next »

[warmaiden]

I'll weigh in on this one as a rarity...a conservative academic librarian. I have not been a victim of garnering poor grades because of my views - if they made it into my academic work, they were supported with academic evidence and rigorous logic. It doesn't affect what materials I provide to researchers and students, as that would be unethical. Much like religion, you CAN separate your political views from your work, particularly if exercising them too strongly will inhibit the very work you are doing. (Case in point: teaching.)

It is a matter of balance - do conservatives have a place in academe? If they do rigorous research, can substantiate their work, and are productive members of society encouraging our students to think and examine, then they have just as much a place in Academe as liberals. If nothing else, as we teach our students, they should be exposed to the entire spectrum of thought...maybe it will get them to do some philosophical examination of their own!

[philbest]

Maybe arguments about the relevance of liberal/leftwing philosophy versus conservative/rightwing philosophy, are missing the wood for the trees: that is, that now, in the 21st century, we have enough historical track record of the outcomes of the ideologies concerned, to be able to make intelligent judgements. The real scandal of the dominance of leftwing philosophy in acadame, is the sheer scale of denial involved regarding real-world facts.

If I was to go to a college of automotive design and engineering, I would be seriously betrayed by a curriculum that empowered me to do nothing better than to re-invent the Trabant. Thus it is in Socio-economic/political studies: why, why, why, turn out a whole lot of little Castros with which to try and fill positions of influence and power in Western society?

[zharkov]

If I was to go to a college of automotive design and engineering, I would be seriously betrayed by a curriculum that empowered me to do nothing better than to re-invent the Trabant. Thus it is in Socio-economic/political studies: why, why, why, turn out a whole lot of little Castros with which to try and fill positions of influence and power in Western society?

Why do conservatives confuse Marxism, socialism, and liberalism?  It is akin to saying the conservatives are fascists, which is -- of course -- very wrong.

Liberalism, on my view, is the political philosophy of J.S. Mill and the economics of J.M. Keynes. Perhaps Dewey, for education and philosophy.  Liberals believe, for example, that markets work pretty well for most things, but that the government has a role to play when the market fails.

[polemeo]

Very few conservatives would be willing to work for my salary.

     
     This comment belies the very misconceptions that Bauerlein himself attempts to explain. In his attempt to explore conservative history, Bauerlein almost completely ignores the religious and social thought that has lead to the development of modern conservatism. If, indeed, conservatives are obsessed with monetary gain, who do so many serve in the military? This argument reminds me of the one often aimed at proponents of the second amendment. In that arena as well, gun activists are accused of supporting violent acts. In reality, police officers ( who are far and above the most likely to get shot at) are strong advocates of relaxed gun control laws. Bauerlein makes a similar mistake. By ignoring the religious and social history of conservatives, he relegates them to the position of money-grubbing businessmen. In reality, conservatives espouse the free market because it supports their history of self-reliance, not because it brings wealth. Conservative thought’s reliance on personal initiative is the true cause of its misinterpretation. By advocating social and economic self-determination, conservatives alienate themselves from any establishment. Also, the apparent economic success of many conservatives is the result, not the cause, of their views.

[daurousseau]

they have just as much a place in Academe as liberals. If nothing else, as we teach our students, they should be exposed to the entire spectrum of thought...maybe it will get them to do some philosophical examination of their own!

And we should all preserve freedom and the enrivonment. Tell me, please, when Academe exposed students to the entire spectrum of thought? What passes for the political spectrum is the spectrum from A to B. You don't hear much from Monarchists and Fascists. Barely a peep from the Revolutionary Socialists. Just a bunch of people arguing about words and occasionally branching out to legislate behavior. Take a look at the discussion threads here. There's no one who could not fall neatly into the category Republican and Democrat.

[pyshnov]

I read the comments. I did not read the article, that would be too much.
Please, read the comments again. Does anybody have the feeling that I have: this talk is ridiculously confused because, over the years, the label "conservative" (as well as "liberal", etc.) was made to represent different things. My feeling is that there is an urgent need to drop labels and to start talking about concrete individual issues. Who knows, may be some new system of political thought will be born? At one time, I liked the "populist", but it was (I think, deliberately) very quickly made to represent a mud again.

[dr_stones]

My syllabus regularly contains Hayek, Milton Friedman, George Stigler, and essays from button-down types like G. Will & W. F. Buckley.

'Course, they also get to read Marx.

