Of course Judith was going to slash all funding to the Humanities…
Govt slashes Marsden Fund money for humanities, social sciences
…the reaction from the experts has been devastating…
“I am horrified by today’s announcement. I am absolutely disgusted by the way that the kind of science I, and my colleagues do – as physical scientists involved in research that is purposeful, focused on solutions to climate and sustainability challenges, that do have real economic value – is being weaponised against our colleagues in the humanities and the social sciences.
Professor Nicola Gaston, Co-Director, The MacDiarmid Institute for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology
“As a scientist who will likely benefit from the changes to the Marsden Fund today, you might think I’d be happy with Minister Collins’ announcement. But I’m not. I’m horrified. If the pandemic taught me anything, it was how valuable our humanities and social science scholars and researchers are. Yes, “science” developed new vaccines in seemingly record time (although, ironically, we only have the mRNA vaccines because of decades of ‘blue-skies’ research that was deemed largely irrelevant by funders…) but it’s not scientists who understand how best to vaccinate people and what barriers might be faced.
Associate Professor Siouxsie Wiles, Microbiologist, University of Auckland
“In abolishing the social sciences and humanities panels of the Marsden Fund, the Minister sets a dangerous precedent for government intervention into what should be independent research. At a time when experts and political leaders share concerns about the impact of declining trust in science, such a flagrant attempt to exert political influence over research is truly alarming.
Dr Courtney Addison, Senior Lecturer, School of Science in Society, Victoria University of Wellington
“Unfortunately, this decision to shift our only blue-sky research fund to applied sciences comes as no surprise. There has been no consultation with the sector, especially the researchers, and none of the reports from the science system or University advisory groups have been released. Scientific research is a continuum from basic to translational, and negating the benefit of social sciences is a poor decision in this political context.
Professor Frederique Vanholsbeeck, director of Te Whai Ao Dodd-Walls Centre for Photonic and Quantum Technologies
“Margaret Thatcher, the erstwhile British Conservative Prime Minister, once infamously stated that “there is no such thing as society”. This view subsequently underpinned the dismantling of much of Britain’s previously agreed social and political contracts. It also saw the rapid dismantling of British industry and the widespread loss of jobs among the working classes (of course, the middle and upper classes were largely excluded from this).
Professor Stephen May, Te Puna Wānanga (School of Māori and Indigenous Education), University of Auckland
“The New Zealand government’s decision to restructure the Marsden Fund and Catalyst Fund is more than a simple budgetary adjustment — it is a pivotal moment.
“This decision comes in the context of international pressure on research funding, and lack of understanding of the value that researchers bring to our society. This rift partly explains why we have reached this moment. We have an opportunity to engage in a productive national dialogue to highlight the fundamental role of research and researchers in our society.
“By narrowing research funding to a prescriptive economic lens, we risk undermining the complex ecosystem of knowledge production. Researchers are critical independent advisors who generate insights that transcend immediate fiscal calculations. Their work generates systemic value through innovative problem-solving, policy development, and societal understanding that often yields unpredictable yet profound economic and social benefits over the long term.
“The most pressing challenges of our time — climate change, technological disruption, social inequalities — defy simplistic disciplinary boundaries. They require nuanced, interdisciplinary approaches that integrate quantitative and qualitative perspectives. An example close to home is that both modelling flood risk and understanding social resilience is crucial to the recovery and flourishing of communities affected by recent natural disasters.
“Leading research institutions globally, including the International Science Council, emphasise the necessity of diverse scholarly engagement that centres human complexity across multiple scales. To create true innovation, our research infrastructure and funding needs to support intellectual diversity, collaborative thinking and a commitment to understanding our world’s complex challenges.”
Associate Professor Priscilla Wehi, co-director of Te Pūnaha Matatini; and Professor Markus Luczak-Roesch, co-director of Te Pūnaha Matatini and Chair in Complexity Science at Victoria University of Wellington
“As we await more detailed information, the New Zealand Association of Scientists deplores key aspects of the today’s announcements that the Marsden Fund will eliminate its Social Sciences and Humanities Panel, and introduce measures requiring funded research to be of economic benefit.
