How come conservatives aren't a larger part of the intellectual community?

You gotta admit, most of professors and intellectuals and academic deans are liberal.

How come conservative intellectual seems like an oxymoron?

Before this turns into a good-ole-fashioned right/left flame war, just hear me out.

I am not saying conservatives are stupid or liberals are so much smarter. I am just curious why University's aren't more even-handed with more conservative voice.

In fact, on the flip side, why aren't there any loud and proud Liberal Radio Talk Show Hosts that fuel up the left?

 

It's an interesting point.

I'm going to offer a possible answer but I'm not sure it makes sense.

Professors, deans, college teachers are people who have spent most of their life sudying. A lot of them have largely depended on aid to get them to where they are teaching today. Not all, but some have never had a serious job other than teaching. IMHO, college professors are also less in touch with "the real world" and reality. Nothing wrong with that, it's a different view. Sometimes they don't see the cost of what it takes to put something in place. Or they don't see how it takes away personal responsibility to do everything for everyone.

Business people on average depend less on aid from others and tend to be more conservative. They are more independent and want more from the world. They hope that by striving hard, they will get there. They care less about their neighborhood and more about themselves.

Nothing against either liberals or conservatives, btw

 

Well, from what I've seen, a very large majority of historians are conservative. A very large portion of best-selling book writers (in non-fiction and such, you can't judge intelligence by fiction) are conservative.

I think it's just that at least in places like California, it's just those bizarre things at places like Berkley that keeps conservatives from keeping their jobs.

 

I think that fairly equal amounts are liberal or conservative.

You don't become liberal or conservative because of education, it's probably because of your parents.

 

I can't see anything good coming out of this thread in the end.


// lurks

 

I am conservative, and I agree that the more education one has, they are more liberal. To contrast this, the more real life experiance one has, the more conservative you become. I do not think it has anything to do with intelegence. Most of the left is also filled with those that have little education and little money.

I thought that liberals already tried talk radio, it's just conservatives are better at it. I listen to it not because I agree with everything they say, but it gives a different viewpoint from the liberal mainstream media. I also listen to the "Diane Reams" show, and that is way easier to make fun of than Rush or Hannity.

 

Really, CoolGuy? I doubt it, IMO, that is.

Academics are usually intellectuals, and intellectuals tend to "pride" themselves on being able to be revolutionary instead of reactionary. Though I hardly think it's fair to comment on how much life experience makes one conservative or not, CoolGuy.

E_S

 

Before the claim is disputed outright, studies have shown that professors tend to vote for disproportionately liberal candidates and laws.

I actually think it's because liberalism is, in theory, a much better ideology: it's a cleaner, less pragmatic belief system. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's better in the real world...

 

Well, many of the academics I know rightly point out conservatism isn't an ideology per se, it's just a label for reactionary politics. Which is true; initially conservatives were for preserving the social order, in opposition to suffrage and democracy. Some would suggest that hasn't changed but otherwise, conservatism isn't really conservative is it? It's a reactionary form of liberalism.

Otherwise, Bubba, you got it. Theory's great, the self-discipline required is usually absent...

E_S

 

It's my experience, being at University, that the proportions of Leftist/Rightist lecturers tends to drift somewhere around 75%/25%. That 75% are GENERALLY concentrated in humanities and arts subjects (English, Politics, Sociology, etc., and pretty much all of them except history, which seems to be a Conservative subject (mostly because Conservatives are traditionalists and history is the subject expression of this)). Conservatives tend to group closer towards the 'bread and butter' subjects like Maths and Science.

I can't offer any reason for this, except that, within it's ideologies, leftism is much more complex than the Right (fascism and nationalism are easier to understand than, say, Marxism and Anarchism in their economic and social forms). For that reason, since University-types are more apt to study them, and thus understand them, they're better influenced.

I guess it's just one of those inexplicable things. I don't think it means that Conservatives are stupider than Liberals, nor vice-versa, but simply Universities and intellectuals have a history of being left-wingers - this could have something to do with them not being in touch with the real world, or it could be because Universities were the birthplace of reason and progressiveness; both of which tend to be better expressed with the left-wing ideologies.

Then again, look at businesspeople and professionals (doctors, lawyers, etc.). There's a MUCH higher proportion of Conservatives than liberals in that segment of society.

I guess it's because of tradition. A lot of University lecturers are left-wing, so they throw that slant on their teaching. So, when future lecturers go through their classes, they also tend to be left-wing. Same with the middle-classes; a lot come from middle-class homes, and it doubtlessly benefits businesspeople and professionals to support a lower-taxing ideology.

