And the war on the University continues:
Congress is taking the first steps toward pressuring colleges to maintain ideological balance in the classroom, a move that supporters insist is needed to protect conservative students from being graded down by liberal professors.
A resolution attached to the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, which has passed the House Education and the Workforce Committee and is expected to be taken up by the full House in September, tells colleges to grade students on the basis of their mastery of subject matter rather than on their political views.
The provision makes no mention of specific political leanings, but represents a victory for conservative student groups who have been arguing for years that American universities are bastions of liberalism seeking to impose their liberal orthodoxy on dissenters.
The measure is not binding, but some higher education analysts caution that it is not to be taken lightly. Colleges and universities, they say, should consider this a warning shot from a Republican-controlled Congress fed up with the liberal academy.
”If the universities don’t move, all that’s going to happen is this will build,” said David Horowitz, a conservative author and a driving force in the free speech movement that inspired the resolution. ”They’re sitting on a tinderbox. Now we have resolutions. I guarantee you, if they thumb their noses at this, there will be statutory legislation.”
Bad bill. Via Jesse Taylor at Pandagon, who is quite exercised about this, which is only slightly ironic considering the a priori dismissal of a scientific study yesterday by feminist caricature and Pandagon co-author Amanda Marcotte. Perhaps we could implore Jesse to pass on some of his respect for the academy to his co-author, and maybe then she will actually read studies before labeling them ‘cute,’ ‘self-serving,’ and ‘sexist,’ even if on first glance they appear to conflict with her dogmatic worldview.
*** Update ***
And then you have things like this:
In addition to recruiting minority and female professors, especially in the sciences, the university could use the money to hire white men “who, through their scholarship and teaching and mentoring, in some way promote the diversity goals of the university,” she said.
As Zywicki notes, these guys aren’t helping us “protect academic freedom from bad ideas such as David Horowitz’s Academic Bill of Rights.”
Read the whole thing.
And maybe this will help some of you understand the corrosive impact of identity politics that Jeff Goldstein has been talking about for the past few days. Probably not.
And just go read this.
ppGaz
The plaintiffs would have a better time convincing anyone that they had a case, if they could produce evidence, other than anecdotal whining, that the problem actually exists.
Surely my fans here will know that I am not making this up: When I was in college, I challenged the established view all the time, even more obnoxiously than I do now. And I was never “graded down” for it. Luckily for me, the integrity of the academic process was strong enough to save me from grade oblivion.
Radical feminists are, of course, idiots, but that’s no reason to pass a law like this.
Otto Man
I think we should also push through legislation urging colleges to grade students on their mastery of the material and not their favorite ice cream flavors. Because we have as much evidence to support that bullshit theory as we do Horowitz’s little crusade.
What a moron. I’ve never been happier to see someone reject the left. You folks can have him.
Walker
I know some conservative professors who would be unhappy about this bill. Before coming to Cornell, I was a professor at a conservative Catholic school. At this school a professor “graded-down” a student for referring to early Middle Ages as the Dark Ages. Why? Because this was the period of the Catholic church’s greatest power and cultural influence, and hence this term is nothing more than a protestant pejorative.
mac Buckets
Regardless, the Resolution only states that students should be graded on mastery of the subject, not on ideology. Who could possibly have a problem with that concept? I just wish it had been in effect when I took Intro to the Evils of That Idiot Ronald Reagan (POLI 201).
Another Jeff
“What a moron. I’ve never been happier to see somoeone reject reject the left. You guys can have him.”
Well, the left got David Brock in that trade, so i don’t think either side won.
db
Professors/universities are being pushed more and more to thumb their noses at Congress, not because of this (but this will add more fuel to the fire), but because those idiots are cutting federal funding more and more for our university systems.
This is coming at a time when American universities are being supplanted by European and Asian universities as the leading institutions on scientific research (cannot find the link to the story right now).
I am not saying we should throw money at anything and everything as a solution. But government support of higher (and lower) ed during the Cold War certainly helped us fight and win that battle. We are not in an old Cold War anymore. But I would certainly say we are in an economic Cold War with Europe and Asia now. The ability for us to compete with those regions requires stronger support of our educational institutions rather than threats that “if you don’t teach what we like, we’re going to cut your [already paltry] salaries.”
That’s getting off topic a bit here but I think this story is emblematic of something much larger with the GOP’s current view of teaching and research at all levels of ed. For the current GOP, it seems education ought to be guided by divine inspiration from above.
JonBuck
“But what harm can it do?”
Those who support this measure have the burden of proof that is it needed. Beware the Law of Unintended Consequences.
neil
So now we know why Republicans don’t approve of Affirmative Action: it’s not a stupid _enough_ idea.
mac Buckets
(Diet Coke out the nose) Are you new to Washington?
neil
By the way, my apologies to John that nobody at all has taken his ‘feminist caricature’ bait.
rilkefan
Mr. “Krugman is an ideologue” asks for respect for the academy…
Geek, Esq.
The big problem–and it is a giant, gaping one–with that EP/voice study is that it doesn’t measure why men’s brains process that information in such a manner.
Is it hereditary or from social conditioning?
Also interesting would be to see how women’s brains processed different voices.
Thomas
mac buckets,
Nobody thinks that the Resolution, taken at face value, would be bad. It’s the assumption, a really good one, that for Horowitz and his little playgroup it will mean basically that all facts are political, and thus no one should be held accountable for what they don’t want to hear.
And Neil, I’ll take it: John is dead wrong. The study Amanda commented upon was taken to mean something else. The study dealt with the way the brain imagines the voice saying neutral words. It didn’t have anything to do with how men understand female voices.
John Cole
And Thomas has it ass backwards.
The study was not sexist or cute or any of the things Amanda attributed to it. She would have known that, but she didn’t read it. Instead, she relied on a horribly flawed (and, it appears, sexist) report in the media, and from that report decided the study was sexist. Why?
Because Amanda has her narrative, and anything that threatens it must be stricken down with the utmost ferocity. Even if the threat doesn’t actually exist.
Zifnab
So seriously, I’ve attended the University of Texas for three years now and I’ve heard this bitching across campus. Professor “A” is too conservative and gave my grade a C- because I wrote about environmental protection. Professor “B” only gave me a B on this paper because I mentioned a Flat Tax. Professor “C” is just being a bitch because she’s a women’s lib’er and my paper said a woman’s place is in the home – specifically the kitchen.
