Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined property: stdClass::$theme in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\theme.inc on line 45
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 553
Notice: Undefined offset: 8192 in C:\xampp2\htdocs\drupal7\includes\common.inc on line 560 venstresida.net - English
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=taxonomy/term/6/0
noEnglish translations of venstresida texts
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/960
<p>If you would like to read automatic translations of Norwegian articles on this site from Google Translate, you can click the link below:<br />
<a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=no&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvenstresida.net" title="http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=no&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fvenstresida.net">http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=no&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fv...</a></p>
<p>Below you can read contents originally written in English.</p>
EnglishFri, 30 Oct 2009 13:41:06 +0100ronny960 at http://localhost/drupal7Power relations and temporary work in academia
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4191
<p><img width=600 src="https://i.imgur.com/hl6Tlxu.png"/><br />
<i>Faximily of the top of a poster about the panel. All photos/illustrations in this text are by the organizers.</i></p>
<p><b>I was recently invited to <a href="https://innsida.ntnu.no/start/#/feed//55fd875b-856a-3b7d-ad27-304d2d8081d6">participate in a panel</a> organized on the occasion of a visit by some researchers from UC Berkeley. I naturally made some notes in advance and as usual, I will post them here, a bit cleaned up (I did not have time to say all this during the debate).</b></p>
<p>After being invited I was a bit undecided about where I should start when commenting on these discussions. I started out going into laws and practices around temporary employment, which is stuff I know well, as a union rep, but then started to think a bit deeper - what is this really about on a deeper level, and I believe it is about power, so I'll start out talking about that, and just stop when I'm out of time.</p>
<p><b>Power relations in academia</b></p>
<p><img align=left hspace=10 width= 200 src="https://i.imgur.com/AgKGseN.jpg"/>I would like to thank the presenters for their interesting presentations about the work life of GSIs working as TAs. </p>
<p>I believe the core question behind many of the aspects discussed here is power relations in the workplace. Here you will find both differences and similarities in a Norwegian context. And I also think that a lot of the challenges you describe regarding GSI's also apply to a lot of other university employees.</p>
<p>Superficially we can categorize two types of power relations: formal and informal power relations </p>
<p>As a union representative many of my roles are within the *formal* power relations. Some employees are in leadership positions and as such have power over other workers. There are formal hierarchies in which TAs often are towards the bottom, but again above the students, they are TAs for.</p>
<p>Here there are some notable differences, I believe, between Norway, and the US. In Norway PhD students are not students - they are employees, since 20 years ago. This means they are protected by Norwegian labour laws and they are protected by our tariff agreements, particularly if they are unionized, not only in their role as TA's, but also as PhDs.</p>
<p>Now things have become a bit more complicated in recent years as we now have two different tariff agreements in the sector. I have argued a lot with Tord about this before, and I dont think we should go into that in any detail here, but for PhDs this means that in the tariff agreement my union is in, salaries mostly are negotiated nationally, where all employees get a certain raise, including PhDs. In the one Forskerforbundet and Tekna is in, all salaries are negotiated locally, which has ment for PhDs that they have gotten very different results at different universities and in the different tariff agreements.</p>
<p>However, the more informal power relations are more difficult to asses, but are often at least as important. Informal power relations at the university came to particular prominance in discussions in Norway in relation to #metoo. It seems academia was not immune to older men with grand self-images, who wollda thunk right, and some were also willing to abuse their often more subtle informal power.</p>
<p>I believe this is a core problem in academia. PhDs working as TAs are in a subordinated power relation also informally to supervisors, leaders and some other permanent staff, which renders them open to exploitation. Whether this actually is exploited will naturally vary very much. </p>
<p>This subordinate position can of course stem from several aspects of the PhD situation - one is very prominent for those who wish to pursue a career in academia: They work alongside staff who can have a huge influence on their future career opportunities via in different ways controlling the access to the professional domain they seek to enter.</p>
<p>The other prominent aspect I believe is in the precariousness of temporary work itself. Do I have a job nest semester? Can I pay my bills? And all that follows from this precariousness in both economic and social relations - Can I afford to have a child? These are questions that goo deep into your personal life, and as such have great power.</p>
<p>So what can you do? There are both more individual and systemic questions.</p>
<p>Individually, if you as a PhD feel you are being exploited in your work duties, you can contact your union, but of course also your department directly if you have trust in the department head. </p>
<p>Some of the more systemic problems, however, stem from the mentioned precariousness of temporary employment itself. And this is a subject that diserves a more thorough going throug.</p>
