Reader in Culture and Law. Research interests in culture, religion, caste, migration, and law. Substack @aryalegal
Joined April 2023
- Tweets1.9K
- Following502
- Followers545
- Likes9.2K
Prakash Shah retweeted
On what standards of conduct universities can legally impose on staff, here are some useful excerpts from the OfS regulatory advice 24, the guidance to universities in England on their duties under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act.
it's only silly if you are against standards of conduct.
These standards of conduct have implicitly or explicitly always been in universities, from the first founding in Bologna -- and yes, mostly slanted to those in charge, but also couched in broader/universal terms.
Now you can say that you want to do away with that entirely (as in free speech absolutism, though: why should an institution not be free to decide to set its own standards, too?), or that you disagree with where exactly a standard should be, that's fine. But it's not unreasonable to have such standards.
(There are specific things in the "truth claims" of what he said, but that might be too much in the weeds.)
Prakash Shah retweeted
For people who are saying that Jason Arday has been cleared of plagiarism, I’d suggest two things:
1. Ask who has done that ‘clearing’, and how disinterested are they likely to be?
2. Have a look at Dave Harris’s files here, and see if you are then confident there is no plagiarism.
arasite.org/plagmenu.html
The use of Brahminhood in this and many other contexts only has purchase because of its specific western construction based on a Christian reading. As I show in my book, out next week, this reading is pervasive but doesn’t tell us about anything India.
Student in question makes the terrible decision that they have nothing to learn from those whose publicly expressed views don’t tally with their own conception of welfare. Moreover they broadcast this ignorant position that most likely defies their own experience.
Prakash Shah retweeted
My interview from tonight is at about 35’50” on here.
'Cambridge can't be a disinterested party in this'
@drianpace spoke to @joshxhowie on this week's Free Speech Nation about an independent inquiry into the Jason Arday case - from a rather different angle than the (re)framing of @Cambridge_Uni's inquiry
youtube.com/watch?v=oLdmasjy…
Prakash Shah retweeted
Can we please stop this nonsense already? This is absolutely sickening.
Yes, only a minority of Arday's scholarship looks outright fraudulent and needs to be retracted. And I understand why lefty anti-racism activists may still mistake that for vindication.
But academics who still defend Arday--after all the blatant lies available to anyone who wants to see them--are doing much more harm to higher ed than the man himself ever did.
Latest analysis by Taylor & Francis also clears Arday: no plagiarism. emeraldbook.org/news/oct-232…
How does defending Arday, who engaged in dishonest malpractice, and maligning those who called it out, advance the cause of an imagined devil-free racial paradise?
How despicable and disgusting of @UniofOxford to host the eugenicist at the core of the Prof Jason Arday lynching? In 2026 they are asking if hiring Black and Brown people weakened university. I got out of my sickbed for the @makeitplainorg pod. Watch: youtu.be/6zzOLjVMgzE
Prakash Shah retweeted
Another person who does not seem to be able to distinguish between a factual claim (whether true or false) and a normative claim.
Saying that the proportion of group X in elite universities would "approach 0" if hiring was under a particular set of selection criteria is a factual (descriptive) claim.
Saying that members of group X do not "belong", or ought not to be appointed to elite universities because of their group membership is a normative claim.
To my knowledge, Cofnas has never made the normative claim in question.
Both claims should be protected by free speech of course.
I think all MPs and academics should get training in basic metaethics and logic. Would be much more useful than any DEI training.
Hope that Parliamentarians, together with universities, will be defending academic freedom as the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 requires, especially when they disagree with speech or, as in this case, are not up to grasping the claims being made.
Prakash Shah retweeted
Swami Sarvapriyananda calls out the New York Times for omitting the Hindu monk from their coverage of the Anthropic AI summit: "Islam, Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism… and Hinduism? New York Times ko yaad hi nahi aaya." #NDTVWorldSummit
"The Indian press picked it up and made it out as if I was the only person there. Well, that’s KARMA for you, New York Times—take that." 🔥
Can an academic be disciplined for writing that is deemed not to align with a university's aims or values, or detrimental to its reputation? 🧵👇🏾
Prakash Shah retweeted
Thread
🧵Arif Ahmed, Director for #FreeSpeech and #AcademicFreedom at @officestudents , gave the Keynote at the Conflict on Campus event organised by @SimonFanshawe & @Sparemu today.
Mass demos in several European countries are accompanied by looting, arson, destruction of businesses, and general criminality.
@ucu: Let’s bring them to the U.K. and join in.
UCU have called a day of action in every University in the UK on Friday 20th November. We will be working with sister unions to ensure the biggest possible support for protests, rallies and events that will be held on this day.
This is part of our fight to protect jobs and courses as well as build solidarity across the union.
Materials will be dispatched to every branch. Start your local planning now.
Prakash Shah retweeted
Recent prescriptions and policies would have us judge research by non-evidentiary standards, e.g. presumed political impact and scholar identity. In a new essay, Tom Clark and I argue empirical claims should instead be evaluated based on evidentiary strength. We outline a framework for judging evidence, and show its usefulness by revisiting high-profile scholarly disagreements spanning policing, political violence, election administration, and terrorism, before critiquing non-evidentiary approaches. We also argue social science needs a culture that is hospitable to critique—rather than one which condemns critics as “bullies”—if quality standards are to be upheld.
dropbox.com/scl/fi/fsgpflron…
In Indian official English, “locus standi” has escaped the courtroom and become a diplomatic idiom for "you have no business speaking on this.”
