[gt_]

Academia is essentially a class of institutions and/or an industry concerned with higher education. Of course adjunct professors would be associated here.

Apparently you are missing the irony in such critical theory, post-structuralism, marxism, etc. having been so vigorously theorized that it's application was overlooked! The "system" here is quite late to blame itself and the brazen approach to doing so is a bit humurous.

Are you seeking to divide academia into smaller parts; innocent ones and guilty others? Where have we seen that before?

[r00fus]

Adjunct professors are notoriously overworked by the rest of "Academia"... they're like the H1B workers in tech.

Face it, the entire system probably needs an overhaul but isn't governed by some sort of "evil overmind". Small regulatory or incentive-based changes or movements like unionization will probably cause the system to re-adjust.

[gt_]

You are misunderstood about my point. I do not assume any authoritarian presence.

I guess it's just textbook components of neo-liberalism: priorities which lead to bloated administration and marketing initiatives.

I agree unionizing is a good solution. One would think the experts would have acted sooner; that's all. The trajectory has been obvious for a very long time.

[r00fus]

"Les cordonniers sont les plus mal chaussés." - roughly translated: the shoemakers often has the worst shoes.

[gt_]

Your point falls flat when we consider the student loan emabrrassment the professors have (with similar snide elegance) overlooked.

To clarify, the shoemaker's customers in your analogy (the students) have been wearing worse shoes for much longer.

There is a sense that liberal academics assume, which purports that they carry the torch of revolution or something like this. The notion, however, lives only in the academic professorial abstract and fails to materialize outside of it. This torch is an academic torch, not a proletariat torch, not a working class torch. This is a bourjois torch.