David says:
I see that Paul Krugman has analyzed the problem and concluded that
the reason conservatives don't do well in academia (other than
self-selection) is that conservatives are creationists:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/05/opinion/05krugman.html?hp&oref=login.
Yeah, that must be the reason.
Creationism doesn't explain why liberals outnumber conservatives in
the humanities and social sciences, but it must be a factor in
explaining the proportions of liberals and conservatives in science.
A soft-line centrist view that reconciles creationism and evolution
-- the view that "[h]uman beings have developed over millions of
years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process,"
which 37% of Americans said they believed in 2001 (Deborah Jordan
Brooks, "Substantial Numbers of Americans Continue to Doubt Evolution
as Explanation for Origin of Humans,"
<http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/current/creation/evol-poll.htm>, 5
Mar. 2001) -- shouldn't be an obstacle to pursuit of science, but a
hard-line conservative view that "God created human beings pretty
much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years
or so," which 45% of Americans said they espoused (Brooks, 5 Mar.
2001), basically nullifies the believers' chance of getting into
graduate programs in science.
Right-wing views on politics and economy shouldn't require faith in
hard-line creationism, though, so secular intellectuals on the
political right (as I believe you to be one) should reclaim
conservatism from religious fundamentalists. Secularize American
conservatism, so to speak, and there will be more conservatives in
science.
To be clear, my complaint is not that there is a disparity in
academia and isn't that unfair to potential conservative professors.
My complaint is that academia suffers from the absence of
conservatives. Speaking from experience (UCSB in the mid-1980s), I
intentionally took an English class from a "critical theorist,"
sociology from Richard Applebaum (a socialist), a grad class on C.
Wright Mills from Richard Flacks (legendary 60s radical),
contemporary political theory from Cedric Robinson (a Marxist),
post-industrial capitalism from a Left perspective, and others I
cannot remember. I wanted to understand the "other side" and had
the opportunity to learn from very smart people. However, if I was
a Lefty and wanted to do the reverse, my options would have been
very limited. There was one Straussian in the poli-sci department
teaching theory, and the econ department was hardcore neclassical
(students in econ 1 were required to watch Free to Choose videos).
Perhaps there were others I was unaware of. But as a practicable
matter, the only way the Lefty could have learned the "other side"
was to go to a non-conservative professor and ask for reading
recommendations, which is obviously not the same as having a real,
live person as a teacher.
I agree with you that students (whether they are on the left, the
center, or the right) would benefit from more intellectual diversity
and more vigorous political debate in academia. A proposal that
there be equal numbers of pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian professors
in Middle East studies, equal numbers of economists of various
schools (from Marxist to Austrian), etc. would be very interesting,
but such a proposal ironically goes against the spirit of
conservatism, which dislikes social engineering.
I just don't think it is good for the university where there are
entire departments where not only did not a single person vote for
George Bush, but no one in the department even knows anybody who
voted for George Bush. It seems very insular and less than ideal
for a university allegedly devoted to critical inquiry.
As you know, I don't have any love for the Democratic Party, and I
really wish that no professor gave a penny to it, but I do think that
Republicans are financially harder on academia than the Democrats.
After all, all colleges and universities -- including private ones --
directly and indirectly depend on tax dollars. If Republicans gave
more money to academia -- through state subsidies to public
institutions, more grants for researchers, more scholarships to
students, etc. -- than Democrats did, even today's Democratic
professors would shift their allegiance, I think.
--
Yoshie
* Critical Montages: <http://montages.blogspot.com/>
* Greens for Nader: <http://greensfornader.net/>
* Bring Them Home Now! <http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/>
* Calendars of Events in Columbus:
<http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html>,
<http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php>, & <http://www.cpanews.org/>
* Student International Forum: <http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/>
* Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/>
* Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio>
* Solidarity: <http://www.solidarity-us.org/>