And to be fair, yeah, there’s a degree of bias across campus. Of course, it’s also across the political spectrum. Most people resolve this problem the same way they’ve resolved it for years in academia, business, and politics – by telling their bosses/graders/professors/candidates what they want to hear. Sure enough those Cs become Bs and those Bs become As and those angry red scribbles about you being a mysognoist pig go away.
What disgusts me is the “sit down and shut up” attitude that comes so strongly from the right these days. There’s no marketplace for ideas anymore. Academia has been the heart of the progressive world because it has been the sanctuary for hypothesis. You go to church to hear dogma. You go to college to hear new ideas. And the new ideas are at the heart of progressivism. It’s the philosophy that we can do one better, that if we just change things or tweak things or revolutionize we can make the world a better place. When you start mandating what can be said and what can be heard, you effectively drain the idea pool down to the dregs of what Washington wants people to think.
And as a college student that pisses me off.
SeesThroughIt
To any and all conservatives who are crying like a child with a skinned knee over this total horseshit “liberal bias” in academia, I say this forcefully and from the bottom of my heart:
Shut the fuck up.
To help you learn how to do this, I will gladly offer you a complimentary subscription to Shut the Fuck Up! magazine.
ppGaz
Well, we could start with anecdotal evidence.
My wife responds with my vocalization of “yes,dear” by lowering her voice, softening her tone, and acting favorably toward me. For this reason, I say it early, and often. I haven’t won an argument with her since 1992.
However, if a woman says it to her, she feels patronized.
Go figure.
Defense Guy
Nope, not going to happen in this country. There is a problem in some schools, but legislating fairness of thought is a project that is laughable. In fact, it is as equally absurd as some of the rules used by universities that got us in this mess to begin with. So, at least insanity is the rule of the day from both sides.
Bernard Yomtov
I think rilkefan nailed it.
John Cole
Rilkefan and Yomtov- Sorry to confuse you with two ideas at once, but I have never protested any of Mr. Krugman’s work as an academic, nor do I want anything to do with critiquing his classroom grading procedures.
I am, however, certainly allowed to discuss his ideological stances on the editorial page of a prominent newspaper.
ppGaz
Which rules are those that result in students being “graded down for their views?”
Facts and figures, please.
Kimmitt
You know, folks who use “reality-based” as an epithet aren’t going to do well in academia. Just saying.
JPS
John:
Stupid law, yes. But come on: “war on the University”? I think that’s a bit overwrought.
Seesthroughit:
“To any and all conservatives who are crying like a child with a skinned knee over this total horseshit “liberal bias” in academia, I say this forcefully and from the bottom of my heart:
“Shut the fuck up.”
Stirring. Listen, pal, I don’t whine or cry, but the average professor I know these days–and I know a lot–is not only on the left end of liberal, but literally hates anyone who disagrees. How do I know? Because they express it freely.
See, they rarely ever meet someone who disagrees, so they feel free to uncork rants of truly remarkable hatred, on the assumption that anyone smart enough to be one of us, couldn’t possibly disagree with them.
From where I sit in academia I encounter so much hatred over honest disagreements I no longer try to make the case that reasonable people with good intentions can hold my views. I used to, when I was under the naive misimpression that these people were open to an exchange of ideas, that they could disagree without hating the person they disagree with. Without calling names, like “you fucking Nazi”, or saying things like, “Oh shut the fuck up, I don’t want to hear this fucking right-wing bullshit” in response to a rather meek objection that the draft bill was introduced by opponents of the Iraq war, not by its supporters.
I’m trained to keep my mouth shut at faculty dinners, because I’d get a more open and friendly reception for my views over at DailyKos.
I don’t ask for your sympathy and I don’t want it. But don’t insult me by claiming that there isn’t a liberal bias in academia, when (I’d bet) what you’re really thinking is: Good. You deserve it.
James Emerson
Not to be concerned. The outrage expressed by Boston.com is commensurate with their inane denial that the hotbed of Northeastern liberalism somehow wasn’t responsible for acts of Confessional buggery…or something like that.
Personally, I feel sorry for the college conservatives not being able to compete as free thinking academic souls. But then the disadvantages of inherited wealth and purchased political power have enfeebled their mental dexterity. It’s so much easier to get Uncle Karl start whispering something about black babies born out of wedlock or the hegemoic possession of academia by those elitest liberal, than it is to actually define what a conservative is now-a-days..or maybe that IS what a conservative is now-a-days.
It apparently wasn’t enough that their corporate daddies got them into the hallowed halls of Ivy League academia by flashing a bank statement or detailing one’s social connections, because those damned liberals running the place had the temerity to actually ask them to defend their ideas beyond their conservative rote and bowing upbringing. That will not do. Time to call in a few favors from Congress.
Bad liberals…they should know better than to demand stiff competition in the marketplace of free thought without the halter of an affirmatively active conservative thought tax. It’s as if they’ve become capitalists of free thought…and THAT probably makes them communists or jihadists or whatever the latist ists is. But whatever…academic competition is manifestly dangerous to the health of modern day conservatism…whatever that has become.
JPS
Few professors I know would think James Emerson’s comments unfair in any way.
ppGaz
I think the issue on the floor is students being “graded down for their views.”
Is this an actual problem, supportable with facts, or it is it just something being whined by students who don’t like their liberal teacher?
jg
So the government is going to make law what is allowed to be taught at school? Isn’t that a little fascist?
Its not a war on universities. Its a global struggle against learning.
Kimmitt
That’s because they aren’t. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the conservative movement and its leadership have become intellectually and morally bankrupt over the past few years.
I have an acquaintence of mine who is a right-winger. He’s a really decent guy; does community theater, would give you the shirt off of his back. But when discussing politics, he’s a lying hack. We eventually had to stop talking about politics, because I got tired of having to google every other sentence that came out of his mouth to prove that it was clearly false. There’s something about modern conservatism that does this to people.
Defense Guy
The same crowd you yells that the right is pushing it’s agenda on them in the public arena, simply cannot comprehend that the left could do this in acedemia. I would call it willful ignorance or my shit don’t stink syndrome.
