What happened, I think, was that the production of geniuses declined rather gracefully, gradually, incrementally - but that it was that the ability to evaluate and recognize major work of genius that collapsed abruptly.
This is totally true here in America too. It appears even the ability to evaluate and recognize mere competence has collapsed as well.
I don't just think Charlton is right intellectually, I have experienced this as a feeling. Few things are so fundamentally dissonant- to see yourself as a potential resource, just being wasted, because the people you are dealing with simply cannot fathom what you are talking about and how it fits in with their stated goals. Some people merely use stated goals as tools to get whatever it is that they really want, but even in rather corrupt institutions, you will find the earnest sort, who seem to have some true attachment to the stated goals.
The progressive movement may well be the mechanism via which everything has become tainted. This essay seems to be apropos: On the structure of the antimodern university.
One could easily drop community, city, church in place of university and develop a highly similar essay. Alan Liddell is giving you the basics, assuming you want anything you do to last multiple generations- the very basics. Is it not sad that I see something this basic-
An antimodern university (hereafter AU) ought to be located in the country, on arable and easily defensible land.- and find comfort that this particular stranger at least has this right? Should I not be able to rejoice with my brothers over something slightly more sophisticated than this? But I am fated to watch lunacy.