James Panton

LM network resources Core elements: Institute of Ideas | Spiked | List of all pages on the network Key People: Frank Furedi, Michael Fitzpatrick, Claire Fox, Helene Guldberg, James Heartfield, Mick Hume, Phil Mullan, Brendan O'Neill, Keith Teare, James Woudhuysen, Publications: Living Marxism | LM Contents | LM Commentaries | Frank Furedi: List of Publications | Confrontation | The next step Precursors: Revolutionary Communist Tendency | Revolutionary Communist Party Companies: Junius Publications | Informinc (LM) Limited | Cyberia | Easynet | CScape | Academy of Ideas Background: Bibliography | Chronology | Images and logos | Scribd document archive

James Panton on BBC Newsnight, 20 August 2007

Science vs Superstition: the case for a new enlightenment, edited by James Panton & Oliver Marc Hartwich. Published by Policy Exchange, 2006.

James Panton (Born 1977) is a teacher and lecturer and is associated with the libertarian anti-environmental LM network. He has written for Living Marxism and Spiked , spoken at the Battle of Ideas, officiated for Debating Matters, is a co-founder and press officer for the anti-regulation Manifesto Club and has spoken at the East Midlands Salon. He is currently a teacher at Magadalen College School in Oxford and head of the politics department having recently completed a PGCE in 2013/14. He conitnues to lecture at Hertford College, University of Oxford for visiting students and has lectured in various colleges at the university since 2003. He is also an associate Lecturer in the Faculty of Social Science and Faculty of Philosophy of the Open University. Prior to this, around 2007, he was chair of the Institute of Ideas' postgraduate forum and was one of the founding members of the Manifesto club where he was campaigns coordinator for around one year. He has also been their Press Officer since its inception in 2006. From 2005 to 2007 he was also co-director of the Battle of Ideas for whom he had been the coordinator of the Debating Matters competition from 2002 to 2003.

Education

From 1995-1998 he undertook a BA (Hons) in Politics, Philosophy and Economics, for which he achieved a 2:1. He then Undertook an MPhil in Philosophy at University College London at the University of London, followed by an MSc in Politics at the University of Oxford. According to his linkedin profile from 2001-2010 he undertook a DPhil in Political Theory at the University of Oxford, although an article written in the Scotsman suggests this may have began in September 2000. The time it took to complete this suggests it was likely undertaken on a part-time basis, perhaps due to his role as tutor and lecturer from 2003 onwards..

Views

Writing for Spiked (2001 - 2010)

Higher Education and Dyslexia

From 2001-2010 Panton contributed 18 articles to Spiked, around nine of which considered issues within higher education, often (5) with a particular focus on dyslexia, which Panton was diagnosed with only late into his academic life, leading him to question its widened definition. This focus links somewhat to the topic of 'personal responsibility', frequently written about by other members of the network, whereby some forms of dyslexia are seen as a mechanism by which to refute personal responsibility for failure by Panton.

Stringer begins his controversial article on dyslexia by noting the number of functionally illiterate members of the prison population, and deduces from this, in a crude-but-intuitive way, that increasing literacy in schools would decrease the prison population. While this smacks of the peculiarly New Labour logic that sees education as a panacea for all social ills, there is obviously something concrete in the idea that children who are let down by the education system to the degree of functional illiteracy are less likely to be able to go on and take control of their lives and determine their futures. But amongst all these problems, one has remained little interrogated by Stringer, Elliot and those other brave souls who criticise the dyslexia industry. This is the issue of what our preparedness to expand a category such as dyslexia, and to apply it to an expansive and indeterminate range of problems met in the classroom, tells us about our views of the capacities of individuals to engage with and struggle against challenges and difficulties.

There is a certain disdain in his articles towards the massification of higher education and a belief that this has in part led to a therapeutic culture being fostered in academia, limting what students see themselves as being able to achieve.

Over the past few years there has been a reorganisation of education around self-esteem rather than rigour, and a trend towards decreasing standards. It is no coincidence that this has coincided with increasing numbers of students being churned along a conveyor-belt that exists where real education ought to.