<p><b>Temporary work in academia</b></p>
<p><img align=right hspace=10 width= 200 src="https://i.imgur.com/irrrWnk.jpg"/>As a labor union representative, the principle of full, permanent positions is perhaps my work's central tenant. However, there are exceptions. This presentation has primarily been about PhDs, but I will start with a slightly broader perspective. </p>
<p>In Norway, there has always been a limit to how long you can work in a temporary position before you have the right to a permanent position. It used to be four years - that was how I got a permanent academic position some 15 years ago. This was changed by the previous conservative government to 3 years by changes in the law of government employees, but these changes had a few holes, that were made larger, prominently:</p>
<p>Previously one could not hire another temporary employee to replace a temporary employee - if the tasks were still there to be done, you as a temp had the right to continue. Now you can replace one temp with another freely to prevent anybody from getting three years and a permanent position.</p>
<p>PhDs who are employees in Norway, and post-docs are completely exempt from these rules.</p>
<p>In addition the general job security of public employees is reduced in recent years, and is now formally not very different from the private sector. </p>
<p>A final point is economy. Over the past couple of decades the economy of higher education institutions in Norway has become increasingly unstable. Increasingly larger parts of the budget has become volatile. Even parts of the money institutions get from the government are based on performance in different indicators in the style of New Public Management, but particularly in research - an increasing amount of the activity is project based. </p>
<p>Even if you formally have å permanent position, if it is connected to project funding, and the funding stops, then your job security, also in Norway, disappears with it. Therefore many formally permanent positions, are also de facto temporary, of which we have recently seen quite horrific examples here at NTNU as well.</p>
<p>I recently talked to an old friend of mine who graduated at the same time I did, who has been working at the university of Oslo for 20 years now, mainly on different projects, and who just now got a real permanent academic position.</p>
<p>This practice has dire effects. First of all for young people, who are in the phase of their lives when many start families, but who get no financial security, and no social security, perhaps having to move to another city or country to get another temporary academic position. This does not necessarily fit in with the plans of partners or children. Neither does not having a permanent position fit well with getting a housing mortgage.</p>
<p>For academia we can see a slight decline over time of how attractive we are as a workplace. While I have always made a few hundred thousand kroner less a year than fellow graduates who went to the private sector, I have in academia had more autonomy, being able to control how I work, having my own office, deciding where to direct my research, and working in a democratic sector - an institution built on ideas I believe in. </p>
<p>But gradually these perks of academia has ben picked away on. Democratic elections of leaders are gone. The autonomy has been gradually reduced by both incentive-based NPM creating pressure to produce different indicators, funds earmarked for "strategic areas of research", the need to constantly apply for grants to get funds to do your job. Job security has as I have said been reduced. And even my office is in jeopardy in the coming years with new campus plans.</p>
<p>If the university is to be run like a business anyway, why not just as well work in the private sector and get paid twice as much?</p>
<p>So what should we do? </p>
<p>Simple stuff - reverse the reductions in job security imposed by the former government. </p>
<p>When regarding PhDs I do not believe they should have an automatic right to permanent employment after graduation, but we in NTL believed at least that their duty work should be calculated into the three years that give a permanent position. </p>
<p>And we should rework the entire system for financing research and higher education, giving institutions and departments the economic stability needed to hire people permanently.</p>
<p>This won't solve everything, but it would be a huge step in the right direction, I believe.</p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4191#commentsPolitikkVitenskapEnglishUtdanningThu, 19 Jan 2023 12:54:28 +0100ronny4191 at http://localhost/drupal7“It’s not like it’s popular science we are doing”
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4189
<p><img width=600 src="https://i.imgur.com/0PKL8QR.png"/><br />
<i>Faximily from SEFI 2022 proceedings.</i></p>
<p><b>Looking at some research data with a colleague, I was inspired into doing a small side-project on popular science and it's possible role in science education. I will post the abstract, and links to the paper below.</b></p>
<p><font size=3>Abstract</font></p>
<p>This paper discusses the role popular science and science dissemination texts can have in learning physics in higher education for physics students and technical physics engineering students. In a mixed-methods study, students' attitudes, experienced motivation, and learning is mapped through a quantitative survey (N=155) and two qualitative surveys with in-depth interviews, one with six master level students and one with four 1st year students. The interview data shed light on two aspects of popular science's role in learning physics. Students report that reading popular science is highly motivating, but they do not have the perception of having learned physics from it. This converges with a division between calculations and conceptual understanding among the students. The paper then questions whether this gap could be closed or made smaller with greater emphasis on conceptual understanding in physics classes.</p>
