Patronage networks make scholarly critique too costly in Middle East studies

Evidence

A great deal is staked on this repetition, not least a fairly well run system of patronage. The senior experts in the field, whether from the government, the corporation world, or the university, tend to have connections with one another and with compliant donors. A young scholar depends on this network for his or her subventions, to say nothing of employment and the possibility of publication in the established journals. To venture unfriendly critiques of the recognized scholars or of their work, in this field more than in the fields of general history or literature, is to risk too much. … The most curious omission — and the most routine — is the analysis of the connection between scholarship and the various forms of power in the society for which this scholarship is produced. And the moment a voice is heard that challenges this conspiracy of silence, ideology and ethnic origins become the main topic: He (or she) is a Marxist; or, he (or she) is a Palestinian (or an Iranian, or a Muslim, or a Syrian) — and we know what they’re like. — Edward W. Said, Covering Islam, 329

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the ‘old boys network’ critique and to how ad hominem dismissal (accusing critics of being Marxists or Palestinians) functions as epistemic gatekeeping — echoes the standing finding that challenging dominant expert consensus invites identity-based discrediting. — connects to: Scholarly networks create echo chambers that sideline marginal knowledge — Crystal Abidin and Megan Lindsay Brown (eds.), Microcelebrity Around the Globe:…, 116
• DEEPTHINKING: The mechanism described — patronage suppressing critique until challenging voices are dismissed by identity rather than argument — is a durable, transferable account of how expert fields maintain orthodoxy.