Animal Testing

In 2006, perhaps corresponding to his involvement with Pro-test, he wrote 4 articles vehemently defending the need for animal research and stating this needed to be argued for positively as a moral endeavour and not as an unfortunate neccessity. However, he also implies any questions levelled against animal-testing are necessarily anti-progress and misanthropic:

The more others are prepared to take a stand on this issue, the less the activities of animal rights campaigners need concern us. Taking a moral stand on vivisection is the only way in which the argument will be won. Perhaps then we can move from defending vivisection against the misanthropes - an argument which ought to have been won a long time ago - on to a more positive debate about the values and principles around which we might organise a more progressive society...The real problem that pro-vivisectionists face is not small groups of extremists, but the ongoing silence of those in authority. Until scientists are able to come forward in public and be proud of their work, until universities are prepared to make public statements defending their researchers, and until our elected politicians stand up and make the moral argument for vivisection, the impression of vivisection will continue to be that it is, at best, an unfortunate necessity - at worse, something to be ashamed about, something best kept under wraps. We can challenge this central problem by refusing to keep our support for vivisection under wraps, and instead stating it loudly and proudly. I, James Panton, am proud to proclaim that I support vivisection as an essential part of scientific progress and as an entirely moral, humanistic endeavour.

Who will join me?

He also argued against the banning of anti-animal-testing activists' right to protest, based on a belief in 'freedom of speech' and that confronting their arguments through debate would be the best way to tackle arguments they put forward against animal testing:

I have no sympathy with animal rights activists, but I think that more laws will do little to defeat their arguments. The authorities are using draconian measures to substitute for a decent moral argument in defence of animal research. In the absence of offering a moral justification for vivisection they instead clamp down heavily on the anti-vivisectionists. Blair promises new measures to restrict the actions of animal rights extremists rather than standing up and saying animal research is crucially important and must continue. They use the law to create the impression of being tough on anti-vivisectionists because they seem to lack the words - or the guts - to defend vivisection.

In one article he suggests those in favour of vivisection should buy shares in GSK and again implies those who argue against vivisection are necessarily misanthropes:

The only way to beat these misanthropes is to stand up and be counted. Shareholders in GSK, and supporters of the People’s Petition, should be proud of their support for vivisection. The Pro-Test committee, on which I sit, has bought 10 shares in GSK as a symbolic gesture of solidarity with its shareholders, to demonstrate that we are not intimidated.

Climate Change

Panton also contributed three articles relating to climate change which largely argue against the idea of reducing carbon footprints through consumption choices, whilst seemingly ignoring the reality that alterations to people's consumption choices are necessary to avoid climate change. This omission suggests the scientific consensus on climatye change is rejected by Panton. He argues the idea of altering people's consumption choices is a miserable moral message:

Mike Small, the inspiration behind the diet, claims that this is ‘not a back-to-nature movement rejecting the twenty-first century. It is a flexible, consciousness-raising exercise to show what realistic changes individuals can make’. He is surely right - the Fife Diet is a product of a peculiarly twenty-first century form of moralistic miserliness where the future of the planet is understood to be dependent upon the consumption choices made by individual families. The more they can reject the advances of food production and transportation that the late twentieth century brought to small towns like Burntisland the better.

Similarly to others in the network he implies that there has ben an environmentalist elite capture:

Over the past few years, we have all got used to being hectored by the environmental lobby about the ‘small sacrifices’ we should make to our daily routine in order to reduce our carbon footprint: take public transport, think about ‘holidaying at home’, don’t leave your TVs and computers on standby, wash your clothes at a lower temperature, and so on. But surely things are getting surreal when the head of the UN’s Nobel Peace Prize-winning climate science project starts demanding that we should all turn veggie? This seems to be another illustration of the fact that the IPCC is not the impartial body of experts it purports to be.

In a 2007 appearance on Newsnight James Panton again used the topic of anti-moralism to argue against individual efforts to reduce carbon footprints in the face of climate change and of the inevitability of increasing energy consumption:

It is a fact that our energy needs, consumption needs, will go up in the next century … it is interesting that when someone like me, as I often do, suggest that there really are political, scientific and engineering solutions to whatever is happening within the climate we are accused of being climate change deniers. I am accused of evading my own personal responsibility, and the big problem for any kind of political project that wants to inspire people and to change the way that they act is that you cannot do this with this miserablist moralizing.

