<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/css/atom.css" type="text/css"?><entry xmlns="http://purl.org/atom/ns#">
<created>2005-12-16T06:47:40Z</created>
<issued>2005-12-16T06:47:40Z</issued>
<title>Day-um</title>
<modified>2005-12-16T06:47:40Z</modified>
<summary></summary>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped">&lt;p&gt;U of C theory professor Jacob Levy &lt;a href="http://jacobtlevy.blogspot.com/2005_12_11_jacobtlevy_archive.html#113466504694290429" title="Jacob T. Levy"&gt;talks about his tenure denial&lt;/a&gt;, breaking a two-month blogospheric silence; from his perspective, the fact that both he and &lt;a href="http://blog.lordsutch.com/archives/3012"&gt;Dan Drezner&lt;/a&gt; were denied tenure at the departmental level has nothing to do with blogging or ideology, but instead because &amp;ldquo;both political economy and liberal political theory are outside the emerging, Perestroikan, sense of what [Chicago&amp;rsquo;s] department&amp;rsquo;s about.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;My (strictly personal) sense is that any department that aspires to either be or continue to be considered at the top of the discipline needs to attract and retain the best faculty possible across the breadth of the discipline. My sense is also that the Perestroikans and their &lt;a href="http://blog.lordsutch.com/archives/727"&gt;fellow travellers&lt;/a&gt; have &lt;a href="http://blog.lordsutch.com/archives/644"&gt;at best a minimal conception&lt;/a&gt; of the actual breadth of the discipline. The intersection of these two senses is most disturbing, at least for those of us who&amp;rsquo;d like to think that Chicago ought to be an important center of political science research.&lt;/p&gt;</content>
<link>http://blog.lordsutch.com/archives/3128</link>
<id>http://blog.lordsutch.com/atom.cgi/entryid=3128</id>
</entry>
