Albeit, I have heard it argued that tenure is not as relevant in the modern era of social media and twitter mobs, because academia is turning into a monoculture of thought through self-censorship.
It is understandable that the more diverse taxpaying public would start to question the purpose of protecting the views of a privileged elite class when they themselves don’t feel supported.
The medical and legal profession also censures fellow practitioners who, regardless of their basis in scientific or factual thinking, bring infamy to the profession through recklessness or callousness to the wellbeing of others.
Certainly it's not true of professionals in general. While I get the idea behind tenure, what is the argument that a tenured CS professor has a particular right to express controversial political opinions that a senior engineer at a large technology company does not?
(Though there are other arguments such as said professor maybe should be able to work on some idea other people think is a dead end while it's probably reasonable that the engineer's manager can just tell them work on it on your own time if you want.)
Professors most certainly are not a "privileged elite class." They're research/teaching specialists. Your talking point sounds straight out of some right-wing website/tv channel.
What is tenure if not a privilege? And if it isn't then what's the problem here? If tenure isn't something valuable then why are we discussing a story about it being taken away?
EDIT: Just lol at the downvotes and the comments here. Lots of snark, personal attacks, but no one actually able to explain how tenure is not a privilege.
Pointless snark that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion.
How else would you consider professors to be privileged? How do you consider them elite?
Yeah. Seems valuable. A privilege, almost.
> It's there so that people such as yourself can't replace them with those whose views they prefer.
Gratuitous personal attack.
> You classify professors as if they are all the same, which means you're creating a straw man to weaken the position as whole without actually providing any sort of specific point to argue about.
What?
> How else would you consider professors to be privileged?
How else? So you admit that they are privileged in one sense, in the sense of having tenure, of not having to fear getting fired for speech, and you're asking me how else they are privilged?
You're manipulating what I said. The word 'else' is in reference to what other ways do YOU think they are privileged. And you still haven't answered the questions.
OK. So you do not admit that tenure is a privilege?
> And you still haven't answered the questions.
You have some nerve. You write a comment filled with snark and personal attacks that doesn't answer any of my questions, and now you demand that I answer your questions?
Unfortunately, with the destruction of many jobs due to outsourcing and the shrinking middle class, there are a growing % (and number) of citizens who would consider tenured professors (and their surrounding bureaucracy) an elite institution that looks down on their way of life. Treading this carefully might be necessary since their voting power is growing.