James Emerson
JPS says:
That would include the raving lesbian whose course in creative writing I was failing due to an ongoing spate of hostilities relating to my Vietnam era stories. But it would also include the sweet young PHD candidate who liked me for my writings, and taught me a few unforgetable lessons about feminimism as well.
SeesThroughIt
Zing!
db
Conservatives do have intellectual roots, too… heard of Leo Strauss? (one of the best, best books I read that discusses this with some clarity is the Right Nation (by a couple of editors for the Economist))
GOP leaders ought to recognize that the consequences of what they are trying to do could very well stifle any thought that could benefit their own side.
ppGaz
Actually, it’s more likely to be the “whose ox is being gored” syndrome.
In the grand scheme of things, I find the hijacking of government to advance a bigoted, religious, war-touting, fiscally irresponsible, gay-bashing agenda to be a really big concern, and the politics on campus to be less so.
All due respect, you seem to be more interested in finding every opportunity to point out that liberals are flawed than in acknowledging that the people who are running the country are ….. well, you get the idea.
Off Colfax
You know, all I can do while reading this is think “Sheeesh, that Ward Churchill thing still has the far right riled up…”
But in a closer reading of the article, I think it goes way deeper than that, with Churchill being the most recent match to the tinderbox. Conservatives have been complaining for years about the liberal bent in the groves of academe for a very long time. And, in truth, there are some professors that are literally off the map with their political stances. However, some of those very same professors were the ones that were challenged frequently, then turned around and challenged us right back, leaving us the better for it.
Certainly there are many tenured professors out there that have their own pet theories regarding the state of reality… But how is that any different than what Hugh Hewitt, Rush Limbaugh, and Michelle Malkin have? The only difference is that the bloviators of the right are in private practice and the far-left professors are (mostly) employed by the state. (I say mostly due to the fact that there are a good number of private universities out there and many of the professors furthest from the mainstream will gravitate to schools like Grinnell, Harvard and the like… Look it up.) This goes against the grain of the little-government thought process, doesn’t it just?
And being a Democrat, all I have to say about Pandagon’s Amanda is that she cuts my blog-reading time by an amount equal to how much she writes. On occasion will she bring out a gem of semi-original wisdom, but the vast majority of what she posts is the standard tripe of the far left. And I don’t have time for either the far left or the far right these days.
(NOTE: All definitions of “far left” and “far right” are determined from the moderate portion of the spectrum. To those on the far ends, those categories get way too crowded.)
JPS
ppGaz:
“I think the issue on the floor is students being ‘graded down for their views.'”
And I have no comment on that, aside from saying this is a stupid and unnecesary law. What moved me to argument, slightly off-topic, was the snide comment by SeesThroughIt that there is no liberal bias in academia.
“Actually, it’s more likely to be the ‘whose ox is being gored’ syndrome.”
And on this I agree with you exactly. With this twist: How many of those who dismiss claims of bias as whining, paranoia, or excuse-making for not clearing thebar, would be so sanguine if the shoe were the other foot? if 90% of professors were Bush voters? if the typical political disagreement between faculty members were whether Ann Coulter is great, or whether she’s too restrained by her sense of fair play to give those damn lib’ruls the hell they deserve?
KC
I just graduated from grad school. I did have a professor who was liberal, brought her politics to class a little too much, and really annoyed me. However, people in the class challenged her about a lot of stuff and the class actually turned out to be pretty entertaining. Moreover, she was hardly an incompetent or unfair grader. I wrote a research paper about grants offered by the oil industry for environmental research that she thoroughly critized, but gave me an ‘A’ on. In all, her ‘bias’ turned out to make the class interesting and didn’t really effect her grading, as far as I saw, at all.
Just to mention it, I also had an openly conservative professor too. He was an asshole, not because of his politics, but because of his attitude. The first day of class, after we sat down, he didn’t say anything. Not a word. He just sat there looking at us. After sitting in tense silence for about ten minutes, someone finally raised their hand and asked what we were supposed to be doing, and he replied by saying, “discussing American history. Now do it.” I still learned a lot from him though, although his class was far from enjoyable.
As for the other professors I had, I never really got their politics and never really cared either.
Defense Guy
That should be the goal, at least IMO. If it isn’t a class on politics, then there is no reason for it to come up.
SeesThroughIt
I suppose, then, that you have real proof of this alleged bias?
Allow me to clarify “real proof:” Something factual. Not a conservative student bitching about a low grade. Not a conservative student bitching that what’s being taught in class doesn’t line up with his/her own beliefs and/or a conservative student demanding that the curriculum reinforce his/her beliefs. Not merely teachers who are liberal.
Considering how often conservatives piss and moan about “liberal bias” in anything and everything, and considering how often this “bias” simply turns out to be “people saying stuff conservatives don’t agree with,” this whole “liberal academic” bullshit looks like the little boy crying wolf yet again.
Look, one of the big examples of “liberal bias” came from a college not to far from me: Foothill College. The conservative student complained that he received a low grade on a paper because he espoused conservative beliefs. In actuality, it was just a shitty paper–poorly written, full of unsupported opinions (that’s unsupportED, not unsupportABLE–catch the difference there?) presented as fact, and not even answering the question the paper was supposed to address. His grade was the grade he earned for his work. His politics and his professor’s politics had nothing to do with it. And this story is pretty much how all these allegations of liberal bias turn out.
Grumpy Physicist
That should be the goal, at least IMO. If it isn’t a class on politics, then there is no reason for it to come up.
Really?
Economics. Evolutionary biology. Climatology. Cosmology and the age of the Universe. Anthropology. Toxicology. Zoology.
Even dull-as-mud Accounting, if they ask the question “should we expense stock options?”
Lazy students will fix on anything they can as an excuse for why their grades are poor (“he’s a liberal! She’s a right-winger! My TA is a foreigner and I can’t understand him!”). Now why would congress, and right-wingers in general, be SOOO sympathetic to those student’s plight? I wonder.
So when do we see the companion bill, from those always fair and right-thinking republicans, that outlaws *employment* discrimination based on political views? “The boss is a huge liberal! If we disagree when he praises Teddy Kennedy, he’ll fire us! Put a stop to it!”…. .mmm, hmm. Any minute now, right?
JPS
SeesThroughIt:
“I suppose, then, that you have real proof of this alleged bias?”
I didn’t write “discrimination”, I wrote “bias.”