“For those who understand national research systems, receiving this announcement is chilling. That’s especially true because the government has been unable to progress the long-awaited reports on reform of the research system.
“More than any other panels, those eliminated investigate and help us understand who we are as nation. Why would we not care to support that?
Dr Troy Baisden, Co-President NZ Association of Scientists; Motu Research Affiliate; and Te Pūnaha Matatini Principal Investigator
“This is dire news for blue skies research in New Zealand. Now there is no funding for anything archaeological-related (i.e. humanities) unless you can put an evolutionary biology spin on it and put it through the Ecology, Evolution & Behaviour panel.
Associate Professor Nic Rawlence, Director, Otago Palaeogenetics Laboratory, University of Otago
…of course Judith was going to gut humanities research, such research tends to be critical of the right wing bullshit Judith pedals, far easier to kill off any critical voices of Government policy than fund them.
This decision is political and ugly.
This is who we have become because people were so angry at Jacinda for post Covid bitterness.
At some stage Kiwis need to take a really along hard look in the mirror and ask if their post Covid bitterness justifies this sort of policy.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
The right know how to leverage their cobbled together power. The left pissed away an historic mandate. However the rights job is always easy, cut, scrap, destroy, let their mates scimm. Its easy to competently not do something. Building, caring, containing excess selfishness, selling a fair go narrative via opposition publishers is much harder.
When are kiwis going to realize not everything has to make a massive profit .We are a small island at the bottom of the world so we are never going to be a super power or a massive economic world hub as Key soon found out after pushing as hard as he could .
We need to focus on what is best for NZ as a society and worry less about exporting cash to overseas overlords .Collins and the other BBB S of the government need to put on their maternal caps and think ,HOW IS THIS GOING TO AFFECT MY GRAND KIDS .But I guess that is too much to ask from the dopes .
Gordon I feel strongly that we are caught up in a pseudoreligion and an old economist I know thinks this is so. And humans go through seeming waves of unrest and turmoil (or the screaming abdabs/habdabs!) that bring on irrationality, wars etc. And also there is worship of education dispensed as the answer to everything without definition of type and how, dispensed in different ways to different classes and grades with emphasis on sport rather than intellectual curiosity. Different strata continue in society with different understandings and outlooks. So which strata with which education is in power in Kiwiland?
How do we mix things better so we all can have similar understanding or our goal and national truth? Can’t be done at present because of our educational setup, and as parents don’t understand the need to think widely and deeply, passing on the habit and skill to their children. We remain separate though in the same society.
But hey forget it for now; we’re nearing the holidays and Christmas. Try active separation, of alcohol, in this clever scientific experiment. It uses pretty coloured liqueurs kept separate in a drink, great to look at and no doubt with interesting affect on the human body! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30RJ-aZQTAI
I am neither of those things .I am a grandfather who actually cares about the future of my grand kids .My son will find out if he is to be thrown on the scrap heap on monday due to Bishops hatred of state house dwellers .
It is Luxon and Brown ,and the 3 BBB women and the river of filth that are caught up in the psuedoreligeon and beleive they are superior economists to all of the country .
Judith and Humanities – what is it exactly?
Are social sciences part of humanities?
Although political science, government, geography, anthropology, and sociology may, from certain perspectives, be considered humanistic social sciences, for the purposes of the Humanities Indicators, they are categorized as non-humanities disciplines.
The Scope of the “Humanities” for Purposes of the Humanities Indicators
American Academy of Arts and Sciences
https://www.amacad.org › humanities-indicators › scope-…
And National loves Ju-death! And is not being racist or anything. Just going for the best woeman for the job. As the saying goes ‘Gentlemen prefer Blondes’!
It could be that being blonde is important in Judith’s fight to the top in Kiwi politics and wealth gatherers. So the Humanities and Social Psychology could undermine her prestige with their curiosity and findings on how stereotypes work on individuals and those they interact with!
