Is it a "problem" that there are so few political "conservatives" in the American academy?

Hume

Verified User
That someone is a “conservative” is as relevant to a faculty appointment as the fact that they prefer the Rolling Stones to the Beatles, or rock climbing to chess. Political tastes deserve as much consideration as other personal characteristics when it comes to hiring scholars, which is to say, they deserve none. (Indeed, to consider political tastes at all is illegal at public universities, one of the problems with “diversity” statements.)

 
That someone is a “conservative” is as relevant to a faculty appointment as the fact that they prefer the Rolling Stones to the Beatles, or rock climbing to chess. Political tastes deserve as much consideration as other personal characteristics when it comes to hiring scholars, which is to say, they deserve none. (Indeed, to consider political tastes at all is illegal at public universities, one of the problems with “diversity” statements.)

Of course it is a problem. This is why universities are leftist indoctrination sewers.
 
Look who's talking. This was no debate. Just a stupid assed thread. Your a jackass.

The insult battle with Hume is starting up so this thread is toast now, but just as an aside. You claim you were successful in fighting against the "indoctrination". What area were you in?

I was in the sciences and I really didn't experience any overt political stuff. Even in the humanities classes I took I don't recall any attempts at "indoctrination".
 
One of the great ironies in academia is the best way to be a diversity hire is to be against diversity hires. Universities are so desperate to hire conservatives, it is the one great diversity a job applicant can have.
 
One of the great ironies in academia is the best way to be a diversity hire is to be against diversity hires. Universities are so desperate to hire conservatives, it is the one great diversity a job applicant can have.
Yes, some academics have made that argument.
 
Back
Top