Miriam-Webster online: “a personal and sometimes unreasoned judgment : PREJUDICE”
You ask me for proof? Reread my comments. Gee whiz, why don’t you prove to me that there’s an atmosphere around you.
And again, I submit that if the professoriate were the mirror image of what it is–if, generally, they were not only overwhelmingly conservative, but prone to blurting out how much they hate liberals, and tarring all liberals with slanderous stereotypes–you might not be so quick to dismiss the complaints as whining, or demand specific proof of misconduct.
No, I’m sure you’d trust a bunch of pissed-off Michael-Savage-listening conservative professors to never, ever let their politics enter into their professional judgments. You might even say how lucky their liberal students are to be challenged that way, and taught to think like that.
rilkefan
“Rilkefan and Yomtov- Sorry to confuse you with two ideas at once”
See, John, you’re being ideological, not logical.
BTW, you ought to note that Amanda (who I certainly agree is way quick with “sexist”) writes that the content of the article will stand or fail on its scientific merit.
John Cole
Rilke- Amanda condemns the study as sexist, then, as an afterthought (probably having read Majikthise), she adds she should probably read the study.
Don;t confuse the opening line of this post- the war on the university is not simply being waged by folks like Horowitz. The gender idenity crowd and the left are waging their own side of the battle, as well.
Syme
So Liberalism now = thought crime? It was only a matter of time I guess :-(
Defense Guy
Grumpy Physicist
I’m sorry, are you saying that these subjects are examples of fields of study in which the politics of the professor should even come up? How so? If you really feel this way, how do you propose to get around the fact that there are often 2 reasonable opposing opinions?
SeesThroughIt
OK, here’s what you’ve said, in a nutshell. “I think there’s an anti-conservative bias because that’s what I believe based on some arguments with professors.” Yeah, that certainly is an airtight, fully substantiated argument. Well backed up, plenty of evidence to support your claim. Perhaps you can use that as an academic paper on anti-conservative bias, get a crappy grade, and complain about how your crappy grade is due to anti-conservative bias. That’d be a neat trick.
Remember: The plural of “anecdote” is not “data.” And you don’t even have a plural of anecdote, just your own vague impressions, which you’ve given very little reason to hold credence in.
Well, when you actually demonstrate that this is happening to conservatives across academia, I might be willing to entertain your little notion. Good luck!
Rome Again
Making a claim that if the role were reversed then 90% of professors would be Bush voters obviously means you have verifiable and obvious proof showing that 90% of professors currently vote Democratic, correct?
Kimmitt
I would expect bias to come up in discussions of normative Economics, but a good professor would be careful to distinguish between positive and normative discussions. Still, “Why the heck are we studying this stuff?” is a valid question, and it does lead to some discussion of politics.
Bernard Yomtov
John,
My point was that much of Krugman’s criticism of Bush, which you identify as ideology, is in fact solidly grounded in his academic specialty, and in actual data and logic.
You certainly are entitled to discuss his editorial stances on the pages of a prominent newspaper. But that’s not what you did. You issued a blanket personal condemnation – ideologue, mean-spirited, boring. Not one word of actual substantiated disagreement with anything he has said.
This is in line with general conservative criticism of Krugman. Little sensible disagreement, lots of insults, because he dares to point out unpleasant realities that contrast with right-wing fantasies, and is sometimes a touch impolite about it.
Defense Guy
Let us not forget that Krugman has about the worst record of being proven correct of any columnist around today. Not only does he show his ideological leanings often, he is wrong in his assertations far more than he is right.
Defense Guy
Not sure how that happened, meant to go in another thread.
JPS
RomeAgain:
I wrote imprecisely. When I was in college, a poll of our professors showed that 92% of the then-current faculty had voted for Dukakis (that was the most recent election). I was a small college, and ought not to overgeneralize. I do not, however, believe my college was an outlier. I seem to recall most polls I’ve ever seen of university faculties showing something on the order of 80 to over 90% of them being left-of-center.
Incidentally, I know (SeesThroughIt) there are people who’d whine just because their professor disagrees with them or challenges their view. I’m not one of them. Fact is, I loved my liberal professors in college, and love them all the more in retrospect, because they were capable of listening to their opponents, and debating vigorously without rancor; of arguing with what I said, rather than with the nastiest mutation of what I said that they could devise. That’s not something I ever encounter in academia anymore.
Out of 40 or so professors in my current department, I’m one of two who are right-of-center. For any university I visit, any conference I go to, or any visitor I host, comments along the lines of what a bunch of criminals the administration is, and how stupid, evil or both their supporters are, are standard. These comments happen every time, and no one would ever think twice or wonder if anyone present disagrees. It either doesn’t occur to them, or they figure anyone who does is an asshole, and deserves to be offended. It is, simply, assumed that We All hate the rethugs.
So I guess that’s anecdotal, but it’s the culture I’ve been immersed in for a good many years now. You want to argue that I deserve all the abuse I get because conservatives are terrible people and it’s good to see them on the receiving end for once, fine. My whole fucking point is that everywhere I go in academia, I’m surrounded by people who feel that way. Just don’t try to tell me it isn’t so, that it’s all in my head, or that I just start whining when someone disagrees with me.
It’s not that I can’t take reasoned disagreement, it’s that I barely remember what it is.
JPS
[Geez. I was in a small college. Should never type while irritated.]
Barry
Defense Guy Says:
“Let us not forget that Krugman has about the worst record of being proven correct of any columnist around today. Not only does he show his ideological leanings often, he is wrong in his assertations far more than he is right.”
Defense Guy, do you have anything to back that up?
SeesThroughIt
I don’t want to argue that at all, I haven’t argued that, and I have no intention of arguing that.
Really, our fundamental disagreement is that you posit that there’s a prima facie anti-conservative, pro-liberal bias in academia, and I don’t accept that because I have seen no convincing evidence that such a thing exists, so it strikes me as so much crying wolf.
Pelikan
I’d like to chime in here and point out that, on a personal note, I came to add this site to my reading list entirely because Amanda over a Pandagon was annoying the hell out of me. I guess I have not been out of school long enough to be sanguine about young people acting like they are the FIRST to discover whatever the hell ideaology they’re espousing. Radical feminism ranks right up there with libertarians in my book. But John, I’m guessing you’re older than 22.