[daurousseau]

Conservatives' Place in Academe: hmm. The higher reaches of Medical School Administration? College of Business? Nuclear Engineering? Power Plant? Campus Security? Classics? Residence Life? Cataloging? Landscaping? School of Pharmacy? Campus Committee for Yesterday?

[resipsa]

Liberals believe, for example, that markets work pretty well for most things, but that the government has a role to play when the market fails.

So do conservatives.  Are you claiming that conservatives don't believe market failure exists?  I'm quite conservative and I've never taught an econ student such a thing.  Even the most laissez-faire capitalists don't make such claims.

[gastr1]

Liberals believe, for example, that markets work pretty well for most things, but that the government has a role to play when the market fails.

So do conservatives.  Are you claiming that conservatives don't believe market failure exists?  I'm quite conservative and I've never taught an econ student such a thing.  Even the most laissez-faire capitalists don't make such claims.

Huh. I guess I need to stop watching Fox News and listening to Grover Norquist and Ron Paul.

[college_grad]

Many times, activist monetary & fiscal policies cause as much trouble as they are intended to fix.  Even though I hold that position, I don't disagree that certain government functions like the rule of law, right of property, and protection from physical crimes like violence & theft are pre-requisites for any functional market economy or free society.  There are a few vocal libertarians who would probably want the police force privatized, but I don't see that type of thinking having much impact on the broader conservative voting group.

[fizmath]

Liberals believe, for example, that markets work pretty well for most things, but that the government has a role to play when the market fails.

So do conservatives.  Are you claiming that conservatives don't believe market failure exists?  I'm quite conservative and I've never taught an econ student such a thing.  Even the most laissez-faire capitalists don't make such claims.

Huh. I guess I need to stop watching Fox News and listening to Grover Norquist and Ron Paul.

If you knew anything about those people then you would know that Paul does not belong in the same sentence with those other two names.

Anyhow, I can only speak from my experience and observations.  There are few conservatives in academia mostly because few go to grad school and even try to get hired in a university.  Many in the sciences are very apolitical and don't get too active or bothered by current political events.   

I suppose if you had a national reputation as some important conservative theoretician then you might suffer some discrimination in certain departments and/or schools.  I've never witnessed any meaningful blackballing of someone for having conservative views.  I also think the whole left/right dichotomy is outdated and meaningless.

[chubbytiger]

If you knew anything about those people then you would know that Paul does not belong in the same sentence with those other two names.

Anyhow, I can only speak from my experience and observations.  There are few conservatives in academia mostly because few go to grad school and even try to get hired in a university.  Many in the sciences are very apolitical and don't get too active or bothered by current political events.   

I suppose if you had a national reputation as some important conservative theoretician then you might suffer some discrimination in certain departments and/or schools.  I've never witnessed any meaningful blackballing of someone for having conservative views.  I also think the whole left/right dichotomy is outdated and meaningless.

LOL  I assume that you're in the humanities somewhere?  The majority of science, math, and engineering faculty I know are fairly conservative or libertarian.  Lots of us go to graduate school and quite a few get jobs in the academy.  I think that you've forgotten that most higher degree holders do not work at universities, but in the private sector - especially those in the above mentioned fields.  The idea that we're not bothered by current events - I'm not even sure where to begin addressing that nonsense.

As I mentioned at the beginning of this thread, I think that many (most?) of us keep our heads down around other faculty members.  I have no data that the leftist faculty members would hold a grudge against me but, given their very outspoken and often rude comments about conservatives, I don't really want to find out, either.  If that's apolitical, so be it.

[bio_postdoc]

LOL  I assume that you're in the humanities somewhere?  The majority of science, math, and engineering faculty I know are fairly conservative or libertarian.  Lots of us go to graduate school and quite a few get jobs in the academy. 

Actually, most of the biologists I know are quite liberal.  I'm guessing that may be at least partly due to the conservative crusades against stem cell research and teaching evolution; we don't have the luxury of ignoring politics, since it impacts us directly.

[amador]

"Conservatives" have been whining about academia since the creation of academia.  Change a few of the references and this essay could have been written in 1980 or 1950: academia is monolithic, controlled by conformist subversives who hate freedom and America and are poisoning the minds of our children.  I'm a victim, I'm ignored, I'm a victim, nobody listens to my ideas.

Righto, that's been the case more or less since Meleto v. Socrates.  Basically, the argument is "these smart guys refuse to ply before and share the statements of established power, therefore they are a threat to the state and they must be put under control".  Enough to make their less educated constituency believe that they are "for the smaller guy" and enough to scare many academics into staying in their place in order to continue receiving funding.