Is there any place free of bullying?

When I was a child I avidly read the writings of philosophers such as Socrates – this led me to the belief that democracy was founded on the concepts of freedom of speech and expression.

For years I studied and ended up with six degrees, hoping always to find a place where people could say and write what they think, without fear of persecution or prejudice in employment.

What did I observe?

My first decade was spent in private industry. Anyone who did their job as an internal or external auditor could be coerced, either by direct threat of loss of employment, business or under an inducement. During my employment at a merchant bank I was bullied by the administration not to insist on maternity leave.

So in search of freedom I accepted a Commonwealth Scholarship.

I returned to University to study and develop systems of regulation for the accounting profession, to ensure that the provision of information was carried out in a non-prejudicial manner. That is, to ensure that no bullying occurred by company officers and directors to distort such information.

When I presented my thesis, which demanded the provision of mandatory cash flow statements, I was bullied into supplying all my data, so that someone could rerun my experiment and refute my results.

I was also intimidated by university editors not to publish, as it could result in monies being withdrawn by accounting firms to fund professorial and lecturing positions.

The only person who came to my defence was an American professor who substantiated my demands and stated that the US was about to mandate for such information.

As a result my career was limited at the university where I undertook my thesis. Committees to promote waited to meet until no equal opportunity officer was present. Male candidates were promoted over females regularly.

So I returned to the workforce.

On the eve of the greatest boom in the eighties what I witnessed were bank officers being bullied by superiors receiving bonuses to distort the credit approval process.

Government regulators were bullied to approve practices that nearly bought two of our four major banks to their knees. As a government officer I started an inquiry into banking regulation in 1990. Without support from a notable politician I would have been intimidated into silence.

There was no federal whistle-blower protection and there is still none to protect those in the private sector. Moreover there is nothing in any anti-discrimination act, in any State, to protect Australian citizens from political discrimination. Such behaviour is rife in certain universities where membership of a union and/or a left wing party ensures promotion.

Returning to the hallowed halls of academia in pursuit of freedom of expression, I found my supervising professor trying to direct my PhD to echo his views; resorting to the extent of stifling any attempt to publish.

To explain, my research was directed at developing optimum regulatory systems for banks and others operating in the finance sector. My research and views were ridiculed by those advocating the Chicago School of Economics line that markets are efficient and best left to their own devices, and not regulated.

My viewpoints were directly repugnant to those lobbying for liberalisation of financial regulation. I was a lone voice and suffered direct discrimination in terms of work hours, rooms, grants and promotion.

Publishers choose editors of journals according to citations by others. If a university such as Chicago wishes to enforce its views, it promotes those who only cite their views. By this method, existing views are perpetuated and bullying of challengers to conventional thinking, suffer discrimination and manipulated sackings – witness Joe Stiglitz.

Another method of bullying and intimidation involves the continual refusal to publish any works by countercyclical thinkers. The Chicago School of Economics, which believes in no or minimal regulation of financial markets, has secured positions on all editorial boards and bullies those who think differently by refusing to publish their views. In a world of publish or perish this is a death knell.

This goes a long way to explaining the present state of affairs in the financial system. Those decrying deregulation were bullied into silence.

Women with children and aging parents are particularly vulnerable to this form of coercion. They are then bullied to take all the menial positions and unfavourable teaching loads. This perpetuates their inferior status.

It is my experience that the fifth estate is perhaps the only relief valve in this cycle. Bullying of academics, politicians, corporate officers and regulation has bought us to the worst financial crisis since 1929.

Academia should be the place where the truth can be told and discovered. To me it is far worse than the private sector. At least there, the profit motive acts to mitigate against bullying to some extent.

It is now almost 2450 years since Socrates was executed for speaking his mind. His crime was two "impious" acts: "Failing to acknowledge the gods that the city acknowledges" and "introducing new deities."

Is it not time to enact laws to enforce freedom of speech and expression? Those who are bullies always pick a soft target such as women. This time bullying has eroded the wealth of nations and impoverished the poor even more, leading to civil disturbances. Let's put a stop to it now, by any mechanism possible.

We could start by examining the suppression of research findings in universities, which are meant to be the fount of all wisdom.

We must ensure promotion on merit, by demanding that external members be appointed to committees allocating funds and considering promotion. Then the public may start receiving advice that is truly unbiased and informed.

Perhaps then, bullying may be understood for what it really is: A means by inferior moral beings to secure power and wealth using the laws of the jungle.