<p>Link to paper: <a href="https://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2117/383022" title="https://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2117/383022">https://upcommons.upc.edu/handle/2117/383022</a></p>
<p>Link to SEFI proceedings (paper is on page 420): <a href="https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/ebook-sefi-2022-1.pdf" title="https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/ebook-sefi-2022-1.pdf">https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/ebook-sefi-2022-1.pdf</a></p>
<p>Link to paper on Researchgate: <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366848374_It's_not_like_it's_popular_science_we_are_doing_-_Popular_science_motivation_calculations_and_conceptual_understanding_among_physics_and_engineering_students">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366848374_It's_not_like_it's_popular_science_we_are_doing</a></p>
<p>Link to paper on (the extremely predatory, but hey) Academia: <a href="https://www.academia.edu/94299202/_It_s_not_like_it_s_popular_science_we_are_doing_Popular_science_motivation_calculations_and_conceptual_understanding_among_physics_and_engineering_students" title="https://www.academia.edu/94299202/_It_s_not_like_it_s_popular_science_we_are_doing_Popular_science_motivation_calculations_and_conceptual_understanding_among_physics_and_engineering_students">https://www.academia.edu/94299202/_It_s_not_like_it_s_popular_science_we...</a></p>
<p>Enjoy!</p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4189#commentsVitenskapEnglishUtdanningPublikasjonWed, 04 Jan 2023 12:36:50 +0100ronny4189 at http://localhost/drupal7Interview with Transform! Italia
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4139
<p><a href="https://transform-italia.it/rodt-come-costruire-un-partito-utile-e-fedele-ai-propri-ideali/"><img width=600 src="https://i.imgur.com/mLO6bkx.png"/></a><br />
<i>Click on the faximilie to go to the Transform! Italia website (in italian)</i></p>
<p><b>The growth of Rødt (The Red Party) in the latest Norwegian general election has not gone unnoticed internationally. I was recently interviewed by the Italian left magazine Transform! Italia about the party, its strategy of growth and the political situation. As the interview is published in italian, I will present the english version below.</b></p>
<p>----<br />
<i>1) In the last general election Rødt greatly increased its votes; this result is not accidental of course. When analyzing the distribution of votes one can see that your party has gained support especially among young people and in urban centers. How have you organized a political and social intervention that has proved to be so fruitful?</i></p>
<p><b>The growth of</b> Rødt is no accident. It has been part of a long systematic plan. When there was a change of leadership in 2012, and the current leader Bjørnar Moxnes was first elected along with i.a. deputy Marie Sneve Martinussen and party secretary Mari Eifring, the party laid a systematic plan for building the organization. For many years the party and its predecessor had been laying around or slightly above 1% in polls and elections. Initially in the 2013 elections it did not show any effect, but we dug in, rewrote much of our party program to remove internal coded language, and make it more accessible to ordinary people, and worked similarly with our communication. We managed for the first time to prioritize and to run nationally coordinated campaigns. Previously the party was sometimes jokingly referred to as a collection of local groups with a common foreign policy. But now we became a party that could put issues on the national agenda, notably keeping a firm eye in the economic issues where a large majority of the population has common interests. </p>
<p>Initially the case of the “welfare profiteers” was important. Private corporations making huge profits selling welfare services to state and municipalities, like e.g., kindergarten services, effectively putting taxpayers’ money in their pockets. This and, later on other issues gave the party the opportunity to connect important challenges in people’s everyday life to a broader ideological narrative. This gave an initial breakthrough when we doubled our support in the 2017 elections and Bjørnar Moxnes was elected to parliament with a direct mandate from the Oslo constituency, and then doubled again in 2021 to 4,7 % breaking the national threshold (4%) as the first new party since it was established, and gaining a total of 8 representatives from all over the country.</p>
<p>It is true that we have support from young and urban voters, but as I see it this is not the most interesting thing about Rødt. This has been relatively common in leftist parties the last decades. The most interesting thing about Rødt is that we have had large growth all over the country, including small rural municipalities. Actually, Rødt grew inn all but one of Norway’s 356 municipalities in the last election. Comparing with the similarly positioned Green party we can se a huge difference. They also grew considerably in urban areas, but they lost votes in many more rural parts of the country, just missing the 4% threshold, and getting only 3 directly elected constituency representatives.</p>
<p>I believe an important reason for this, is the conscious and planned gradual building of the party organization over the entire country, and this also influences the party’s policies. When our members come from all over the country, in a lot of different life situations, our policies also will reflect that.</p>
