Doublethink

Abstract: It is higher education’s responsibility to continuously challenge and critique value and knowledge claims that have prescriptive tendencies. Part of this responsibility lies in engaging students in socio‐scientific disputes. The ill‐defined nature of sustainability manifests itself in such disputes when conflicting values, norms, interests, and reality constructions meet. This makes sustainability – its need for contextualization and the debate surrounding it – pivotal for higher education. It offers an opportunity for reflection on the mission of our universities and colleges, but also a chance to enhance the quality of the learning process. This paper explores both the overarching goals and process of higher education from an emancipatory view and with regard to sustainability.

Abstract: Introduction: modernising sistema 1. What is sistema? 2. Putin's sistema: svoi on top 3. The inner workings of sistema: from blat to otkat 4. Sistema's material culture: from vertushka to Vertu 5. 'Telephone justice' in the global age: from commands to signals 6. 'Werewolves in epaulets': from doublethink to doubledeed 7. From dealership to leadership: sistema and informal governance Conclusion.

Abstract: Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign Policy Decisions and Fiascoes by Irving L. Janis was published for the first time in 1972. In an unprecedented way, Janis applied ideas from small-group analysis to the explanation of policy fiascoes. He made plausible the hypothesis that each of these events can, to a considerable extent, be attributed to the occurrence of a very specific and obviously detrimental phenomenon within the groups of decisionmakers involved in their making. He called this phenomenon "Groupthink," cleverly picking this highly suggestive Orwellian mode of expression ("doublethink" in Orwell's novel 1984). According to Janis, groupthink stands for an excessive form of concurrenceseeking among members of high prestige, tightly knit policy-making groups. It is excessive to the extent that the group members have come to value the group (and their being part of it) higher than anything else. This causes them to strive for a quick and painless unanimity on the issues that the group has to confront. To preserve the clubby atmosphere, group members suppress personal doubts, silence dissenters, and follow the group leader's suggestions. They have a strong belief in the inherent morality of the group, combined with a decidedly evil picture of the group's opponents. The results are devastating: a distorted view of reality, excessive optimism producing hasty and reckless policies, and a neglect of ethical issues. The combination of these deficiencies makes these groups particularly vulnerable to initiate or sustain projects that turn out to be policy fiascoes.