- Scarlet.

 

Universities have been a hot bead of liberal idealism for years. The 60's were the poster child for this. A lot of the Vietnam riots took place on campuses.

Being a conservative strongly rooted in my beliefs before going into college I had no problem picking and disregarding liberal propaganda. However, I think the universities hit it big with those students who enter school not really knowing, or caring, what they believe.

My Political Science, International Relations, and my history professors were all liberals. I think the only one who I could not a liberal, and more of a moderate at that, was my economics professor. Though, comming from a northern Minnesota university what can you expect.

 

I've never met a liberal economics professor. I guess they've all done the math.

AYBABTU?

 

@ AYBABTU

True, true. My econmics professors were all pretty conservative. My humanities, psychology, and other arts teachers were pretty liberal though.

 

Yeah, this guy was a moderate(or independent) I'd say. He had conservative views of the economy, don't get me wrong. However, in just preclass discussions it was clear he was a social liberal.

 

"Before the claim is disputed outright, studies have shown that professors tend to vote for disproportionately liberal candidates and laws.

"I actually think it's because liberalism is, in theory, a much better ideology: it's a cleaner, less pragmatic belief system. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it's better in the real world..."

i totally agree w/ you on this one. i'm a moderate liberalist myself by the way. i have nothing against true conservatives (buchanan and mccain to name 2) by the way. i just despise the conservatives that work w/ corrupt bureaucrats and the despicable corporate elites. i strongly believe that education/intellect has very little to do with being conservative or liberal. whoever said that those with more life experience tend to be conservative was quite off. what does life experiance have to do with wanting to maintain the status quo?

cheers!

 

my 4 economics teachers were all bleeding heart liberals. does this mean much? maybe, maybe not. who knows?

cheers!

 

AYBABTU, how do you explain economist Paul Krugman?

 

Also, keep in mind, that conservatives prefer to actually DO things vis-a-vis the intellectual route. Not that there are not conservative scholars - look at the Heitage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute, Competitive Enterprise Institute, CATO, and the Center for Security Policy (all of which are fine think-tanks).

But more likely, you will find a conservative providing a good or service via business than in academia. Or in the military (but the military has its share of great thinkers - John A. Warden III has provided the best refinement in the theories of applying air power in war).

 

Heh... I haven't met him, 7.

AYBABTU?

 

Here is a reason why: perhaps some Deans apply an ideological litmus test prior to hiring. Here is a little case in point: a black Nebraska football coach was not allowed to coach at Stanford because of his Christian beliefs. For all the "diversity" rubbish I hear about on a daily basis, there ought to at least be some ideological diversity. I suppose skin color and gender are what they really mean when they talk about "diversity".

 

The Center for Security Policy is indeed a great think tank. And, largely non-partisan in their work, which, if you ain't American, is a good thing!

However, Obi-Wan McCartney's point remains. He asked why they aren't a larger part of academia - that is, why aren't there more of them. I think JediFlyer got it - they're in the business community.

E_S

 

Here is a reason why: perhaps some Deans apply an ideological litmus test prior to hiring.

I don't know about football coaches, but for academics, it doesn't work that way. When departments have positions to give out, they look around for the most qualified postdocs and sometimes industrial professionals they find. That's all. I'm not saying that there are no politics involved in the decisions, because academia is a grade-A political circus, but I don't think personal ideologies are usually a factor.

That being said, the intellectual set does place a lot of value on liberalism, since it's approximately equated with open-mindedness and acceptance of change, something all people who consider themselves smart want to pretend to have. This isn't to draw general conclusions about how smart people of different politically ideologies are, however, because of course the lower-class, most downtrodden segments of society are usually also quite liberal because it's liberals who promise them the most.

 

I don't know about football coaches, but for academics, it doesn't work that way. When departments have positions to give out, they look around for the most qualified postdocs and sometimes industrial professionals they find. That's all. I'm not saying that there are no politics involved in the decisions, because academia is a grade-A political circus, but I don't think personal ideologies are usually a factor.

Oh, that REALLY depends on the department, I think - particularly departments like history and minority studies.

 

I think the main difference is that lefties try to appeal to the emotions while 'conservatives' tend to see logic, not hype.

 

What does that have to do with why Conservatives aren't more prevelent in Universities?

And both sides of politics use emotion AND logic to get their messege/agenda out.