It's a well-written piece (as I'd expect). However, I find it blinkered in regard to recognising and accepting the role of the establishment in perpetuating racism.
By framing his argument in the non-secular ritual of sacrificial scapegoating, he draws my attention to the legacy of established institutions in creating the social environment in which racism has flourished and persisted - more specifically, the Church. In the article, it's the rather more nebulous "modern culture" and "habits deeply rooted in human society-building" that are bought to the fore.
Another established institution which is more clearly identified is Cambridge (and Oxford) University, about which he writes:
But a university can hardly be fairly asked to make up in short order the imbalances and inequities of an entire educational system and all the social and economic mechanisms that lie behind it.
The author bio states that Rowan Williams is a former archbishop of Canterbury and master of Magdalene College, Cambridge.
Easy for him to say. Universities are terrible employers and will sacrifice (almost) anyone to protect The Organisation. In my experience, anyway. I never reached the dizzy heights of senior management.
And he's right about one thing: they can't be expected to solve all the problems with the educational system on their own. Some universities are trying, though. They're the ones who get sneered at for offering 'Mickey Mouse degrees' and not doing as much research (because most of the research grants go to older universities).
It turns out that the academic who appears to have started this whole witch-hunt was himself under investigation by his university in Belgium because his colleagues told the university authorities that he did not appear to be qualified for the role. I will not name him here, the details are in today's media reports.
I have personal experience of academics who are not reticent in telling anyone and everyone they meet their extreme hard-right views.
In British universities at least, there is often security in senior academic roles which means both that they cannot be removed for stating an unpleasant view ('academic freedom') and second their age means that they are uninhibited in many social settings. The university cannot or will not act and they seem to continue finding platforms to spread it inside and outside the university.
I think this is one reason why it is important to have people within the structure who challenge this narrative with their presence. I am not sure how that can be done given the structural problems that exist.
Comments
By framing his argument in the non-secular ritual of sacrificial scapegoating, he draws my attention to the legacy of established institutions in creating the social environment in which racism has flourished and persisted - more specifically, the Church. In the article, it's the rather more nebulous "modern culture" and "habits deeply rooted in human society-building" that are bought to the fore.
Another established institution which is more clearly identified is Cambridge (and Oxford) University, about which he writes: The author bio states that Rowan Williams is a former archbishop of Canterbury and master of Magdalene College, Cambridge.
And he's right about one thing: they can't be expected to solve all the problems with the educational system on their own. Some universities are trying, though. They're the ones who get sneered at for offering 'Mickey Mouse degrees' and not doing as much research (because most of the research grants go to older universities).
I have personal experience of academics who are not reticent in telling anyone and everyone they meet their extreme hard-right views.
In British universities at least, there is often security in senior academic roles which means both that they cannot be removed for stating an unpleasant view ('academic freedom') and second their age means that they are uninhibited in many social settings. The university cannot or will not act and they seem to continue finding platforms to spread it inside and outside the university.
I think this is one reason why it is important to have people within the structure who challenge this narrative with their presence. I am not sure how that can be done given the structural problems that exist.