Confession of left wing intolerance

[Independent voter]

Those on the far left can often be just as bad as those on the far right, it's only the issues that are different.

The article is mostly about academic situations where consevatives are a rare breed. It makes you wonder if a student's education wouldn't benefit by at least hearing a few consevative views.

The author points out that 18% of Sociology professors identify as communists, lol.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/op...tolerance.html

I’ve been thinking about this because on Facebook recently I wondered aloud whether universities stigmatize conservatives and undermine intellectual diversity. The scornful reaction from my fellow liberals proved the point.

“Much of the ‘conservative’ worldview consists of ideas that are known empirically to be false,” said Carmi.

“The truth has a liberal slant,” wrote Michelle.

“Why stop there?” asked Steven. “How about we make faculties more diverse by hiring idiots?”
Continue reading the main story

To me, the conversation illuminated primarily liberal arrogance — the implication that conservatives don’t have anything significant to add to the discussion. My Facebook followers have incredible compassion for war victims in South Sudan, for kids who have been trafficked, even for abused chickens, but no obvious empathy for conservative scholars facing discrimination.

The stakes involve not just fairness to conservatives or evangelical Christians, not just whether progressives will be true to their own values, not just the benefits that come from diversity (and diversity of thought is arguably among the most important kinds), but also the quality of education itself. When perspectives are unrepresented in discussions, when some kinds of thinkers aren’t at the table, classrooms become echo chambers rather than sounding boards — and we all lose.

Four studies found that the proportion of professors in the humanities who are Republicans ranges between 6 and 11 percent, and in the social sciences between 7 and 9 percent.

Conservatives can be spotted in the sciences and in economics, but they are virtually an endangered species in fields like anthropology, sociology, history and literature. One study found that only 2 percent of English professors are Republicans (although a large share are independents).

In contrast, some 18 percent of social scientists say they are Marxist. So it’s easier to find a Marxist in some disciplines than a Republican.

The scarcity of conservatives seems driven in part by discrimination. One peer-reviewed study found that one-third of social psychologists admitted that if choosing between two equally qualified job candidates, they would be inclined to discriminate against the more conservative candidate.

Yancey, the black sociologist, who now teaches at the University of North Texas, conducted a survey in which up to 30 percent of academics said that they would be less likely to support a job seeker if they knew that the person was a Republican.

The discrimination becomes worse if the applicant is an evangelical Christian. According to Yancey’s study, 59 percent of anthropologists and 53 percent of English professors would be less likely to hire someone they found out was an evangelical.

[Underverse]

Part of the assumption of this article is that conservative and liberal ideas have equal merit.

Let me give you some insight into this supposed source of discrimination. If someone is a radical evangelical Christian, it's likely to affect and inform their work, especially in the humanities. If I was asked to choose between two candidates, one of whom was this radical evangelical Christian, I too would give the evangelical less consideration, on the grounds that their personal beliefs has a reasonable likelihood of interfering with their work.

With Republican ideology, it's much the same. And let's be clear - we're talking about social issues, not economics (given that this article is about humanities departments). Classically republican social ideologies are abysmally outdated and have less merit than liberal social ideologies in general.

That being said, there aren't a lot of situations where ideology is made clear during job interviews, so this is probably much less of an issue than the article makes it out to be de facto.

[Gwennie]

I'm a liberal, and here's my perspective. There's some areas where liberals are right about science, such as evolution and global warming (though plenty of conservatives agree with the science here, too), but we (I'm a liberal) don't have the monopoly on reason, and there's areas where many liberals aren't so on the side of reality, such as alternative medicine, organic farming, fear of gmo food, anti-vax (all bunk). Probably nuclear power, as well.
Social issues we tend to be right on. As for economic theory, it's an area that's a lot more subjective, with lots of room for compromise and negotiation. But people aren't idiots for believing things I don't.

[Garnier Fructis]

That being said, there aren't a lot of situations where ideology is made clear during job interviews, so this is probably much less of an issue than the article makes it out to be de facto.

I wonder how much of it can be attributed to conservatives just not looking for academic jobs.

[Endus]

It's also largely an American thing, and I'd venture that a lot of the current state of affairs has to do with how far to the right the Republican Party has shifted over recent decades. It's less to do with left versus right, since the Democratic Party is moderate at best, if not leaning into the right themselves, and more to do with the particulars of each party's specific platform.

There's a fair bit of backlash here in Canada from the academics in the sciences, against the Conservative Party, for instance, because of that party's lockdown on scientific communication and support from the government (attitudes that have been reversed with the Liberal Party's election). Again, not down to left/right, but specifics of party policy.

[Garnier Fructis]

Probably nuclear power, as well.

The left's fear of nuclear power is pretty ridiculous, yeah. Pointing to old, badly designed and badly maintained reactors which led to catastrophe in places like Chernobyl is quite like pointing to the state of commercial aviation in the 70's and claiming that current aviation is just as unsafe (which is definitely false).

[Endus]

The left's fear of nuclear power is pretty ridiculous, yeah. Pointing to old, badly designed and badly maintained reactors which led to catastrophe in places like Chernobyl is quite like pointing to the state of commercial aviation in the 70's and claiming that current aviation is just as unsafe (which is definitely false).