Whilst he denies being somenone who denies climate change, he clearly does not confirm an acceptance of the scientific consensus on climate change. In addition, he argues that people will inevitably consume more energy in the future and that there are political and technological solutions which will be capable of resolving the trade-off between this requirement and its environmental impact. This appears to be an implicit denial of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change, given the need to reduce carbon emissions radically, including through a reduction in energy consumption, and thus arguably he should be labelled a climate change denier based on his own defence against such a claim. The paradoxical argument that to deal with climate change we should continue to use more energy to force innovation, is often used by others in the LM network. For example in James Woodhuysen and Joe Kaplinsky's book Energise!, which does accept that climate change exists and is as a result of human activity, but argues that the resolution to this issue is more energy consumption, which will inevitably lead to technological innovation.

Involvement with PRO-test (2006)

In 2006 Panton was involved in the founding of Pro-Test, the pro animal (pro-vivisection) research campaign in support of the Oxford University bio-medical research facility. For a time his biographical note on the Manifesto Club website indicated that he was a founder member of Pro-test, as did a number of articles in the press. However, the Pro-test web-page suggests the group was initiated by a 16 year old called Laurie Pycroft who was 'frustrated with the way that those opposed to vivisection (testing on animals for the purpose of scientific progress) were dominating the public debate on animal research' and does not mention Panton. His affiliation with Pro-test had also been removed from his author biography on the Manifesto Club website by February 2007. Nevertheless Panton's 2006 Battle of Ideas biography indicates his involvement with the group encouraged his contribution to Science vs Superstition: the case for a new scientific enlightenment:

In 2006 James was involved with Pro-Test, the pro animal research campaign in support of the Oxford University bio-medical research facility. Work on the issue of animal rights and the arguments around animal research led James to look more broadly at the issue of contemporary society’s attitudes to science, and his preliminary thoughts on this issue found their expression in the book he co-edited with Oliver Hartwhich of the think tank Policy Exchange - Science vs Superstition: the case for a new scientific enlightenment (Policy Exchange, 2006).

Brendan O'Neill reported on a demo organised by Pro-Test referencing Panton who argued the Pro-test demo 'was about more than medical research: it was about "defending progress" against the idea that there is "no moral difference between humans and animals"'.This particular piece attacked the left, either for not attending the demo, or for arguing that animal research is geared towards the boosting of drugs companies profits:

Some on the left refuse to get involved because they say animal research is geared to boosting the profits of drugs companies. What a cop-out. The vast majority of scientists (and their students, judging by the demo) who experiment on animals are driven by the desire to cure disease. By pointing the finger at drugs company bosses, the left not only opts out of this cutting-edge clash between human progress and "animal rights"; it

also allows drugs companies to pose as champions of progress.

Brendan O'Neill goes on to contrast the pro-vivisection demo with an anti-vivisection demo arguing the former to be progressive and humane whilst the latter is cynical and weary:

The anti-testing protest consisted mostly of forty- and fiftysomethings, some of whom looked weary. Their placards spoke of fear and suspicion of scientists, and humanity. "We live in a world of deceit: don't believe the scientists' lies," said one. It was hard to resist the conclusion that the anti-testing demo was a reflection of the state of the old left, drowning in cynicism and moral relativism, while the pro-testing demo was new and surprising, an attempt by

forward-looking young people to define themselves as progressive and humane. The left has been left behind.

Panton later wrote an article for Spiked with a highly similar message implying arguments against vivsection should be considered as necessarily 'anti-progress' and 'anti-humanist':

Anti-vivisectionists like Mel Broughton do not represent large numbers of people, nor do they wield much power. Instead they are sustained by, and they feed off, a broader sense of misanthropy today, and doubt about human achievement - and surely it is that underlying problem which we need to address?... those of us who support vivisection need to challenge the anti-progress culture from which anti-vivisectionism springs

