[neilv]

There's some truth to that saying about "academic politics", but I think it can also twist the understanding of a situation, so that people unfamiliar are less sympathetic than they should be.

Consider all the kids aspiring to pursue some field that at some point funnels through a university. They're not knowingly signing up for some niche bloodsport. And that's not what the situation actually is. The complaints about academic research dynamics in some fields aside, there's a more immediate problem of frequently unchecked bad behavior by individuals, often victimizing people who are in very vulnerable positions.

The term "academic politics" invokes our ideas of "politics", such as around those who run for elected office: that it's largely BS and lies, and only for those who have the stomach for that, and that everyone who plays it has to learn how to play dirty. Fortunately, that's not an accurate characterization of all that goes on in a university, and it's certainly not the traits for which we want to pass-filter all our researchers and university teachers. When some individual in a position of power is behaving badly, and the consequences rain down upon the defenseless, that's not "politics".

("Politics" only kicks in when the abuser brings in enough money/prestige that that a corporate-oriented official wants to silence the messenger, or when members of the abuser's academic caste implicitly close ranks in ignorant solidarity. But the abused still aren't political operators.)