<p><i>2) We would like to raise the question of the link between mobilization from below and participation in institutions. How would you describe the relation between your party and: the social movements currently active in Norway, on one hand, and the Socialist Left Party and the Labour Party, on the other hand? The SV has not joined the new government that consequently is confronted on its left with a bloc counting on more than 12% votes. However, we wonder: can we talk of a bloc, of an alliance? And what does Rødt expect of the Støres government, in the light of the increasing neoliberal involution of Nordic Social Democracies? </i></p>
<p><b>If we go</b> a couple of decades back in time, the Socialist Left Party, and their youth wing dominated many social movements like Attac or the Peace movement, while the Labour party dominated the Labour movement. My impression is that in line with the party’s growth a lot of these movements now feel closer aligned with Rødt than previously. Rødt has not done any forms of “entryism” or such strategies. I would probably say quite the contrary, but I see that a lot of people I got to know that were engaged in social movements but were not in a party or were in other parties some years back, have been joining Rødt more recently. I believe this is simply because they see the party both useful and fitting with their values in a way they perhaps did not do 15 years ago.</p>
<p>The Norwegian Labour party has taken a small left shift after their large right shift from the 80s/90s, but they are still quite a bit to the right if you take a longer historical view. The agrarian based Centre party they are now in government with, have on the other hand taken a small rightward shift in recent years - possibly trying to keep voters they got from the conservative parties during the 8 years of conservative government. This makes the current government more centre-oriented than many had hoped, but they do not have a majority and this gives the hope that they can be pressured.</p>
<p>There has been a huge growth to the left of the current government, and I believe these parties, both Rødt, Socialist Left and the Greens should cooperate to pressure the government, but initially it does not look like this is happening in any large or formalized manner. The Socialist Left party can form a majority with the government and seems content to use this position to pressure the government alone, without involving other parties. Perhaps this can change over time.</p>
<p><i>3) Norway is not a member state of the EU, although it is associated with it through its membership of the European Economic Area (EEA). In the last period, marked by the pandemic, the UE has adopted a strategy of financial support to the member states, in order to mitigate the disruptive social and economic consequences of Covid-19. These measures, often celebrated as a key to new social and economic models, are in fact imbued with a logic of loan repayment. Furthermore, in the last weeks EU leaders have confirmed their attachment to the austerity paradigm. What is your opinion about the current state of the EU? And how is Rødt going to deal with EU left coalitions, such as GUE/NGL and the Party of the European Left?</i></p>
<p><b>Rødt is cooperating</b> with parties within the EU, notably the Scandinavian parties in the GUE/NGL (Vänsterpartiet and Enhedslisten), but we are staunch opponents of Norwegian EU membership, as the Nordic left traditionally has been. We do not see a fundamental shift in the EUs policies, and we see that our membership in the EEA at times forces privatization and marketization of what was traditionally public services, like mail or public transportation, and also a trade and economic model that creates increased economic inequalities and increased carbon emissions (all though they may not always end up on the EU countries carbon budgets).</p>
<p>We of course follow the debate in the EU and in the left with interest, and will welcome any transformation of the union, but for Rødt to change its view on Norwegian membership such a shift would have to be fundamental. As the situation is now, I believe the Norwegian left could accomplish a lot more for Europe by adopting progressive solutions in Norway that would be impossible within the EU due to the constrictions of the treaties, and show that other solutions indeed are possible, than by joining and attempting to “change from within”. I do not see the current development in the EU as any decisive break from the neoliberal model the union has been built on.</p>
<p><i>4) Rødt has been criticized by climate activists due to its position on wind power and, more generally, its “industrialist culture”. How do you combine in your program protection for employment and economic radical restructuring? And how can climate mobilization be carried on in the country that is Europe's largest petroleum liquids producer and one of the world's top natural gas exporters? We guess that, in addition to lobbying power, the Norwegian climate movement has to face cultural resistances even stronger than in other countries. </i></p>
<p><b>This is interesting</b>, and I believe where one of the strengths of having a party based in all parts of the country comes to use. To start with the point of an “industrialist culture”, I believe that if we want to get popular support for stopping climate change, we have to present a program where we can do that while at the same time securing people’s jobs and welfare. This means we will need to build other forms of industry while phasing out oil production so all the engineers, construction workers etc. now employed by the oil and supporting industries can get other jobs. This means i.a. using Norwegian hydropower internally to built climate friendly industries in stead of exporting it. Rødt was early in making such plans. Already in 2009, two years after the party was founded, our first “plan for a fossil free future” was published, and this work has been updated and expanded on many times since then.</p>
