Does an academic truly think, if they merely bring about a rationalization? Are the contests between those who supposedly "come up with an argument" genuine? What more there would be would be interesting to find. Academics fight without spirit, calmly. They are "very nice people not trying to do harm", which differs from "do no harm" and when one seeks after who wrote and instituted the most destructive of policies and activities, one never quite finds any responsible figure. They are all too nice. The smartly dressed, well-spoken woman who wears the yellow and black shawl during Thursday's afternoon seminar cannot be held to account, no. That would be political risk? The academic criminal who is responsible for eroding the institution cannot be the nice man with the pot belly and the white goatee, the one who brings dried mango for the lunchroom.
After all, he agreed with me!