On Finding One's Tribe

Percy Family Coat of Arms, circa 1067.

Twice now I have entered a random question into Google. And twice now Wanderlust has produced the result I needed. Last time I was searching to reset my inner compass. This time it was about finding my tribe.

It isn't so much about finding a group of people to hang out with, but rather to feel that my work is valued and not subjected to unwarranted criticism from people who live by their ideology.

I am talking about writing an article for a journal where the topic is controversial. The point of such articles is to stimulate debate. But only if that debate is in the "correct" direction as stipulated by the ideologues, it seems.

I had a similar situation in the examination of my PhD, where one examiner suggested that I resubmit my thesis that compared the impact of the institutional frameworks that govern communications technologies (the independent variable) with the outcomes in terms of penetration (the dependent variable) in Canada and Australia. My examiner suggested that my "new" thesis should be on why the NBN was the most innovative thing ever. My findings disagreed.

Then I had my other examiner who took my major finding, modified it, and published it before my thesis had even been accepted. At least it was acknowledged but WTAF? These people are not scholars. They are the same people who give my students 5/10 with feedback like: "A bit bland". I am getting sick of it.

And then to have two reviewers who obviously disagreed so much with my controversial ideas that instead of allowing the article to stand as a controversy, decided that they would write their own responses to my controversial article as part of my rejection feedback. 

I know that being rejected is par for the course but in this case it was so clearly a case of ideological difference that I won't bother submitting to this journal ever again.

So where to from here?

I have asked for some guidance from my mentors, and this has led me to reflect a little more on where I want to go. I realise that I want my work to matter in a practical sense and to contribute to my sense of a "virtue proposition", along the lines of my teaching practice, which has become more focused on developing my students' social capital. 

To do so, I will have to rethink where I associate. To find my own tribe, so to speak.

The first thing is to realise that where I get my ideas from does not have to conform to traditional left-leaning sources. Indeed, I am finding more and more solace in the great books of the western world the more I read for myself. Much like Harold Bloom, I am no longer interested in apologising for this approach.

Seneca would take it where he could get it. Here is his approach in Letters from a Stoic, Letter II:

My thought for today is something which I found in Epicurus (yes, I actually make a practice going over to the enemy’s camp – by way of reconnaissance, not as a deserter!). ‘A cheerful poverty,’ he says, ‘is an honourable state.’

I have often followed Seneca's approach subconsciously but there is a point where we either back ourselves, or continue to bend in the wind of others' stuff. I've had a long run of not trusting myself for whatever reason, at least intellectually, while at the same time stubbornly backing myself subconsciously and only realising afterwards I was reaping the rewards for sticking to my guns.

It is interesting that these issues have arisen at a time when I am encouraging my students to make their subconscious habits more conscious so they may live the Socratic ideal; or, the examined life. I tend to learn the most from teaching and this time is no exception.

As I approach the end of the semester where I will finish by encouraging my students to become "reflective practitioners", I find myself (yet again) learning my own lessons.

What strikes me about the advice on finding one's tribe presented on Wanderlust is that "trying new things" doesn't have to mean yoga or tree-hugging; it can mean trying a free market think tank. It can mean returning to my conservative roots challenged long ago and now but a distant memory. 

It doesn't have  to be politically correct and it can even mean listening to Jordan Peterson if I choose to.

While it may be a case of coming full circle, I realise that I have only one life. And the purpose of that life is to live it. I've tried the unicorns and lollipops way, and it is not for me. It pretends to do good while doing nothing. 

I've listened to others' views about how certain politicians are "the hope for our children" while these same politicians do nothing but complain. I've also seen politicians working themselves into the ground while keyboard warriors sit in the stands and troll and critique.

From now on, I am the man in the arena. And I will choose the arena. If the audience doesn't like it, that is none of my business.

 

On Writer's Courage: Perplexing Reflection

Sunset over Lake Pejar, NSW. Photo by Dr Michael de Percy

 

No Matter Our Wreckage by Gemma Carey
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

I've met the author a couple of times and we follow each other on twitter. I bought this memoire on Kindle recently and once I started, I couldn’t stop. I usually write notes on my blog about every book I read but this one made me double-check. It was only yesterday when talking to my students about developing a professional online presence and I mentioned how Gemma Carey had gone against the academic grain with her book that I realised how courageous she is in publishing this story. While it was far less courageous, B.F. Skinner took a similar approach decades ago and was admonished for writing a novel (Walden Two), despite its own type of brilliance.

I think the book is very courageous and has challenged my thinking on multiple levels. I don’t know where to go from here, but I suppose that is the importance of the book. After days of reflection, I am still at a loss as to “where to from here?” But I hope my perplexity honours the work sufficiently for now.

View all my reviews

On Narrative and Momentum; or, I just needed to write something about something right now

Mushrooms at the Gunning Golf Club [Photo © 2021 Eliza Markert]

Sometimes I just have to write something. If there is a single thing I love to do, so much so that I just have to do it, then that thing is writing. It is my world; my raison d'être. I make no apologies for it.

I've been trying to get myself back on track after a couple of years of alternately healthy and not-so-healthy distractions. I've been blogging for so long now it is part of my identity, but my reading and other scholarly pursuits have taken a back seat. Or so it seemed. 

It was merely a blip on my reading/writing radar. That is not to say that my life hasn't been better than ever before. It certainly has! But my scholarly life needed a revival.

The idea of momentum comes up time and again in my research into technologies such as transport and telecommunications. I find these topics interesting because - well - I found out that as an Aquarius I am interested in all things related to time and space. So logistics is key. And I do whatever I like as much as I can justify it! Anyway, I digress.

As a former artillery and later pay corps army officer, and having completed the Logistics Officers Intermediate Course at Bandiana (another lifetime ago), and more recently becoming a Chartered Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, it all makes some sort of serendipitous sense.

My research focuses on the topics of these things: transport and telecommunications. But that is not key to my narrative, and I have become entangled in the "subject matter expert" divide before. But why is it that if I focus on multilateralism and foreign aid or refugees, for example, that I am outside of my expertise? Well, please let me explain.

The key theoretical thing I am interested in is how institutions change or don't change, and how policy instruments help or hinder the outcomes of policy goals as they relate to institutions. Effectively, I am interested in how governments can achieve what that want to achieve, and why they don't do these things. It is pretty straight forward!

But my approach is also relevant to international institutions such as the Word Trade Organisation and the World Bank. If I were to be asked, at a pinch my specialisation is government-business relations from a regulatory, industry policy, and an international political economy (IPE) perspective. None of these perspectives disrupt my personal narrative. They are related to subject; not specifically to theory.

So therein lies my narrative. What is my purpose? To understand what institutional factors help or hinder, from a policy perspective, governments' achievement of desired policy goals.

That's it for now. So what is your narrative?