<p>On the question of wind power this is a typical case of competing considerations. Along with climate change loss of natural habitat is the great global threat to life on this planet. Wind farms asphalt and destroy large areas of Norwegian nature, and this is not a question that should be taken lightly. Norway’s largest environmental organization (Naturvernforbundet) is e.g. also opposed to these wind farms. There are also conflicts with the rights of Norway’s indigenous Sami population, where Norways supreme court recently deemed one established wind farm as illegal as it was built on traditional reindeer grazing grounds and came in conflict with indigenous rights. All in all, I thus believe the critique of resistance against wind power is a bit simplistic. It always has to be compared to the alternatives, like spending similar resources on upgrading existing hydropower plants or simply reducing energy consumption.</p>
<p><i>5) Keeping with oil… scholars have coined the category of “petrol populism”, to point out to a strategy, in countries such as Norway and Venezuela among others, intended to get popular support by using resource revenues. The Progress Party, that has largely impacted Norwegian political agenda, lost the last general election. Do you think that this is the end of an era or in Norway, too, regardless of electoral results is right-wing populism by now mainstream? How is Rødt counteracting the populist campaign among workers?</i></p>
<p><b>Over years</b> Norway has put money from our petroleum production into what is now the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, and in Norway the discussion more often goes along the lines of “fiscal responsibility”. There is a general agreement amongst the major parties of not using mot than 4 % of the dividend of this fund into the annual government budgets.</p>
<p>The Red party does not subscribe to this principle. We believe what the money is being spent on is more important than how much is spent. Notably we believe it is reasonable that some of the money made creating the climate crises, should be spent transforming our society to a fairer, greener one. </p>
<p>The Progress Party’s problems I believe are mainly twofold. Firstly their 7 years in government with huge tax cuts for the rich, and welfare cuts and increases in public fees for the rest has definitely damaged their populist credibility. At the same time, we have seen over decades a gradual positive development in the Norwegian populations attitude towards minorities. Attacking minorities and trying to create a moral panic has traditionally been the Progress Party’s go to-strategy when they slump in the polls. The potential of this strategy is now diminished.</p>
<p>Rødt’s strategy is one of keeping our eyes on the economic issues where the large majority of the population have common interests, and building solidarity across statuses differences in ethnicity, gender, sexuality etc. on this basis. At the same time, we reject the rights attempts of creating moral panics creating spectra’s of “political correctness” or the more recent “wokeness” with no basis in quantitative data, with the clear ambition of dividing people that have common interests.<br />
So far, the strategy seems to be working well.</p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4139#commentsPolitikkEnglishPublikasjonThu, 16 Dec 2021 11:12:36 +0100ronny4139 at http://localhost/drupal7Gramsci and Lenin
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4129
<p><img width=100 align=left hspace=10 src="https://thegramsciblog.files.wordpress.com/2021/11/gramsci_image_eugenio_hansen1.png"><b>As I have briefly touched upon previously there has been some disagreement on the ideological relationship between Lenin and Gramsci. I believe this mainly has two reasons.</b></p>
<p>1. For posterity the ideology of “Leninism” or rather “Marxism-Leninism” was established by Stalin after Lenin’s death. Lenin then became a vehicle to promote Stalins own ideas and to legitimize his power, often with great disregard to Lenin’s actual ideas (two obvious examples – Lenin’s disregard of statues and other forms of idealization of great men, and Lenin’s attempt to remove Stalin shortly before his death). </p>
<p>Posteritys ideas of Leninism therefore often had little connection to Lenin’s actual thought and the discrepancy with the ideas of Gramsci therefore became greater than they had to be.</p>
<p>2. The other reason is that the most influential part of Gramsci’s work – the prison notebooks – were written after Lenin’s death, and it is therefore impossible to know how Lenin – who always was a politician writing for the here and now – would have evaluated the situation at the time Gramsci was then writing. </p>
<p>Gramsci himself, e.g. in Q7§16 about war of position and war of manouvre, believed that Lenin was moving toward the same ideas Gramsci was:</p>
<p>“It seems to me as Ilitch had understood the need of a change away from war of manouvre, which had led to victory in the east in 1917, towards a war of position, as the only possible war in the west.” (My translation).</p>
<p>Gramsci therefore can be said to be a Schrödingers Leninist – both a Leninist and not a Leninist at the same time. Whether he is one is disclosed only when the definition of “Leninist” in question is revealed. He was a Leninist as far as he himself believed to be mainly in line with Lenin’s thoughts. He was however not a Leninist in the sense the term was used in the orthodox soviet sphere after Stalin’s seizure of power.</p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4129#commentsPolitikkEnglishWed, 10 Nov 2021 11:52:40 +0100ronny4129 at http://localhost/drupal7Citizen Engineer: From Building to Bildung
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4106
<p><b>I rarely, but sometimes publish things related to my work on this blog. Let this be one of those occasions. </b></p>