More on topic, i can only offer personal experience, but most professors I’ve known in the liberal arts would indeed vote democrat, but would also make every effort to analyze any paper in a rational manner. If you got an “F” it’s becasue you were using logic, not the wrong ideaology.
Wow, far-righties using bad logic, now just try and get your head around that one..
Vladi G
The problem with this is that often the student is telling the truth. The student really did get downgraded for mentioning a flat tax (per the example).
What the student, and subsequently jagoffs like Horowitz, fail to say is that the student mentioned the flat tax in a paper that was supposed to discuss working conditions in slaughterhouses at the turn of the century (the last one).
What has happened a couple of times with Horowitz is that he flouts some bullshit example of a student who gets a bad grade on a paper that espouses their conservative views. What Horowitz doesn’t tell anyone is that the answer didn’t come anywhere near the same zip code as the question. Either that, or the student is asked to take a position that conflicts with their personal views, they refuse to take the position, and then throw a hissy-fit about it. “How dare he ask me to take an unpopular position and defend it!!”
Jeff G
Really, our fundamental disagreement is that you posit that there’s a prima facie anti-conservative, pro-liberal bias in academia, and I don’t accept that because I have seen no convincing evidence that such a thing exists, so it strikes me as so much crying wolf.
You don’t accept anectdotal proof as valid or binding, and you’d likely argue that simply because the vast majority of professors in the humanities are registered democrats, that does not reflect a necessary bias in their grading and consideration of other viewpoints… What do you want? Even on those occasions where professors have come right out and admitted their biases and suggested that they were engaging in mere correctives, that is dismissed as “fringe.”
What kind of evidence short of a declaration of prima facie pro-liberal activist bias signed by entire department would you accept as proof?
JPS
SeesThroughIt:
You’ve seen no convincing evidence because you haven’t lived it for years on end. I’d bet you’ve never been insulted in vile personal terms by someone with make-or-break power over your career who, having heard you’re a liberal, decided over wine to demand to know what you thought, then to hate you for answering politely but honestly.
Or warned, by someone who sincerely wishes you well, that the next time we all talk about politics, you should keep your mouth shut for your own good. Because we really don’t want to hear what you think, we miss the good old days when we could just vent and no one argued with us, and you’ll only hurt your career. The last sentence is a direct quote. From a friend.
You try working 80-hour weeks for years on end, in a field that should have nothing whatsofuckingever to do with politics, getting your dream shot, and then going to dinner with your new bosses and listening to them all rant about how those fucking liberals are all a bunch of traitors who want al Qaeda to win. [I find what I just wrote offensive, for the record, but it’s the exact right-wing counterpart to what I’ve been listening to for years.] Oh, ha ha, except you, of course. We know you’re different. Don’t worry, we’d never hold it against you. We’re much too fair and professional.
Now after a few years of that, I’d like to see your reaction when someone says there’s no bias there, you’ve got no proof, you’re just crying wolf.
Jim
The ironic thing about this movement, is that, at least as it relates to private institutions, it is much more difficult for conservative institutions to comply. Few, if any, of the liberal institutions that conservatives hate formalize their biases and few, if any, would tolerate political based grading if it could be proved. On the other hand, I suspect a number of conservative institutions (e.g. religiously affiliated schools) do accept, condone or encourage in a more formal way such practices.
gratefulcub
This is unbelievable.
2 threads.
On this one, liberals are trying to claim that there is no left of center bias in university professors. Anyone that has ever been to a campus knows that, statistically speaking, college campuses are liberal resorts run by liberal professors.
On another, conservatives are saying the the GOP leadership in no way uses racism and homophobia to excite their base and win elections. This is crazier than the 50/50 campus.
If we all admit the obvious……..
Defense Guy
Show me, and make it obvious please. It may be that I am just to close to the thing to be able to see it, but I do not remember the GOP using either tactic in the ’04 elections.
gratefulcub
‘the gay agenda’
‘the sanctity of marriage’
a federal ammendment to ban gay marriage by any state
‘one mother, one father’
Mix togehter with a little evangelical buzz words and you have a homophobic base voting with gusto all over rural america.
Did I dream all of this? Does James Dobson actually exist? Is Rick Santorum the senator from Pennsylvania? Does our president still support the FMA every few months even though he has no intention of trying to pass it? Did dick cheney support the FMA even though his daughter is gay and he doesn’t actually support it personally?
db
I can’t help but think that this whole “ideology in the ivory tower” whining by conservatives (and yes, it is mostly conservatives doing the whining – do I have to back that statement up?) is like me sitting in the rain and crying that I am getting wet.
Okay, let’s agree with the assumption that the majority of academics are liberal. Let’s ask why? There is an inherent selection bias, of course. And it’s something that the conservative whiners would rather cry about than do something about by encouraging more conservative-minded individuals to consider careers in teaching and research.
If such groups can prove to me that the effect of such liberal-mindedness of academia is detrimental to the learning process of students, then I can begin to see the logic of some of the legislative measures they are proposing (just slightly, though).
I mean nothing infuriarates me more than when I hang out with my stock-broker friends and they tell me how GW is the Messiah. Hey, if they are good at padding my 401k, what should I care about what they think so long as they are effective? Why should I care if a college professor wears birkenstocks and pachulli, so long as (s)he is effective at their job?
Defense Guy
I would give you the presidents support of the FMA as being close to what you are talking about. The rest is far more suspect and part of no campaign that I remember.
The talking heads do not count as if they were the politicians themselves.
One other thing. You are missing the proof of cause. Where is the proof that these issues were the reasons voters came to the polls. If you claim ‘moral values’, I’m really going to laugh.
gratefulcub
Moral Values. Defense. Don’t change horses in mid stream. They hated the liberal elitist northeastern rich kid (all true except liberal) with no personality. Abortion. Gay rights. fear of arabs. He is a christian and they didn’t think Kerry ‘really’ was. They thought his economic policy was the best one offered. They like Laura. They hated TerezaHK. They like Longhorn Football. They always vote republican. Their husband votes republican. They hate libruls. They don’t believe in evolution. They don’t know what evolution is. They had to vote for someone. They were tired of universities being so damned liberal.
I don’t know why people vote. I don’t even know what moral values means. All I said is that the GOP tried to use homophobia to their advantage. I have no research data that examines the effectiveness, but my own experiences in the rural south tell me that ‘it didn’t hurt.’ And, GOPers like Rove get paid a bunch of money to make these decisions, and they use plenty of polls to make them.
