← Previous Post: | Next Post:

 

The problem with being systemically corrupt…

… is that any particular revelation of corruption threatens to set off a chain reaction.

Take your typical southern university system — a crony dumping-ground, a favor-repayment franchise, a post-tailgate barrens of the blitzed and bilious. As with the 2009 Mary Easley scandal at North Carolina State (scroll down for several posts), one fallen crony begats another which begats another yea to everlasting. More recently, the unpleasantness in the University of North Carolina’s Afro-American Studies department has touched off a spate of panic-auditing which has begat more fallen cronies, among them a sporty, well-compensated couple that travels about hither and yon on the taxpayer’s dime.

Margaret Soltan, September 11, 2012 7:41AM
Posted in: sport

Trackback URL for this post:
https://www.margaretsoltan.com/wp-trackback.php?p=37306

5 Responses to “The problem with being systemically corrupt…”

  1. Bill Harshaw Says:

    “Take your typical southern university system ”

    Is that your impressionistic finding, or is it supported by statistics showing southern universities are more corrupt than western or northern? Have you asked your colleagues in sociology whether they’re interested in determining the causes of this regional disparity?

    🙂

  2. Margaret Soltan Says:

    Bill: I think it is indeed true that southern state governments generally tend to be more corrupt than most other parts of the country, and that as state institutions, public southern universities tend to be more corrupt, yes. According to a recent list, 3 of the 8 most corrupt states are southern, with Georgia the number one most corrupt state.

    Another study names Florida the most corrupt state.

  3. Bill Harshaw Says:

    For the sake of argument, because I’m not fully convinced, I wonder why the sectional difference, if there is one. Back in the day the football powers were Notre Dame, Syracuse, Army/Navy, then maybe Oklahoma and the Big Ten and SoCal. Then came Alabama and Texas. If the south started off behind, did they try to catch up by bending the rules, setting off a vicious circle/race to the bottom?

    Of course, back in TR’s day the Ivies were the big dogs and they cheated too.

  4. Jack/OH Says:

    “[C]rony dumping-ground . . . favor-repayment franchise . . . .” Low-incidence/low-impact cronyism and nepotism don’t break me up too much. You have a brother-in-law on the skids who’s reasonably qualified, so, okay, let’s overlook the dozen other equally qualified applicants for the job.

    Aggressive cronyism and nepotism, and outright job-selling put you in a whole ‘nother league. I’m talking about unqualified, inept folks displacing qualified applicants and given substantive responsibility, budget money, evaluating authority over their underlings, etc.

  5. Jack/OH Says:

    “I’m not just taking out the trash. I’m ‘covering’ for a drunk, a no-show ghost employee, and a political hack.” That’s what a low-level worker at a nearby academy said a while back. Trust me–at the level at which I (a non-prof) see things–there’s not a whole lot of improvement when it comes to academic and administrative hiring.

    As a guy who grew up partly on his uncle’s used car lot, I’m okay with the values of the souk, the marketplace, whatever you want to call it. But, dudes and dudesses, if you want to set yourselves aside as professors, do better than covering your hindquarters and feathering your own nests.

Comment on this Entry

Latest UD posts at IHE

Archives

Categories