fig  
leaf of respectability to what are at root capitalist enterprises;  
consequently a purist and more sustainable solution requires that  
radical intellectuals step out of the university world and work to  
create alternative, people-powered institutions that can seriously  
challenge the status quo.

As my research and learning has imparted this world view within me, I  
now find myself in a position where accepting this PhD is not  
possible. With this in mind I wish to inform you that I will not be  
handing in the revised PhD manuscript, titled “Mediating Social  
Engineering: Moving Beyond Elite Manipulation of Democracy.” My  
decision is consistent with the views expressed above.

I wish to emphasize that the research and analyses that informed this  
decision were undertaken in the closing months of my candidature, and  
even upon handing in my manuscript I was still unsure as to how I  
should proceed with regard to accepting the PhD. Rather than simply  
resign my candidature prior to handing in my thesis, I determined that  
a more powerful political statement could be made by rejecting the  
concept of receiving a PhD after it was accepted by the external  
examiners. In this way, detractors could not assert that I was  
incapable of completing a PhD, only that I had decided not to accept  
it. The difference is critical given my view of the political role  
that universities fulfill in justifying plutocracy.

Critically, I wish to demonstrate that I am rejecting the formal  
academic institution and not the reverse. For this reason, I have  
waited for the Chair’s final decision, which required only minor  
changes to the thesis, before informing Griffith University that I  
would not be making the suggested corrections.

Yours sincerely

Michael Barker