See, this is why I don't like people using labels.

I'm pretty left-wing, and I'll freely admit that. I'm also pro-nuclear-power. We use it extensively here in Ontario. Nice and relatively clean.

[Garnier Fructis]

See, this is why I don't like people using labels.

I'm pretty left-wing, and I'll freely admit that. I'm also pro-nuclear-power. We use it extensively here in Ontario. Nice and relatively clean.

I got tired of writing qualifiers like 'many.' I'm in the same boat as you (except that I don't live in Ontario), but I still generalized. Because I'm lazy.

[Templar 331]

I get the feeling that this recent "regressive" movement is just the pendulum swinging in the other direction. During the Bush years you had intellectual liberals being brow beaten by conservative Republicans constantly. Fox News spouting ridiculous "facts" in support of Bush and O'Reilly talking down to liberal minded people who disagreed with him. Almost eight years into the Obama administration and liberals seem to be the ones empowered. Now with a new generation in the drivers seat things are headed into the opposite direction.

From my understanding, colleges have always been liberal leaning. After eight years of Bush and conservatives being emboldened with patriotism after 9/11, these liberal places are more reclusive now. We've seen what radical conservative Republicans want and I guess we're to afraid to let those ideas take root in any fashion. Not that I'm supporting that in any way. Ideas should be discussed and weighed on their own merit.

[Bodakane]

Maybe the right wing would find a stronger foothold in academia if they started understanding and then accepting scientific evidence in things from evolution to homosexuality to climate change.

Its pretty typical of the current conservative mindset to complain about higher learning and science not accepting them all while not accepting higher learning and science.

Its the same mindset that claims Christianity is persecuted in the US then turn around and claim we are a Christian nation.

[Garnier Fructis]

Maybe the right wing would find a stronger foothold in academia if they started understanding and then accepting scientific evidence in things from evolution to homosexuality to climate change.

This is relevant only in a few fields, though, and mostly not the ones talked about in the OP.

[Super Kami Dende]

Most Right Wing people I know aren't religious.

Many Left Wing people I know are religious.

Why are conservatives always labelled as evangelical?

[Wells]

I get the feeling that this recent "regressive" movement is just the pendulum swinging in the other direction. During the Bush years you had intellectual liberals being brow beaten by conservative Republicans constantly. Fox News spouting ridiculous "facts" in support of Bush and O'Reilly talking down to liberal minded people who disagreed with him. Almost eight years into the Obama administration and liberals seem to be the ones empowered. Now with a new generation in the drivers seat things are headed into the opposite direction.

From my understanding, colleges have always been liberal leaning. After eight years of Bush and conservatives being emboldened with patriotism after 9/11, these liberal places are more reclusive now. We've seen what radical conservative Republicans want and I guess we're to afraid to let those ideas take root in any fashion. Not that I'm supporting that in any way. Ideas should be discussed and weighed on their own merit.

I have yet to see anything to make me think "regressive" is any different than "SJW" with new branding TBH.

[Templar 331]

I have yet to see anything to make me think "regressive" is any different than "SJW" with new branding TBH.

I won't argue that it isn't because it is. We are talking about the radical left at any rate.

[Hammerfest]

I'm pretty left-wing, and I'll freely admit that. I'm also pro-nuclear-power. We use it extensively here in Ontario. Nice and relatively clean.

Yep, personal experience is probably the best eradicator of leftism. (I'm pro nuclear power as well, btw... living/working on a nuclear sub will do that.)

[Endus]

Yep, personal experience is probably the best eradicator of leftism. (I'm pro nuclear power as well, btw... living/working on a nuclear sub will do that.)

Nuclear power isn't a right-wing concept. You're being ridiculous.

[Independent voter]

The theory is that right wing people are interested in making money so if they get an advance degree they aren't likely to teach, they'll head for private business. Leftists are more idealistic and willing to sacrifice for the greater good.

[Hammerfest]

Nuclear power isn't a right-wing concept. You're being ridiculous.

Oh it's VERY right wing in the US. All anti-nuclear power activists are leftists down here.

[Dendrek]

There is no doubt some amount of partisan discrimination in education, but I think the biggest factor in the lack of conservative representation is actually that conservatives generally do not seek careers in teaching (or if they do, they stick to largely "conservative" leaning fields).

It's a bit contrived to suggest that a percent of professors not "supporting" conservatives getting a job is equivalent to conservatives being denied those jobs. Many of those who wouldn't support a conservative getting the job likely have nothing to do with the hiring process in the first place.

[Allerius]

Social issues are inherently subjective and people analyze them through the lens of ethics and morality. Ethics and morality come from philosophy, where liberals and conservatives vary in what assumptions and schools of thought they believe in. People often forget this though and start to think their side is objectively right (it's not). Saying that conservative views are worse than liberal ones is like saying that chocolate ice cream is better than vanilla. You can have your preference, but other people have their preference as well.

And before you say moral relativism is bs, convince me that anything is bad without the argument coming down to 'muh feels'. Sure as a society there are feels that the majority will agree on, but don't think your feels are objectively superior to other peoples' feels.