As a university professor, I recently found myself in an awkward place. I teach a large survey course called Introduction to Cultural Anthropology, which enrolls about 350 students. As part of the course, I usually spend one course every semester teaching developmental anthropology. In this field, the main strains involved criticizing development projects, most often for two reasons: ignoring local cultural practices and priorities, or exacerbating what development projects are designed to improve.
In the spring semester of 2025, after I had completed and published my syllabus, something unprecedented happened in the United States: the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was demolished by the Trump administration and the Elon Musk Department of Efficiency (DOGE). From a critical point of view of standard development, some of the reasons the Trump administration has provided for this unprecedented move are very familiar. “Musk and the left of the right” criticize American power The New York Times Announce.
Development is not the only topic of sudden political change in power criticism. Another topic I spent some courses was the same. Many scientific anthropology researchers have long believed that scientists’ values and beliefs have shaped science. The attack on scientific authority that began President Trump’s first term has intensified since expanding these same arguments. So, as university professors, how do we elaborate on these topics today?
While thinking about this in the context of my own class, I began to observe criticism of “cooperating” or “adapting” the left party’s criticism, which was a little curious and some doubt. Both terms have some abusive and malicious meanings. Don’t get me wrong: This view certainly makes sense: Some Republican politicians in the United States have recently liberated and redeployed the arguments simply because they proved that the ideal purpose was justified (and achieved some trolls as additional benefits). But, educationally speaking, “grants” in this case are not always useful. It avoids the argument itself by surrounding its predefined boundaries for its reasonable use.
Furthermore, the argument for these migrations is that the view of “cooperative” cases does not always stand historical scrutiny. Take the question about empowering experts as an example. Nowadays, the right is fighting more with experts and institutions that accommodate them, rather than the left. The battle is attracted by several arguments, including “diversity of perspectives” and claims captured by elites, is itself the logic of migration.
This battle with experts is the most intense battle in the name of populist perspective: people know what suits them best. Decades ago, leftists invested more in criticizing people whose expertise was to control their environment and their needs better than many experts.
But before that, a similar argument was at the heart of neoliberal rights. Friedrich von Hayek, a well-known neoliberal theorist, made this argument against expertise in unrestricted market cases, argues that summarizing and responding to the decisions of a large number of locally informed individuals is better than anyone else. Considering the stability gap between the left and right, considering the migration of these ideas is also a mistake: Marg instilled the “right”, a new hostile attitude toward the free market, while the “left” of the Democratic Party today accepts elements of neoliberalism.
Instead of a simple “appropriation,” the migration of the argument in a series of worldviews should not be interpreted as an agreement area of the agreement in which the depth (despicable or comprehensive?) is reviewed. Why and how to draw different meanings from these areas? This requires continuing to think about and teach these key points, rather than avoiding them for fear of exacerbating their now authorized attacks.
Ultimately, recognizing similar criticisms cross-pollination with different ideological positions is an invitation to engage more deeply in the essence of these arguments in classrooms and elsewhere.
