On my end, the Orwellian Memory Hole theme (see previous blog post) resonates with the "verboten math" meme i.e. a strain within STEM that we'd maybe be better off not considering, if we want a career with the big guys. Whom to salute? In civilian life at least, that's not often so clear.
Actually, I'm not entirely sure how to characterize the threat, or call
it the risk, to one's reputation, and then there's always the other side
of it: what risk is one taking by overt obeisance to some status quo
rule makers? Will these be the administrators going forward? Much to think about.
Academics might rib each other for past citations i.e. if Mein Kampf was a book you cited often, approvingly, in service of your own views, there might come a day when your peers gave you flak for this chapter. I'm thinking of how professor Kaufmann was pretty unmerciful when it came to interrogating Herr Heidegger, while standing up for Nietzsche as having nothing to do with Germanic fascism.
Back to those toeing the line, being good minions beyond a safe pull date: a published disavowal might have helped notify the world of a change of heart. But maybe you weren't sure at the time that it would help, and so on.
In retrospect, you (not pointing fingers, if the shoe fits) played your cards rather inexpertly, but then so did a lot of people. Factored in to one's playbook are one's predictions of who the winners and losers will be. One gambles. One might be wrong.
"Throwing one's lot in with" another is like "hitching one's star to" in terms of comparable idioms.
Then there's "riding the coattails of" which comes off as more minion-like.
The winning team appoints its own to the coveted desk jobs around town. That's not scandalous or unusual, but evidence the system works as designed, assuming the power to overturn administrations was a built in feature.
Monarchies may, in contrast, may have a hard time scripting their own demise, lets admit the obvious, not that orderly transitions haven't happened, in cases of an heir apparent. Dynasties are certainly a thing.
Allegiances and loyalties, expressed or implied, are what we're talking about here. Machiavellian Country.
What's true in our case is our subversive author was never entirely purged from respectable publishing, thanks to some anticipatory efforts by the Bohemian generation, in collaboration with Boomers in many cases.
I'm thinking about Lars Müller Publishers, for example, still actively tapping the "verboten" roots of our counter-culture (cite Private Sky etc.), continuing to bring a positive futurism to light in fresh ways.
When I talk somewhat tongue-in-cheekily about our not indulging in "EU metaphysics around pi" i.e. concerning the "real numbers" (their theoretical foundations), I'm circling the wagons, so to speak, and protecting my West (the Americas) from the undue influence of Continental beliefs, religious and otherwise.
We'll study their beliefs, sure, but not necessarily at the expense of suspending our own. Our practice of globalism need not imitate theirs either.
As an Oregonian, I'm not into picking elective fights with my counterparts in the Stans, for example, let alone in Persia. The Pacific Rim is pacific for a reason. We don't behave like we're a part of some Atlantic alliance, nor would it be a dream come true if we did.