Our statement on anti-India references at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Council of Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Baghdad ⬇️
🔗 bit.ly/4juVp8y
Navi Pillay tried to pressurise the U.K. to implement the Equality Act’s clause on caste discrimination. The Equality Act was a rough model for @ShashiTharoor’s Anti-Discrimination and Equality Bill 2016, which India has thankfully shelved.
It’s been six days since this remarkable woman of Indian origin (see her story, attached) won the #NobelPeacePrize. And the Government of India, her ancestral homeland, hasn’t so much as congratulated her?! Shame on the petty men who have made such a deplorable decision.
“les programmes sont la figure sous laquelle un moment se défend contre le temps”
Message à la droite française.
Vous allez probablement gouverner en 2027. Alors je vous parle franchement, de l'extérieur : je suis économiste de l'école autrichienne et je vous écris de Suisse.
Hier soir, à Limoges, une mairie de 1883 a brûlé et son clocher est tombé. Elle avait été payée par une France qui produisait encore. Elle a été brûlée par une France qui ne fait plus que distribuer. Les formes survivent longtemps à leur raison d'être. Puis elles brûlent.
Rien de ce que l'État pleure aujourd'hui n'a été bâti par lui. Les banques, les lettres de change, la comptabilité, les bourses : les villes les ont faites, entre marchands qui se devaient des comptes. La couronne les a encaissées et a appelé le produit « la France ». Le comité a hérité du tout. Les fruits de la liberté se récoltent dans des phases de non-liberté croissante, et c'est pourquoi l'on prend si facilement le centralisme pour la cause de la prospérité.
Je le dis comme je le pense : la Révolution française fut une erreur, et le centralisme qui la suivit en fut une autre. La théorie étatique de la monnaie n'a fait en 1789 que changer d'habit, de l'hermine au comité. Le comité est devenu ministère, le ministère déficit.
Écoutez la rue : elle veut plus d'État. Un des plus gros déficits de la zone euro, et une foule qui le veut plus gros. Une religion de salut dont le dieu est en faillite ne perd pas de fidèles ; elle hausse la voix et, hélas, ses briquets.
Il n'y a pas de complot, ni à gauche ni à droite. L'Occident s'est relâché après une surtension excessive et névrotique, et dans le vide s'est avancée la religion de substitution de l'étatisme : le salut par l'État, la rédemption dans le nous collectif. La plus grande part de la faute, aussi paradoxal que cela paraisse, revient aux prétendus conservateurs. Un appareil se nourrissait en parasite des institutions et consommait leur capital, et les conservateurs appelaient cela préserver. Ils ont donné bonne conscience au déclin.
Et l'immigration ? Vous pouvez la régler demain matin, vous n'aurez soigné que la fièvre. L'immigration de masse subventionnée vers l'État-providence, menée sous le mensonge du réfugié, est le dernier symptôme : le point culminant d'une naïveté hors du réel, d'un formalisme aveugle et de la consommation de statut et de revenu dans l'État thérapeutique. Qui y voit la cause confond la poussée de fièvre avec la maladie.
Et ne comptez pas sur le patriotisme pour vous sauver de l'étatisme : il en est la forme d'origine. La nation est née en 1789 avec le comité, la conscription et l'impôt pour tous, et la droite « patriote » vit aujourd'hui du même jeu à somme nulle que la gauche : servir les nôtres contre les autres avec l'argent d'une machine qui ne produit rien. Sans la machine, elle n'aurait rien à promettre. L'électoralisme est le cœur du système, pas une faiblesse de vos candidats : il sélectionne une classe qui distribue et une foule qui attend la distribution. Il est trop tard pour le patriotisme ; il faisait partie du problème.
Ne cherchez pas non plus le moment où revenir. Ce moment n'existe pas : tout moment que l'on voudrait ramener est une récolte, et les récoltes ne se répètent pas, mais bien les semailles. Ce qui demeure de la nostalgie, c'est le costume, et le costume pris au sérieux devient un jeu de rôle qui ne veut plus que célébrer sa certitude de salut.
On ne renoue pas avec un moment. On renoue avec un momentum : l'autonomie des villes, la décentralisation, la confiance entre étrangers, l'ambition culturelle, l'esprit d'entreprise, l'invention, l'individu qui ose quelque chose et en répond. La France en avait plus que quiconque, dans ses villes, ses foires, ses salons et ses ateliers.
Il n'y faut pas de programme ; les programmes sont la figure sous laquelle un moment se défend contre le temps. Il y faut des hommes qui fondent, découvrent, inventent, tiennent une maison sur des générations et contredisent une autorité lorsqu'ils savent mieux qu'elle. Et des institutions qui leur donnent durée, dignité et liberté, au lieu de les traiter en suspects.
On ne ramène pas 1883. On peut ramener ce qui l'a bâti.
Was media coverage of Jason Arday racist? @johnarmstrong5 discusses.
Was Jason Arday subject to an unprecedented racist witchhunt in the mainstream media?
Cambridge University argued from the beginning that the coverage was racist. The journal Nature bemoaned "the racism that pervaded much of that coverage".
But what is the evidence for this? nature.com/articles/d41586-0…
Prakash Shah retweeted
No one should expect to be subjected to aggression and intimidation when giving a lecture at a university. The subject of @AdamWagner1 's lecture makes this all the more shocking.
thejc.com/news/uk/masked-gaz…
Decision of the Administrative Court: Berlin Gymnasium does not have to allow "demonstrative" prayer tagesspiegel.de/berlin/schul…