The stakes are in fact very high for the academics themselves. There’s night and day difference between getting tenure, and not.

As whymauri has illustrated, there's a ton of pettiness that goes on between tenured professors and outside of anything to do with the tenure process. It's nothing but people with big egos being a small fish in a small pond and then stomping around like toddlers to make sure everybody knows they are there.

I still have memories of wanting to tell some of my tenured professors that they needed to grow up and find bigger things to cry about. I was in my 20s, they were all 40+.

At least IME, the younger non-tenured professors were less likely to engage in this pettiness because they had, as you have pointed out, a lot more to lose.

I mean the perceived viciousness mostly stems from power imbalance (when it’s between tenured and untenured) and having a lot to lose. Two tenured assholes clashing is at best unpleasant.

No: the will to power is greatest because you have (supposedly) power over the creme of the creme.

As silly as that but Nietzsche had it right: the will to power is one of the primordial forces.

the creme of the creme are all working for big companies making big dollars. But I could imagine people in academia thinking they are the a big deal.

Ehh, I’m old enough now that I can LinkedIn/Facebook search my old classmates and see how the crème of my crop turned out. Everyone was smart but the genuine honest-to-god genius from our class is a research chemist at MIT. The richest is a former childrens’ toy maker (STEM-education startup exit).

What is that based on?

AFIAK, the leaders in almost every field are in academia, where they have the independence to do research, not earn profits, and where their research has the greatest impact because their employer doesn't hide it from the world as long as possible.

Speaking from experience, the "not earn profits" part isn't actually true anymore in many places.

Are you saying that there is pressure on academic researchers to earn profits?

I noticed a major university announcing some new center to nurture businesses to monetize IP. I remember when universities tried to generate knowledge and value for society.

That's not really fair either. There are plenty of brilliant people in academia who don't care for big paychecks from corporations.

The ones I talk to all complain about the poor pay, relative to how much people make in industry. A few make the jump, especially those whose discipline allow them to transition easily to industry.

But try to be a tenure-track professor in biology at a mid academic institution. You are fed up, you want more money, money you think you deserve. Where do you go at, say, fifty years old?

That's just for very, very specific fields.

For instance, for something very practical, market-ready, basically Engineering I'd say you're correct. For basic research, not at all.

Well ya know, industry solved Fermat’s Last theorem numerous times but only managed to scribble it in the corner of their performance review.

Industry solved it as many times as the academics have

Fermat's last theorem has been solved back in the 90s. But it's obviously just one example to illustrate the main point, it's not about whether it specifically has been solved or not.

And also what industry would pay someone to solve that problem. Super hard problem of little industrial value.