The “Dreaming Big” panel on media panics, academic freedom and intersectionality in universities featured lively discussion on the complex ways that neoliberal ideology has infiltrated post-secondary institutions. Educators, organizers and activists discussed the different effects market-driven decision making has had on their respective social and public institutions, and how those effects coexist with each other. Ryerson, in particular, prides itself on being a progressive and innovative university while implementing many of the efficiency-maximizing policies mentioned during the discussion. You might ask how such a contradiction could exist? Dr. Sandra Jeppesen says the lines between neoliberal policy and “innovative” thought have become increasingly blurred.
My friends, most of whom attend university or college institutions in Ottawa, regard Ryerson as a school for artsy, liberal “social justice warriors.” Admittedly this line of thinking is what initially drew me to study Journalism in such a progressive and accepting environment. Yet any Ryerson student can tell you stories reminiscent of neoliberal profit-driven practices they’ve personally experienced. Whether it’s tuition increases, massive lectures supported by a handful of TAs or professors without job security, neoliberal thought runs amok Rye campus. Dr. Jeppeson adds that some neoliberal university policies run under the guise of innovation, including access to funding, female-fronted positions and “horizontal” learning systems.
As panelists presented their experiences of neoliberalism within their respected fields, Tania Bruguera’s thoughts on art and education rang especially true. Most of the speakers expressed that education can come from anywhere, not just inaccessible institutions run by old white men with PhDs. In opposition of neoliberal ideals of education aimed at indoctrination or practicality, speakers confirmed Bruguera’s belief that true education “gives you options to act” [i].
Ryerson Student Union President Suzanne Nyaga lead a thoughtful and relevant discussion on the problem of ‘slacktivism’ on social media. Nyaga says that although activism on social media is important for discussion and awareness, it can also be a way of facilitating shallow discussion. I recently wrote an article on the problematic terrain of Bell Let’s Talk Day, a prime example of corporate-funded ‘slacktivist’ culture. Beyond problems of representation, corporatization and Bell’s mistreatment of their own employees with mental illness, Bell Let’s Talk has actually created an environment counter-productive to the idea of “starting a conversation” around mental health. While writing the story, dozens reached out to me on social media to vocalize their frustrations with #BellLetsTalk, and almost all said they were afraid to publicly speak out against the campaign citing fear of backlash.
In mental health awareness, and all other social issues, we must move beyond performative allyship with tangible action. All of these issues are incredibly complex, and responsible discussion cannot begin on the basis of a hashtag. Awareness is crucial, but it must be accompanied by real demands. As Nyaga says, social media activists need to be (physically) present when the time comes to actually do the work.
[i] Preston, Susan and Jordan Aslett. “Resisting Neoliberalism from within the Academy: Subversion through an Activist Pedagogy”. Social Work Education, vol. 33, no. 4, 2014, pp. 502-518.