SeesThroughIt
See, this is the problem. Here’s your logic:
1) Professors are liberal.
Therefore, it simply MUST follow that…
2) Professors consistently exhibit anti-conservative bias in their grading and will always give a conservative student a lesser grade than his or her nonconservative equals.
You are making an enormous leap in logic there. It’s like me saying:
1) JeffG is conservative.
Therefore, it simply MUST follow that…
2) JeffG likes racism, homophobia, misogyny, and bashing anything and everything non-Christian.
Bullshit, right? Right. There’s a difference between disagreeing with somebody ideologically and treating them unfairly, but you make no such distinction, and in fact, you take it as a given, as an indisputable fact, that all over academia, there’s a rampant anti-conservative, pro-liberal bias. I don’t, and I’m saying, “prove it.” So for this question:
I dunno…how about a massive trend toward lower scores for conservatives’ work as compared to liberals’ work of the same quality, for starters? Because that’s the charge you’re making.
As for you, JPS, your story really sucks, and I’m saying that sincerely, not sarcastically. That’s a really shitty set of circumstances, it’s not right, it shouldn’t happen to anyone, and it certainly does help explain your reaction to my comments. However, may I respectfully point out that it is your story and not necessarily a microcosm of the American collegiate experience as a whole?
Jim
If conservatives are serious that they want more conservatives in academia they should advocate for higher salaries for professors. While smart, well-educated, high achieving, hard working liberals are over-represented in academia, I suspect that smart, well-educated, high achieving, hard working conservatives are over-represented (though perhaps not in the same % disparity due to relative sizes of industries) in other areas of our society (e.g. non-academic science, finance).
So why don’t conservaitves gravitate to academia? I believe that part of the reason is that liberals have created a “hostile work environment” for conservatives. There is a certain element that will say “I am not gonna put up with liberals just for a job.” However, I believe the much bigger part of why conservatives don’t gravitate to academia is becuase the pay (in general) sucks. I am not saying that liberals are better people or any other such non-sense. I am saying that, on average, liberals are more likely to take on a lower paying job that requires intelligence, education and hard work than conservatives are on average.
Jess
I have to agree that the radical left has been too dominant in Academia, although their influence is waning. I don’t think they constitute the majority, but they do tend to be the loudest and most aggressive group on campus. I had one radical post-modern feminist try to boot me out of grad school for writing a MA thesis critical of her favorite theorists, but fortunately I had a good deal of support from the other members of the faculty, even some who disagreed with my argument. It comes down to individuals, not voting records; some people have intellectual integrity and some don’t. It’s not something that can be legislated, for pete’s sake.
But I have to argue with how conservatives tend to lump together two (or more) very different types of left-of-center intellectuals. There needs to be a distinction made between those who seek to understand rather than preach (who tend to be traditional liberals, because open-minded questioning is central to the traditional liberal attitude), and those whom I would call radicals who have a specific political/cultural agenda to promote. The former group is a natural fit with a humanist education, just as conservatism is a natural fit with some other professions, and should be supported. The latter is the left-wing version of the Creationists, and has to some degree created a more narrow-minded, dogmatic environment hostile to opposing viewpoints. But overall, debate and disagreement are asset in the academic environment, and should be embraced rather than seen as a problem, despite the resulting messiness. Culture is a constant process of negotiation, not a tradition written in stone. A good education should reveal the stakes and mechanisms of that process, not bury smother it under dogma from either the right or the left.
Rome Again
JPS,
No problem, I was just curious about that 90% number. I’m sure there are more left of center in academia, I was just unsure that it was that high.
Maybe you should try where I live (Naples, FL), I can’t say for sure as I’ve never gone to college here, but I live in a very pro-Republican area and I would be surprised if our college sports that many left of center professors.
Rome Again
Yes, because we know for certain that those elitist liberals make too much already but Republicans wouldn’t be caught dead collecting their salary.
Thanks for verifying the point that money is what makes a Republican jump through hoops.
By the way, Republicans are over-represented in other areas, one is called “BUSINESS”. Where I live it is very hard to find a job in an office (I am an Administrative Professional who got out of the business) that isn’t owned by an active member of the Republican Party (sometimes they even sport pictures of them standing next to Bush).
Pug
I believe that part of the reason is that liberals have created a “hostile work environment” for conservatives. There is a certain element that will say “I am not gonna put up with liberals just for a job.”
So I guess that’s a problem, especially for the 2% of the population that toils in the halls of academe. I guess in the private sector where you always hear the big shots shooting off their mouths about how great Rush Limbaugh was yesterday or how Democrats are all lazy, stupid parasites, it’s OK for the 85% of people employed by private business. That doesn’t constitute a “hostile work environment.
Believe me, every day in offices all over the country when the white-males-in-charge are spouting off about their right-wing politics there are plenty of people lowering their gazes and biting their tongues. They’d love to tell the boss he’s an asshole, but he can do a lot worse to you than give you a C. Of course, conservatives have no problem with this.
James Emerson
***Bingo***
I was wondering if the thread would head in this direction. There are two kinds of “elitists” in the world my friend…those who want to make a discovery or a difference…the Good Samaritans, and those who want to make money and possess power…the Pharisees. They are as different as water and oil…
The Good Samaritans tend to go into areas where the monetary rewards are merely tangential to their real reward, i.e. the personal satisfaction of making a discovery, of making a difference, or of a job well done. Academia is filled with these types…
The Pharisees go on to amass, or attempt to amass, piles of money and personal power. They are entirely self-defined by net worth and influence, and see little beyond their money pile or their social construct as justification for their self-worth. As you can guess, business leaders, politicians, and pirates tend to be well represented by these folks, but I might be giving pirates a bad name here…
JPS
SeesThroughIt:
Aw hell, besides that I’m the luckiest SoB I know. So I shouldn’t complain and I really shouldn’t have gotten so irascible here. Though I said I didn’t want sympathy, I’m grateful for the understanding, and the sense of fair play.
When you put it that way, sure. (And, RomeAgain, you could be right–I don’t know.)
Pug:
I have a very big problem with this, and not because for me the shoe’s usually on the other foot. I have a problem with unwarranted rudeness in general, and subjecting others to one’s opinions when they won’t feel they can talk back is incredibly rude.