<p>Last year I did a small research project a bit on the side on the motivation of engineering students and how that can be used to promote Bildung oriented education. The results were presented at a couple of conferences. One presentation was at NTNUs Webinar festival, where the presentation has been put up on Youtube, embedded below:</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zYmNe1c8T0o" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></p>
<p>The accompanying paper was published in the online OA journal "Læring om læring", and can be read here: <a href="https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/lol/article/view/3567" title="https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/lol/article/view/3567">https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/lol/article/view/3567</a></p>
<p>This journal has no length limitations, which allowed me to have both a wider and deep approach and flesh out the data with historical anecdotes. </p>
<p><b>Interestingly it has</b> allready been cited in the first partial report from NTNUs "Fremtidens teknologistudier" (Technology education of the future): <a href="https://www.ntnu.no/documents/1286373847/1289915220/FTS+delrapport+1+-+B%C3%A6rekraftig+kompetanse.pdf/d4084ed0-2220-5d9d-82ca-19cd984ded9d?t=1593197367498" title="https://www.ntnu.no/documents/1286373847/1289915220/FTS+delrapport+1+-+B%C3%A6rekraftig+kompetanse.pdf/d4084ed0-2220-5d9d-82ca-19cd984ded9d?t=1593197367498">https://www.ntnu.no/documents/1286373847/1289915220/FTS+delrapport+1+-+B...</a></p>
<p><img width=600 src="https://i.imgur.com/Tdhu4He.jpg"/></p>
<p><b>Together with a colleague</b> I also pieced out one aspect from the data, and made a much more pointed and shorter paper for last years SEFI conference, called <i>CITIZEN ENGINEER - ENGINEERING STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION TOWARDS AN ENGINEERING CARE</i>. That paper can be read here, in the proceedings: <a href="https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Proceedings-2020-web.pdf" title="https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Proceedings-2020-web.pdf">https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Proceedings-2020-web.pdf</a><br />
(on page 1323)</p>
<p>Or if you prefer less scrolling, you can read it on my Researchgate page, here: <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346423942_Citizen_Engineer_-_Engineering_Student%27s_Motivation_Towards_an_Engineering_Career" title="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346423942_Citizen_Engineer_-_Engineering_Student%27s_Motivation_Towards_an_Engineering_Career">https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346423942_Citizen_Engineer_-_En...</a></p>
<p>Well. I guess that was it for now. Do not hesitate to contact me, if you are doing similar research and find any of this interesting.</p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4106#commentsKulturVitenskapEnglishUtdanningPublikasjonMultimediaSat, 27 Mar 2021 14:46:48 +0100ronny4106 at http://localhost/drupal7A sad day in the fight against antisemitism
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4082
<p><img width=600 src="https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1473/26392896430_2e4c2d6323_c.jpg"/><br />
<b>The suspension of Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour party is undermining the fight against antisemitism.</b></p>
<p>The discussion around antisemitisme in the UK Labour party has been long, but to sum it up in the following conclusion should be relatively uncontroversial:</p>
<p>Labour did have a problem with antisemitism, and Corbyn was too slow in dealing with that problem (however one of the reasons for this tempo later has been documentation to be caused by anti Corbyn staffers in Labour HQ delaying the processes - probably to damage Corbyn). It is however also obviously true that the problem was exaggerated by Corbyn's political enemies both outside and inside the party, and in the media. (As all problems in a political movement will be - the particular problem with Corbyn was that he had much of his own party in open war against him, and an extreme media bias against him in addition to the political opposition.)</p>
<p>When current Labour leader, Keir Starmer, now has suspended Corbyn for antisemitism, we should look at what <a href="https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbynMP/posts/10158939532253872">Corbyn actually has said</a>, and I will quote it below:</p>
<blockquote><p>
My statement following the publication of the EHRC report:</p>
<p>“Antisemitism is absolutely abhorrent, wrong and responsible for some of humanity’s greatest crimes. As Leader of the Labour Party I was always determined to eliminate all forms of racism and root out the cancer of antisemitism. I have campaigned in support of Jewish people and communities my entire life and I will continue to do so.</p>
<p>“The EHRC’s report shows that when I became Labour leader in 2015, the Party’s processes for handling complaints were not fit for purpose. Reform was then stalled by an obstructive party bureaucracy. But from 2018, Jennie Formby and a new NEC that supported my leadership made substantial improvements, making it much easier and swifter to remove antisemites. My team acted to speed up, not hinder the process.</p>
<p>“Anyone claiming there is no antisemitism in the Labour Party is wrong. Of course there is, as there is throughout society, and sometimes it is voiced by people who think of themselves as on the left.</p>
<p>“Jewish members of our party and the wider community were right to expect us to deal with it, and I regret that it took longer to deliver that change than it should.</p>
<p>“One antisemite is one too many, but the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party, as well as by much of the media. That combination hurt Jewish people and must never be repeated.</p>
<p>“My sincere hope is that relations with Jewish communities can be rebuilt and those fears overcome. While I do not accept all of its findings, I trust its recommendations will be swiftly implemented to help move on from this period.”