Career Chronology

• Debating Matters Competition – Coordinator (2002-2003)
• University of Oxford, Lady Margate Hall - Lecturer in Politics (October 2003 - September 2006)
• PROTest – Founder member (2006)
• Battle of Ideas – Co-Director (2005-2007)
• Institute of Ideas - Chair of Postgraduate forum (2007)
• Manifesto Club - Founder member and Campaigns Co-ordinator (2005-2007)
• University of Oxford – Dphil, Political Theory (2001-2010)
• Spiked - Writer/Contributor (2001-2010)
• University of Oxford, St John’s College - Tutor in Politics (September 2006 - September 2011)
• Manifesto Club – Press Officer (May 2007-Present)
• The Open University, Faculty of Social Science and Faculty of Philosophy – Associate Lecturer (October 2008-Present)
• University of Oxford, Hertford College – Lecturer in Politics for visiting students (September 2010-Present)
• Stowe Secondary School, Buckingham – PGCE Teacher Training (2012-2013 (approx))
• Magdalen College School, Oxford – Teacher and Head of Politics (September 2013-Present)

Educational Background

• Schooled at Balwearie High in Kirkcaldy (1988-95 (approx))
• University of Oxford – BA Hon, Politics, Philosophy and Economics, 2:1 (1995-1998)
• University College London, University of London – MPhil, Philosophy (1999-2000)
• University of Oxford – DPhil, Political Theory (2000-2010)

Other Links with the Network

Book Contributions

The RoutledgeFalmer Guide to Key Debates in Education

In each of the books to which James Panton has contributed a chapter, the books are filled with contributions from a host of others linked to the LM network. For example, he contributed a chapter entitled 'Challenging Students' to The RoutledgeFalmer Guide to Key Debates in Education, edited by Dennis Hayes (2004). At least 19 of the contributors have links to the LM network having written for Living Marxism, LM magazine, Spiked, or having appeared at events organised by the Institute of Ideas.By order of their contribution the other authors were:

William Taylor, Frank Furedi, Gavin Poynter, Alan Hudson, Claire Fox, Tricia David, Joanna Williams, Teresa Grainger, Shirley Dent, Kathy Hall, Lynn Revell, Simon Knight, Robin Wynyard, Carl Parsons, Richard Harris, Jon Davidson, Mike Radford, Simon Hughes, Kevin Rooney, Dominic Wood, James Woudhuysen, Toby Marshall, Mike Blamires, David Perks, Jennie Bristow, Kathryn Ecclestone, Linden West, Jon Bryan, Jerome Satterthwaite & Lyn Martin, Glenn Rikowski, John Lea, John Nixon, Sonia Blandford, Laurie Thomas, Dennis Hayes, Mary Evans, James Panton, Shirley Lawes, Richard Bailey, Ray Godfrey, Gill Nicholls, and Tyrrel Burgess.

The Changing Role of the Public Intellectual

He also contributed a chapter entitled 'What are Universities For? Universities, Knowledge and Intellectuals', in the book Dolan Cummings Ed. The Changing Role of the Public Intellectual, Routledge (2004). By order of their contribution the other authors were:

Dolan Cummings, Jeremy Jennings, Sabine Reul, Alan Hudson, Gregor MvLennan and Thomas Osbourne, Robert Eaglestone, Bill Durodie, Catherine Scott, Ronald Barnett, Dennis Hayes, James Panton, Sondra Farganis and Frank Furedi.

Science vs Superstition:the case for a new enlightenment

The book he co-edited with Oliver Marc Hartwich, Science vs Superstition:the case for a new enlightenment (Policy Exchange, 2006), followed a similar pattern. By order of their contribution the other authors were:

Dirk Maxeimer and Michael Miersch, Jaap Hanekamp and Wybren Verstegen, Stuart Derbyshire, Joe Kaplinsky, Thilo Spahl and Thomas Deichmann, and Matt Ridley.