Rome Again
But it happens JPS, hence the reason why I deliver newspapers now instead of working in an office. I’m very good with a computer, my phone skills have been praised by customers, I can type 50 proposals a day, but I can’t handle the pro-Republican in-your-face attitude.
JPS
RomeAgain:
“it happens”–oh, I know it, and I’m genuinely sorry. I don’t like it any better coming from “my” side; in fact it bothers me all the more because I feel somehow responsible for them.
ppGaz
More than, say, you are, DG?
Krugman’s list, and yours, please. Compare and contrast. Full disclosure. And of course, others will judge your rectitude, not you. Unless you want to solicity Krugman’s response to your list. Fair is fair.
As you would say, thanks in advance.
epistemology
In fairness, Amanda Marcotte was responding to the spin of the popular press, which she quoted:
That is, she was objecting to the misuse of science for political purposes, by the popular press. Certainly a point well taken. If it were an article putatively demonstrating some biological substrate in white men that could be used as an excuse for treating black men without respect, the issue might have rankled you as much as Amanda. Who certainly needs no defense from me.
John Cole
She continues, even in her latest missive, to attack the study as if the idiotic write-up of the study was accurate.
Kimmitt
And I believe that it’s because an atmosphere of serious intellectual inquiry, along with a pay cut and an expectation that one’s work serve the greater good is basically incompatible with the conservative ideology. Here’s a hint: If the nice, well educated people overwhelmingly support a particular ideology, that might be a sign of that ideology’s compatibility with being nice and well educated, nothing more.
Rome Again
Well I appreciate the concern, thanks, and, I truly am glad that you have remorse for what goes on, but JPS, it’s not YOUR fault, ya know? As long as you aren’t doing this, you’re not responsible, and I don’t expect you to take the blame. It would be helpful though if whenever you see something like this happening, that you open your mouth and say something. That’s all I would hope to expect.
Again, thanks for the concern.
John Cole
Epistemology, from Amanda’s original post:
and
and
From her second post, she starts to clue in:
No, it doesn’t. Which is why her jumping to conclusions about the study, dismissing it outright, all because of an idiotic write-up that is patently absurd is precisely the type of silliness I have come to know and love from Amanda.
FeithHealer
What what what!!! Do I see a (mostly) coherent liberal-conservative dialog taking place here? I thought that kind of stuff was verboten these days. Three cheers to all airbags, keep it up.
P.S. LIBBYS RULE NEO-CONS DROOL
;)
Sinequanon
Well, I just spent (wasted) two hours reading all these posts and links and comments and sheesh! Goldstein is on a rant ( and I posted a long one there), Malkin is a bigot, regardless of her tits or sexual equipment, and making grades because you are conservative is crap. The whole point of university is to expand brain matter and learn how to think and use logic and connectivity and problem solve. If that is all you go away with, you have been successful. If the atmosphere is controlled by a specific viewpoint, no one learns – whether it is conservative or liberal. I am just finishing up another master’s degree myself in my old age and frankly, rarely saw the problem described by this article or threatened legislation. In fact, had it not been for a moonlighting SBC attorney/professor, I would have graduated top of my class! Jerk. He didn’t like my analysis of the Roadless Rule and the investigation I did about Bush and his energy industry appointees to the Ag, Forestry, and EPA, the Presidential Orders, and Administrative Rules those appointees made to thwart the Roadless Rule and related legislation.
epistemology
John Cole:
Following your link to her original post I read the last line:
Obviously the study itself will get much less play than the MSM reports, which I think you will grant are simplemindedly sexist to the point of obscuring the science altogether. Have you read the original study?
John Cole
Epi- yes, as an afterthought, that is there. But look at the rest of the post- it is the study she is damning. Throw in the rest of the nonsense, and it is a pretty hacktacular post:
And no, I haven’t read the post. I will rely on Lindsay Beyerstein’s summation. And unlike Amanda, I won’t come to sweeping conclusions about the study or women in general.
Tapetum
“And no, I haven’t read the post. I will rely on Lindsay Beyerstein’s summation. And unlike Amanda, I won’t come to sweeping conclusions about the study or women in general.” – John Cole.
Um – John? Isn’t that exactly what Amanda is doing that you objected to?
Amanda hasn’t come to any conclusions about men in general, she’s rejecting the ones that the article came to. Also, while I will freely admit that if you read the beginning of the first post, and only that, you could easily come to the conclusion that she was bashing the study. However she makes it very clear at the end of the post, in her comments, in her second post, and in her comments on the second post that it’s the article, not the study she’s objecting to.
Frankly, she’s frothed over the idea that men are being characterized as too stupid. This makes her a ranting feminist how?
John Cole
Umm, no. Amanda is trashing a study before even reading it. She links to a newspaper account, and another person;s interpretation of the newspaper account, and then comes to all sorts of conclusions about men, this type of study, and this study specifically.
I am saying I haven’t read the study, don’t intend to, and that I will rely on Lindsay Beyerstein’s summary, which would lead me to believe the newspaper reports are bunk. By all the accounts I have read, the article linked in Amanda’s piece was most definitely a bit of sexist journalism, but not a sexist study. But Amanda has her worldview, so the fact that it might be a study she doesn’t like trumps reason, and it must be bashed. Count the number of times she trashes ‘EP theories.’
I am not criticizing anything other than Amanda’s rush to condemn a study because it fits her dogmatic view of ‘these kinds of studies.’
Jeff G
Okay. Well having taught in a university and having sat in on faculty hirings and having talked with other teachers, off the cuff, on a regular basis — I’m telling you the bias exists and is often acted upon, sometimes even consciously. You can of course choose to wait for “trend studies,” or hold on to the remarkable assertion that there aren’t more conservatives in academia because they aren’t interested in going into academia (pace the suggestion that the kinds of hardcore ideologues who run humanities departments are hostile to those who don’t think as they do, and so don’t hire them), or that when an overwhelming number of likeminded thinkers with total control over the teaching of certain disciplines gather together, that doesn’t affect their “objectivity”, but I’m here to tell you that’s the way it is.
Believe it or deny it. But I don’t fight it because I enjoy “whining.”
Cutler
Have I been graded down for my politics?
Yes, I believe so. Can I prove it? No of course not.
