The Banality of Academic Evil

So, of course, I'm reading Mark Mazower's Hitler's Europe, and I'm reading about the academic discussions in Germany about how the Nazis should rule Europe (and associated topics like who should be considered a German, etc.). And, naturally, I understand how the academic world works--there's a larger "paradigm" that marks the boundaries of appropriate academic discourse. On rare occasions, someone writes something that's outside this paradigm and it gets published: but, in general, everything is within the bounds. You want discussions of how to mercilessly treat the untermenschen? We can do it. It doesn't really matter who is in charge: the academic animal can adapt to almost any kind of research needs. There's a group psychology in the academy. The very thing that I would like to believe--the academy as a site of intellectual freedom--is one of the bigger lies. So, yeah, I'm disappointed. In the ever diminishing humanities, this reality exists, although most of the academy is now centered in the social sciences and business. When I was at Wichita State, I applied for a non-tenured award for scholarly achievement. I had published a number of articles. But who won the award--some stooge from the business department who had published one article. I had an inkling then about the realities of the academic world. I'm more certain now.