</p></blockquote>
<p>The reaction has been to the penultimate paragraph, and one might disagree with Corbyn, or think that he should not have focused on that point in this situation, but what he is claiming is factually true (perhaps somewhat depending on your personal definition of "dramatically" which is in no way a precise term), and it can in no way be considered antisemitic by any honest good faith reader.</p>
<p><b>The suspension</b> of Corbyn has, not surprisingly been met by triumphalism by many of Corbyn's political enemies, but those of us who follow the darker subcurrents of political discourse, will also see that it is being met by triumphalism by actual antisemites.</p>
<p>The antisemites can now go out and claim "Look, this is what we said all along. All these claims of antisemitism are just bogus, and political tools to keep dissenting voices down."</p>
<p>They would be wrong of course, and a statement like this is obviously logically fallacious (someone being wrongly accused of antisemitism does not mean all or most such accusations are made wrongly, it can not as an individual case be brought to bear on other cases - all must be evaluated individually).</p>
<p>Misuse of claims of antisemitism like this one is a useful tool for antisemites. This and similar cases will unfortunately make it easier for them to recruit angry people from the left to their disgusting cause.</p>
<p>Anybody who actually has an honest engagement against antisemitism should see this, and protest this, and other, forms of abuse of such an important cause for alternate political motives.</p>
<p>And the motives of the Labour right are relatively obvious. They are in a situation where the membership of the Labour party is far to the left of them on central issues of economic policy. This will create problems for them in internal democratic processes.</p>
<p>They therefore now wish to enrage large parts of the membership to make them leave the party in protest, so they can again run the party unchallenged. And if UK Labour members do not see through this strategy, and realize how afraid the Labour establishment is of losing control of the party again, they may succeed.</p>
<p><b>More on antisemitism (in Norwegian):</b><br />
Antisemittisme og venstresida<br />
<a href="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/4034" title="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/4034">http://venstresida.net/?q=node/4034</a></p>
<p>Antisemittisme på venstresida<br />
<a href="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/3915" title="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/3915">http://venstresida.net/?q=node/3915</a></p>
<p>Antisemittismen og palestinakonflikten<br />
<a href="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/1279" title="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/1279">http://venstresida.net/?q=node/1279</a></p>
<p>Distinksjonen<br />
<a href="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/3401" title="http://venstresida.net/?q=node/3401">http://venstresida.net/?q=node/3401</a></p>
<p><meta property="og:image" content="https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1473/26392896430_2e4c2d6323_c.jpg" /></p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4082#commentsPolitikkEnglishFri, 30 Oct 2020 10:17:47 +0100ronny4082 at http://localhost/drupal7Lewin's equation - expanded
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4067
<p><img align=left hspace=10 src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/42/Social_sciences.svg/200px-Social_sciences.svg.png"/><b>A physicists reading of an equation in social psychology.</b></p>
<p>I recently came across a discussion about Lewin's equation. In short it is an equation [1] within social psychology used to describe people's behaviour, </p>
<p>B = f(P, E) (1)</p>
<p>where B is a person's behavior, P is the person and E is the environment. </p>
<p>Which is fine and dandy. But if we think a bit more closely about the factors, we will see they are not completely independent. E.g. a person's environment will to a large extent be shaped by both your own and other people's behaviour, in addition to a natural component, so we can write the environment factor as </p>
<p>E = f(N, B1, B2,..., Bn). (2)</p>
<p>In the same way, a person, if you look upon this as a process that happens over time, is shaped by both a natural (genetic) factor (no matter how you are raised you will behave differently from an anteater raised the same way), and an environmental factor shaped by both the natural environment, and - again - other people's behaviour over the entire course of a person's development. We can mark this as an integral from t=0, ~birth of the person in question, to t=T, the time in question.</p>
<p>In this developmental model, all factors, with exception of the genetic one [2] will in turn be functions of time, and we will get an equation </p>
<p>P(T) = f(G, <span>∫</span><sub>0</sub><sup>T</sup> (N(t), B1(t), B2(t),...,Bn(t))). (3)</p>