Have I had to listen to ranting and raving by Che t-shirt wearing geologists, Iranian exchage professors, feminist/marxist transnationalists, Bush = fascist/ Americans are stupid history professors?
Yes.
Kimmitt
Where the hell do all you people go to school? I’m part of a peer group which has, by and large, finished their undergraduate work within the past decade, at hundreds of schools across the country, and this just is not part of our shared experience. I mean, yeah, I had a Commie for my Poli Sci 101 prof, but my Con Law prof was on Newt Gingrich’s speed-dial. And that’s the sum total of my knowledge of my professors’ politics, and I was a Poli Sci major.
Seriously, if anyone pulled anything like that in our Econ Department now, there’d be some pretty serious repercussions. I saw more anti-Affirmative-Action bake sales than I saw Che t-shirts on my professors.
Was I isolated by attending a major midwestern state school?
baronelmo
I did four years at a liberal arts college (does that monicker even get used by schools anymore?), and don’t remember encountering an iota of that left-wing indoctrination that certain conservatives love to gripe about. All the political activity I saw came from the STUDENTS, not the faculty. The big concern among most of the teachers I knew was getting tenured, not persuading the kids to hate Reagan…
I’m convinced that the years David Horowitz spent in the Communist party left him a paranoid nutjob. Does he really believe that our universities are permeated by shadowy societies of liberals who seek to “recruit” innocent freshmen to their odious cause?
Prime material for a comedy sketch, methinks:
“Aw c’mon, Johnny… just say ‘Bush sucks,’ and spit on this Bible… then you can be in our club!”
“Yeah, DO it, Johnny — then let’s go beat up those Federalist jerks on the third floor!”
“Aw, gee… I dunno, fellas…”
You need to relax, man… here — smoke this funny smelling cigarette. Dr. Pirtle gives you these after History 101 if you talk trash in class about free trade.”
…and David Horowitz wakes screaming.
Richard Aubrey
My kids didn’t get graded down by liberal/radical profs. My kids and their friends knew how to, joked about, smiling, nodding, agreeing, regurgitating, getting the grade, and moving on, laughing.
I happened to be at a party in East Lansing, when I asked a young woman what she did. I thought it was “securities” but it turned out she was a China specialist looking into national security.
I hadn’t offended anyone up to that point, so I said my view of US foreign policy is.
If you have nice stuff, we’d like to buy it.
If you have money, we’d like to sell you our stuff.
If you fuck with us, we kill you.
She looked around and said, “That’s what I believe, but I wasn’t sure I could say that around here.” There were no professors in the building, but the perceived malign influence of the professoriate was still apparent, at least to her, who had been in school long after I had graduated.
Either she was hallucinating, or she had something to go on.
Take your choice.
P.S. For the purpose of the party, substitute “mess” for “fuck”. It was Christmas Eve.
Luddite
Has no one noticed the conservative vs. conservative fight going on at Patrick Henry College?
For two years, Jeremy Hunley sorted magazines and shelved books as a library clerk at Patrick Henry College in Purcellville.
He enjoyed the work, thought the recently founded college’s students were smart and polite and believed in the mission of the school: to mold academic superstars into Christian leaders. A born-again Christian himself, Hunley said he felt at home.
Jeremy Hunley was forced to resign from Patrick Henry College because his belief that baptism is necessary for salvation contradicted school doctrine. (By Gerald Martineau — The Washington Post)
That is, up until the day last year when he was told to resign or be fired. The reason: He believes baptism is essential for salvation.
College administrators told Hunley, a member of the Church of Christ, that the belief put him at odds with the school’s statement of faith, which he was required to sign before taking the job. According to the 10-point document, salvation is found only through faith in Jesus Christ.
Patrick Henry was founded in 2000 to be an Ivy League-type college aimed at attracting academically gifted home-schoolers. The school’s president talks unabashedly of birthing a new generation of conservative leaders who will reclaim the country from years of liberal sway. It is a bold mission that has attracted national attention.
Skeptics, however, suggested that the ouster of a low-level evangelical employee over theological differences could spell trouble for the school, spotlighting an exclusionary attitude that could turn off prospective students and make employers wary of graduates.
Cutler
“Where the hell do all you people go to school? I’m part of a peer group which has, by and large, finished their undergraduate work within the past decade, at hundreds of schools across the country, and this just is not part of our shared experience. I mean, yeah, I had a Commie for my Poli Sci 101 prof, but my Con Law prof was on Newt Gingrich’s speed-dial. And that’s the sum total of my knowledge of my professors’ politics, and I was a Poli Sci major.
Seriously, if anyone pulled anything like that in our Econ Department now, there’d be some pretty serious repercussions. I saw more anti-Affirmative-Action bake sales than I saw Che t-shirts on my professors.
Was I isolated by attending a major midwestern state school?”
Ironically, a schol with one of the most Conservative student bodies in the country, yet the typical leftist leaning faculty.
Any other questions?
I can relate some other fantastic stories about Marxist sympathizing social historians from UCLA if you’d like?
Cutler
Here’s another one of my favorites, a Russian language teacher who said in all seriousness “I already escaped the Soviet Union, isn’t escaping one fascist country enough for one person’s life? How will I do it again?”
Of course, she did stupidly assume I was friendly to her political views, so perhaps that one isn’t fair.
Cutler
Of course to be fair I should probably say that I’ve had many non-political professors, even a Republican or two. One that could even be called reactionary.
However, it is most often the leftist Professors who make it a public part of their identity. Some are crusaders, some are just naive fools who think everyone sees it the way they do. The latter are obviously a result of a system in which they are rarely challenged.
Just one students personal experiences. Why don’t other people notice?
Some personal hypotheses: In spite of many people’s egos, you have to be both politically aware at a young age, and strong enough intellectually to challenge the people who are supposed to teach you, and are automatically assumed to be your intellectual superiors. It is not merely crusading, but crimes of omission and one sided presentations.
If I have a history class in which the entire treatment of American policy in Latin America in the 1970s consists of Hitchen’s “The Case Against Henry Kissinger” and similar materials, how many students are able enough to even know there is another side to the story? How many are going to make the effort to go out of their way and find it on their own?
Some will make the effort, but the bottom line is of course they shouldn’t have to in a true educational institution. Of course, you could then say go elsewhere: that is of course what I personally did, but found it is pretty difficult ultimately to avoid the fools.