Jayb,

"Poirot, it's good to see you son is self-educating. I guess he realizes that there's not much future in studying the Koran all day in Australia. Maybe he could help you come to terms with Australian Culture."

What a pathetic comment....from a person that's offered nothing but vacuous criticism on this thread.

Petty and insular....sums you up well.

Sorry Yebiga,

I do not ignore past.

For example, with Abbott book there will be an early chapter that focuses on why the context faced by Abbott is different from past, and how strengths (and weaknesses) of Aust society (developed over time) can be maintained or developed further given demands of the day.

Of course, there are views and values and insights into the human condition.

I just don't feel the need to rave on about it, or the views of past thinkers.

YEBIGA:
"In a democratic system, being able to win over a single sect is often decisive in the passing of any legislation".
Can you give me a few examples please?

"It must cease sectarianism; even the narrative of evil oligarchs is wrongheaded.

The Humanities don't teach sectarianism, and you're the only one going on about evil oligarchs. But correct me if I'm wrong and, once again, give me a few examples.

"There is an accessible truth and discovering it our endless task"

Sounds wonderful; can you elaborate a little?

"even the most despicable must not be demonized but understood".

Jesus couldn't have said it better himself, but whom is the Humanities demonizing? They are siding "with" minorities!
What you seem to be arguing for is solidarity, though our age of individualism has already achieved possibly the most egoistic and alienated society in human history. It could be argued that finding group identities to replace disrupted class structures "is" working towards a more communitarian society. Recognising ethnicities is not sectarian, but more in the nature of promoting inclusion and empowerment of hitherto marginalised groups. It's xenophobes like Jayb you should be lecturing, not preaching to the converted (the Humanities).

"But for the grace of God go I" is a nice one to keep in mind, but I'm not sure how we should apply it to scholarship?

In truth, it seems to me you've got nothing to say to defend the position (whatever it is) you've been championing here; you've merely strung together a few high-sounding phrases in the hope we'll be baulked by your profundity.
Nietzsche for one would certainly despise such craven talk. Plato and Aristotle denied their slaves any status at all, Shakespeare demonised Jews, Dickens detested ambition utilitarianism in favour of sentiment, and Descarte is the father of modern individualism.

I don't want to be rude, but do you have anything more than platitudes?

“…the fall of the concept of an individual and independent self, which there is no empirical evidence for and every reason to doubt according to academic stricture (as opposed to religious scriptures). If anything, this recognition of our “cultured” identities undermines the liberal doctrine of individualism and ought to alert us to its commodification” – Squeers

Ok, and when you have completed the infinite regression and arrived into the post-masturbatory void, you will again wake up exactly where you started here in the presence at hand. Only now, as you have obliterated every foundation you now stand, on and, for nothing – rudderless. In becoming de-cultured, resistance or agency to the present becomes impossible – the present eternal. Thus stripped of our culture, we surrender everything and unwittingly enable our commodification.

“the liberal doctrine of individualism” - I needs muster all my strength to refrain from insulting. This is the remnants of bourgeois enlightenment theory adopted by modern Capitalism to persuade a populace of its benevolence. It is now nothing but hollow mythology. By what tortuous logic could one conclude that oligarchical, mega-corporates promote a doctrine of individualism? They are diametrically opposed to individualism; they are about uniform business suits working in teams not mavericks, eccentrics or individuality. The only individuality they promote is that between choices of brand and for the individual to struggle to survive alone. They are moreover for the destruction of the individual into a commodity as you suggest - as this makes for greater efficiencies

I perfectly understand how the intention of [deleted - offensive] is to identify and thereby remove oppression, exclusion, etc of minorities, identities, etc. This is the very heart and purpose of these theories and this school of thinking which has infected every fabric of the humanities and resonates in large parts amongst public servants and even public companies. It is now part of the genealogy of our culture.

I suggest that there has been precious little critical thinking as to the wider consequences and ripple effects. In the validation of one sect, we needs must ignore another and in validating an ever increasing number we by extension invalidate or at least obscure the collective cause.

The late 1970s early 80s marks the high point throughout the western developed world of social welfare programs, free education, workers rights, 36 hr week, annual leave, universal free healthcare...

Since then, we have seen the rise of economic rationalism and the systemic de-evolution of the above gains. For those interested, there are numerous sources available which detail the frustration of big business and its proponents during the 1970s and the development of their plans to subvert what they believed was an existential threat to free enterprise.

During this same period, [deleted - offensive] entered our univesities and its rise chronologically at least parallels the rise of economic rationalism and the de-evolution of the great universal social programs.

Although it should hardly be necessary, the documentary sources show that the right wing think tanks targeted 3 areas to subvert the gains of the 1970s: the media, unions and education. Subsequently, the media ownership has been concentrated into fewer and fewer hands and all singing from the same hymn book, the unions eviserated and the education system dumbed down and postmodernised.

The scene now set, we need to explore how the well intentioned validation of a plethora of sects victims may have and continues to aid the economic rationalist agenda.

YEBIGA,

you must be sensible of the utter poverty of what you're saying. You have some great nebulas anxiety you're projecting onto the humanities (too vast and complex for any single person to appreciate or criticise unilaterally), but you fail to communicate it in a coherent manner.
Unless you can provide a comprehensible thesis, or a little detail, I'll leave you to tilt at your windmills. I have better things to do.