<p>If we are to combine these two formulas, we can replace the P and E factors and get something like</p>
<p>B1(T) = f(N(T), B1(T), B2(T),...,Bn(T), G, <span>∫</span><sub>0</sub><sup>T</sup> (N(t), B1(t), B2(t),...,Bn(t))). (4)</p>
<p>This is a more complex equation, but it does not hide the (strong) interdependencies of the factors in the original Lewin's equation. Does it help us in discussing behaviour? I'm not so sure, but acknowledging the complexities of the problem and the huge simplification in Lewin's equation is perhaps also of some help?</p>
<p><b>Endnotes:</b><br />
[1] A scientist would probably rather reformulate it as Lewins function, however without any specific function.<br />
[2] One could argue this is also not the case as genetics is not as completely set in stone as previously thought, but it will do as an approximation and the most effects of e.g. activating genes at specific times will be encompassed by other factors.</p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4067#commentsVitenskapEnglishHumorYmseMon, 31 Aug 2020 11:44:06 +0200ronny4067 at http://localhost/drupal7Bildung, intellectuals and experts
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4053
<p><i>Originally posted on The Gramsci Blog: <a href="https://thegramsciblog.wordpress.com/2018/05/03/bildung-intellectuals-and-experts/" title="https://thegramsciblog.wordpress.com/2018/05/03/bildung-intellectuals-and-experts/">https://thegramsciblog.wordpress.com/2018/05/03/bildung-intellectuals-an...</a><br />
</i></p>
<p><b>Gramsci is known for the quote “everybody is an intellectual”. By this he naturally does not imply that everybody has the role in society as an intellectual, but simply that there are some subjects about which everybody has an opinion.</b></p>
<p>In an often used quote (at least by me), Gramsci states how a person who only knew his regional Italian dialect and was asked to translate a Chinese text, might think he was being made fun of and punch you, while he on the other hand would have no hesitation speaking his mind on a range of matters about society of which he had not much more training than in Chinese.</p>
<p>I believe these latter subjects perhaps are best described by the phrase “worldview”, and it is in the sense that everybody has a worldview, that we are all intellectuals.</p>
<p>This connects us, I believe, to the German term “bildung”. It is perhaps testament to a domineering technical/usefulness-approach to education in the anglo-american cultural sphere, that this term is also used in english. The similar Swedish term is the related “bildning”, while the Norwegian “dannelse”, can be translated by “formation”, but then in the formation of a human being into a person fully capable of being a contributing member of society at large, and not simply a skilled professional.</p>
<p>The subjects that bring about this, is I believe, to a large degree overlapping with the worldview-subjects Gramsci alludes to.</p>
<p>This came to my mind, when i recently came across a facebook post on a page I follow, satirizing a number of ideas often promoted by alternative medicine, conspiracist and other forms of “alternative” milieu, by fantasizing what it would look like if these ideas were connected to automobiles. This was done by creating a frontpage of an imagined Alternative Automobile magazine, with headers like “Several chain collisions revealed as false flags” and “My car has electromagnetic hypersensitivity” and on and on – it presents an absurd picture.</p>
<p>But it raises the question. Why are such claims so much more absurd? Why does nobody try to develop homeopathic gasoline to prevent climate change? Why not send the car to a healer instead of a garage?</p>
<p>In this area we all trust the experts. My preliminary answer is because auto mechanics falls outside the area of “worldview”. And this “worldview” is not limited to questions about society, it definitely also relates to nature. While nobody thinks cars run by magic, some people do believe the earth is flat.</p>
<p>The shape of our universe definitely connects to worldview, as does our place within it, including bort certain questions about health and medicine and our place in society. All questions prone to different pseudoscientific an conspiratorial beliefs. All questions relevant in understanding both recent US elections, and the role of internet media platforms.</p>
<p>Yet again, Gramsci’s observations have a lasting relevance in interpreting our current situation.</p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4053#commentsPolitikkEnglishWed, 17 Jun 2020 11:43:30 +0200ronny4053 at http://localhost/drupal7The Internationale - May 1st 2020 Corona Home Office Online Conference Edition
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4044
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tN2mFW7mB48" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe></p>
http://localhost/drupal7/?q=node/4044#commentsKulturEnglishMultimediaMon, 04 May 2020 10:12:38 +0200isfjell4044 at http://localhost/drupal7