Battle of Ideas Panel Appearances

2005

• Saturday 29th October 2005 - James Panton appeared on a panel with: Dr Dylan Evans (author of Emotion, Evolution and Rationality, affiliated to Academics For Academic Freedom), Professor Frank Furedi (perhaps the leading associate, of the LM network, he writes regularly for Spiked Online, and wrote one of only two papers published by Global Futures), Professor Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn (co-director, discussing 'Is morality making a comeback?' at the Battle of Ideas).
• Saturday 29th October 2005 - James Panton appeared on a panel with: Mary Evans (Professor of Women’s Studies, University of Kent), Dennis Hayes (vice president of the lecturers’ union Natfhe, he is the founder and director of Academics for Academic Freedom, is the convenor of the East Midlands Salon, and has written for Culture Wars and Spiked), and Daphne Patai (co-editor, Theory’s Empire: An Anthology of Dissent, has written for LM).
• Sunday 30th October 2005 - James Panton appeared on a panel with: Professor Frank Furedi (perhaps the leading associate, of the LM network, he writes regularly for Spiked Online, and wrote one of only two papers published by Global Futures), and Todd Gitlin (professor of journalism and sociology, Columbia University Graduate School, author of Letters To a Young Activist; editorial board, Dissent), discussing 'A provocation lecture: J'accuse anti-authoritarianism' at the Battle fo Ideas.

2006

• Saturday 28th October 2006 - James Panton appeared on a panel with: John Fitzpatrick (senior lecturer in law and director of the Kent Law Clinic, University of Kent, stood for the RCP's Red Front in the 1987 General Election, was 'Living section' editor of Living Marxism, is a shareholder of Spiked Ltd. and has officiated for Debating Matters), Professor Conor Gearty (Rausing Director, Centre for the Study of Human Rights, London School of Economics), Anthony Grayling (Professor of philosophy, Birkbeck College, University of London), and Elizabeth Woodcraft (barrister, Tooks Chambers; crime novelist), discussing 'The rise and rise of human rights – an unalloyed good?', at the Battle of Ideas.
• Sunday 29th October 2006 - James Panton appeared on a panel with: Lesley Chamberlain (writer and critic), Frank Furedi (perhaps the leading associate, of the LM network, he writes regularly for Spiked Online, and wrote one of only two papers published by Global Futures), Ted Honderich (Grote Professor Emeritus of the Philosophy of Mind and Logic, University College London), John Ralston Saul (essayist and novelist), John Sutherland (Emeritus Lord Northcliffe, Professor of Modern English Literature, University College London; reviewer, essayist and columnist), and produced with Claire Fox (director, Institute of Ideas), discussing 'The Battle for the Future' at the Battle of Ideas

2007

• Sunday 28th October 2007 - James Panton appeared on a panel with: Paul Mason (Newsnight editor), David Aaronovitch (columnist, The Times; author, Voodoo Histories; chair, Index on Censorship, spoke at an event organised by the Freedom Association), Stella Creasy (head of research and development, Involve), and Claire Fox (director, Institute of Ideas), discussing 'Democracy and its discontents' at the Battle of Ideas.

2014

• Saturday 18th October 2014 - James Panton appeared on a panel with: Jennifer Betts (researcher, Centre for Secure Information Technology (CSIT), Queens University, Belfast), Phil Booth (coordinator at medConfidential), Stephen Deadman (Group Privacy Officer and Head of Legal – Privacy, Security & Content Standards, Vodafone Group), Dr Natasha McCarthy (head of policy, British Academy; member, steering committee, Forum for Philosophy, Engineering and Technology), and Bill Durodié (member of the advisory board of the Scientific Alliance, writer for Living Marxism, Audacity, and Spiked and a founder member of the Manifesto Club), discussing 'DRIP by drip: have we given up on privacy?' at the Battle of Ideas.

Affiliations

• Manifesto Club
• Institute of Ideas
• Spiked
• Battle of Ideas

Publications

1999/2000

• James Panton, 'I don't believe in that God', LM 126, p. 12, December/January, 1999/2000.

2001

• James Panton, ‘McEducation - and bits on the side: A conference at Canterbury Christ Church University College, Kent, in July 2001 brought together sociologists George Ritzer and Frank Furedi to debate the question: 'What is the McUniversity?'’, Spiked 18 July 2001.

2002

• James Panton, ‘A third class proposal: Will classifying degrees by percentage rather than class make British higher education any better, or fairer? An academic has his doubts’, Spiked 10 August 2002.

