Tuesday, 2 August 2016

Professional . . . Genealogy

On CBC's Sunday Morning program with Michael Enright there was an interview with Thomas Frank, the author of What’s Wrong with Kansas and Listen, Liberal. Although supporting Clinton over Trump he views Hilary Clinton as "the leader of a coterie of a highly educated, well-appointed and high-powered professional class that has all but abandoned its connection to the concerns and aspirations of the working class."

He's what he said about professions:

The nature of professions is to have an insider group with views that are identical and to use the professional boundaries to exclude dissenting opinion. It's almost the definition of a profession. People are excluded not because they are wrong but because they aren't "professionals". If you don't share the views of highly respected professionals you are not part of the gang and your views are not up for consideration. These people fail, and fail and fail and there's no accountability because they control the profession. They are the insiders and there's no accountability.

Is the professional group in genealogy an exception?


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Maybe. No idea really. I know I feel a bit intimidated by professionals who have all sorts of specialized education I don't have.
But It got me to thinking about the Cameron honours list kerfuffle here in the UK. What you described could explain it. An MBE for handling the PM's wife's clothes and schedule? He already handed out an honour to his own barber for heavens sakes in a previous honours list, for services to hairdressing. Good God! Cheers, BT