Social psychology Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Social_psychology
Social psychology is the scientific study of how thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are influenced by the actual, imagined, or implied presence of others.
Hence : https://medium.com/@truthtopowerrecords/blonde-bimbo-or-blonde-with-ambition-a-social-psychological-analysis-of-the-film-legally-blonde-6697a90aaafe
…When considering the stereotype that is linked with blonde-haired women, Clayson and Maughan (1986) found that blondes may be perceived as positively stereotyped individuals. However, while blondes are perceived as feminine, pleasant, and beautiful…
These further headings in google might be informative. But I can’t open New York Times without forfeiting my first-born son or something so I offer it as possibly good.
Opinion | The Enduring, Invisible Power of Blond
The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › 2023/01/19 › the-enduring-…
19 Jan 2023 — Being a natural blonde must confer honor, esteem and power to those who can legitimately claim it.
If you’re into long words and understand ‘penal spectatorship as a discursive mechanism’ etc you will possibly find something pertinent in this.
(PDF) ‘She’s White and She’s Hot, So She Can’t Be Guilty’
ResearchGate
https://www.researchgate.net › publication › 27617463…
23 Apr 2015 — This paper examines the role of penal spectatorship as a discursive mechanism by which white, female offenders are protected in public spaces by …
The “experts” are not exactly an objective group are they. Thankfully Marsden will now have to concentrate on STEM subjects instead of decolonisation and gender religion.
so you can push your vile agenda without question
1+1 =2 once more. Truly vile agenda
I have an honours degree in Arts. I like humanities that produce value. The Marsden fund was wasting taxpayers’ money on research of questionable academic worth.
But STEM objective? You think because they are ‘hard’ sciences? I have noticed that a lot of
the hard sciences have hard effects on the body and planet. Lord Rutherford seems to have been both clever and kind but his findings have gone towards explosions that are decided to be used on decisions made by men who have no ability in setting ideas down objectively, quite
irrational when considered.
The idea that there is a need for ‘blue sky’ research in social science is pretty ridiculous.
Literally all that needs to happen to improve society is for every neoliberal change implemented since the 80s to be reverted, and those responsible for them to be tried for high treason and face the most severe penalties.
The Marsden fund was only recently opened up to humanities by Grant Robertson under the last Labour government. Prior to that it was a fund for science research. Under Labour’s direction, the fund was re-purposed towards the following super-important areas of research:
$360,000 to study Big Things such as the Ohakune Carrot, with a focus on “a critical gaze to the privileging of Pākehā-centred narratives in current research on roadside “Big Things” and “Weaving together feminist, participatory, and filmic geographies, this project seeks to re-centre alternative stories currently hidden in the Big Things’ shadows“
$360,000 to collect disabled indigenous stories about climate change with “establishing how such stories resist ableist narratives and theorise and advance disability-centred ways of creating sustainable and just environmental futures.“
$861,000 to explore dark nudges and sludge on social media in relation to advertising alcohol.
$861,000 to help decolonise ocean worlds from imperial borders
$861,000 to link celestial spheres to end-of-life experiences to “create opportunities to rekindle the ancient connection to the stars and re-imagine the meaning of death, while also advancing understandings about the practical application of Māori astronomy in contemporary times.“
I agree Perseus. We could add this gem
$360,000 to examine Pacific gamer girl experiences – because “gaming culture remains associated with masculinity, heterosexuality, and whiteness.”
People taking themselves seriously and taking others for a ride, is this list of funding? applications? Kindliness and practicality as a guide would slice through a lot of the overblown projects that are posited.
Funding for systems that would indicate land or shallows to whales so they wouldn’t beach themselves and find out whether it is human activity that distorts their recognition receptors; that would be a humanities thing that would be practical. And part of it would look at why we divorce ourselves from our animal side and regard it as other, yet cannot use our superior and protean intelligence to concentrate on matters that should be relevant to our superior status.
Comments are closed.