2003

• J Panton, 'Universities, knowledge and the intellectuals', in Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy Vol 6, No 4, Winter 2003.
• James Panton, ‘Stressing out students: Students are encouraged to experience university challenges as traumas’, Spiked, 15 July 2003.

2004

• J Panton, 'Challenging Students' in D Hayes (ed) Debating Education: Issues for the New Millenium (Routledge Falmer, 2004).
• James Panton, ‘Selling out universities: Having accepted the marketisation of higher education, critics of top-up fees have lost the argument’, Spiked, 14 January 2004.
• James Panton, ‘Can’t read, won’t read: 'Dyslexia' is becoming a catch-all excuse for poor work’, Spiked, 5 August 2004.

2005

• James Panton, 'What are Universities For?' in D Cummings (ed) The Changing Role of the Public Intelectual (Routledge, 2005).
• James Panton, 'The Politics of Experience' in Studies in Marxism Vol 10, 2005.

2006

• James Panton (ed), Science vs Superstition:the case for a new enlightenment (Policy Exchange, 2006).
• James Panton 'Animal Rights and the Culture of Mysanthropy', in Science vs Superstition (Policy Exchange, 2006).
• James Panton, ‘Animal rights protesters: don’t ban them, beat them: A leading member of the pro-vivisection group Pro-Test argues that animal rights activists should be defeated through debate, not legal injunctions’, Spiked, 18 April 2006.
• James Panton, ‘Stand up for animal research: The online People’s Petition supporting vivisection is a bold and positive initiative. If only it didn’t offer supporters the option to remain anonymous’, Spiked, 2 May 2006.
• James Panton, ‘Animal research: extremists are not the problem: Tony Blair has signed up against anti-vivisection agitators - but that is not the same thing as signing up for vivisection’, Spiked, 16 May 2006.
• James Panton, ‘Infantilising students: 'Good behaviour contracts' for university students undermine the informal relations that make higher education possible’, Spiked, 5 October 2006.
• James Panton, ‘Time to stop monkeying around: One supporter of vivisection says a BBC documentary revealed the benefits of animal research - and the need for tough arguments to defend it’, Spiked, 28 November 2006.

2007

• James Panton, ‘The dislexia sceptik is onn to sumthing: Academic and supposed dyslexic James Panton thinks the professor who describes dyslexia as a 'social fig leaf' for the middle classes has a point’, Spiked, 4 June 2007.
• James Panton, ‘Let us celebrate the freedom of flight: There’s more to manmade flight than the spewing of CO2 molecules: flying is liberating and enlightening, and that’s why millions of us do it’, Spiked, 16 August 2007.
• James Panton, ‘Giving thanks to America this Thanksgiving:Microsoft, fast food, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment (the one on bearing arms): should we be grateful to the US for these things?’, Spiked, 20 November 2007.
• James Panton, ‘Why I've no appetite for the Fife Diet: A 'small, grassroots movement' has sprung up in Scotland based on eating only food produced nearby. Local boy James Panton is appalled’, Spiked, 27 December 2007.

2008

• James Panton, 'Intellectual influences on the New Left in America: C Wright Mills and Herbert Marcuse', In journal: Reconstruction Vol. 8 No. 1. 2008.
• James Panton, ‘If you can’t inspire them, bribe them: In offering iPods to people who vote, the New Labour government is taking its cue from the Fidel Castro School of Public Engagement’, Spiked, 14 July 2008.
• James Panton, ‘Why I’ve got a beef with going vegetarian: After policing how we shop, holiday and dispose of waste, now environmental bigwigs want to turn us into eco-veggies’, Spiked, 11 September 2008.

2009

• James Panton, ‘Demythologise dyslexia: By medicalising reading problems, we suggest to children that they can’t overcome their difficulties’, Spiked, 20 January 2009.

2010

• James Panton, ‘What’s so great about the welfare state?: ESSAY: The origins of state welfare were far from progressive, and in its new therapeutic form it is actually a barrier to human solidarity’, Spiked, 21 April 2010.

Resources

• BBC NewsNight 20 August 2007 transcript
• Profile, "James Panton", Manifesto Club website, accessed 29 Dec 2010
• LinkedIn: James Panton
• Twitter: jimpanton
• Website: James Panton