Below is my column in The Hill on the recent poll of university professors in this election. It speaks volumes about the composition of higher education today.Here is the column:The 2024 presidential election is shaping up to be the single most divisive election in our history. The public is split right down the middle with almost every group splintering between former president Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. There is, however, one group that seems almost unanimous: professors.
A new survey of more than 1,000 professors shows that seventy-eight percent will vote for Harris and only eight percent will vote for Trump. Other than a poll of the Democratic National Committee, there are few groups that are more reliably Democratic or liberal.
For anyone in higher education, the result is hardly surprising. The poll tracks what we already know about the gradual purging of departments around the country of conservative, libertarian, and dissenting professors.
Indeed, the lack of political and intellectual diversity may be turning some donors and even applicants from higher education. With failing revenue and applications, universities are starting to re-embrace commitments to neutrality on political issues.
Some, however, are doubling down on advocacy and orthodoxy.
In an op-ed this week, Wesleyan University President Michael Roth called on universities to reject “institutional neutrality” and officially support Kamala Harris. Calling neutrality “a retreat,” Roth compared Trump’s election to the rise of the Nazis and insisted that schools should “give up the popular pastime of criticizing the woke and call out instead the overt racism.”
He added, without a hint of self-awareness or irony, that “we should not be silenced because of fears of appearing partisan.”
In my book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I discuss the intolerance in higher education and surveys showing that many departments no longer have a single Republican as faculties replicate their own views and values.
So not only are professors voting en mass for Harris, Roth would have the schools themselves work openly for her election.
That ideological echo chamber is hardly an enticement for many who are facing rising high tuition costs with relatively little hope of being taught by faculty with opposing views.
There are obviously many reasons why faculty may reject Trump specifically, but this poll also tracks more generally the self-identification and contributions of faculty.
A Georgetown study recently found that only nine percent of law school professors identify as conservative at the top 50 law schools — almost identical to the percentage of Trump voters found in the new poll.
Notably, Roth acknowledged that the current lack of intellectual diversity in higher education had become so extreme that there might be a need for “an affirmative action program for conservatives.”
However, he and others continue to saw feverishly on the branch upon which we all sit in higher education in calling for even greater political advocacy.
There is little evidence that faculty members have any interest in changing this culture or creating greater diversity at schools. In places like North Carolina State University a study found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans 20 to 1.
Recently, I had a debate at Harvard Law School with Professor Randall Kennedy on whether Harvard protects free speech and intellectual diversity.
This year, Harvard found itself in a familiar spot on the annual ranking of Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE): dead last among 251 universities and colleges.
Harvard has long dismissed calls for greater free speech protections or intellectual diversity. It shows.
The Harvard Crimson has documented how the school’s departments have virtually eliminated Republicans. In one study of multiple departments last year, they found that more than 75 percent of the faculty self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.”
Only 5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
Consider that, according to Gallup, the U.S. population is roughly equally divided among conservatives (36%), moderates (35%), and liberals (26%).
So Harvard has three times the number of liberals as the nation at large and less than three percent identify as “conservative’ rather than 35% nationally.
Among law school faculty who have donated more than $200 to a political party, a breathtaking 91 percent of the Harvard faculty gave to democrats.
The student body shows the same bias of selection. Harvard Crimson previously found that only 7 percent of incoming students identified as conservative. For the vast majority of liberal faculty and students, Harvard amplifies rather than stifles their viewpoints.
This does not happen randomly. Indeed, if a business reduced the number of women or minorities to less than 5 percent, a court would likely find de facto discrimination.
Yet, Kennedy rejected the notion that the elite school should strive to “look more like America.”
It is not just that schools like Harvard “do not look like America,” it does not even look like liberal Massachusetts, which is almost 30 percent Republican.
Our students are being educated by faculty taken from the same liberal elite of just 26 percent of our nation.
Some sites like Above the Law have supported the exclusion of conservative faculty. Senior Editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” by arguing that hiring a conservative law professor is akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism to teach at a university.
The result is that law students at schools like Harvard have relatively few faculty to reflect the views of half of the judiciary and the majority of the Supreme Court.
Likewise, having a faculty that ranges from the left to the far left further marginalizes the small number of conservative students.
The impact of this academic echo chamber is evident in surveys showing that 28 percent of Harvard students engaged in self-censorship — a figure doubling since just 2021.
Given my respect for Professor Kennedy, I was surprised that he dismissed the sharp rise in students saying that they did not feel comfortable speaking in classes. Referring to them as “conservative snowflakes,” he insisted that they simply had to have the courage of their convictions.
This ignores that they depend upon professors for recommendations and their challenging the orthodoxy at the school can threaten their standing.
Moreover, Kennedy defended cancel campaigns or “disinvitations” of speakers as a form of free speech. As students see faculty supporting the cancelling of conservative or libertarian or dissenting speakers, it is hardly an invitation to speak freely yourself in class.
There was a hopeful aspect, however, to the debate. Before the debate the large audience voted heavily in favor of Harvard’s position. However, after the debate, they overwhelming voted against Harvard’s position on free speech.
It is an example of how exposure to opposing views can change the bias or assumptions in higher education.
There is little likelihood that Harvard or higher education will change. It is like the old joke about how many psychiatrists it takes to change a light bulb. The answer is just one but the bulb really has to want to change.
Academics like Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley law school, have denounced conservative justices as mere “partisan hacks.” Other faculty have joined in claims that Trump and his supporters are “fascists” out to destroy democracy. It is only likely to get worse after the election.
The political polling of professors reflects the near complete cleansing of colleges of conservative faculty. The question is whether donors or applicants will continue to support an echo chamber that has become ideologically deafening.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Up thread some distance a commenter says “Afraid to compete? No. How do you compete against old stale ideas from conservatives? ”
This unwittingly describes the evolution of a society enthralled with “progressive” ideas. A society that evolves sensibly is one that is experimental, if you will. It carefully adopts new ideas in response to a reason– I.e. a problem to be solved. It then evaluates the response, and if the new idea doesn’t solve the problem, or if it actually makes the problem worse or creates now problems of its own, well, a sensible society would discard this “new idea”.
However, our commenter suggests that as solutions are adopted they become the stale ideas that conservative defend. Not that they don’t work well, but that they are stale.
This is a prescription for the failure we see in societies embracing progressivism. Evolution becomes the endless revolution — revolution for the sake of revolution. It seems the people most entranced by this constant overthrow of stale ideas are the very folks a sensible person would keep away from power — reckless, impatient, imprudent, full of themselves and immature. The result is a society without tolerance or charity, without wealth, full of cruelty, which pretty well describes the history of collectivism.
To the point of Turley’s colomn today, the academy is full of people full of themselves, reckless, and immature — it was thus 50 years ago when I was in graduate school, it was when W.F. Buckley made his famous quip about being governed by draw from the phone book rather than the Yale faculty, it was when Cicero said that no idea was so preposterous that some philosopher wouldn’t consider it.
Good luck to us all next Tuesday.
Kevin T Kilty,
Great comment!
Kevin, that’s an accurate representation of what I’m saying. My point is conservative ideas rarely change. Progressivism is the constant exploration of new ideas and seeing if they work or not. Some may not be practical enough or ready for society to accept in a short amount of time. But, that doesn’t answer the question of what new ideas conservatives offer to counter new ideas brought up by progressives or liberals. Progressivism is about pushing the boundaries by offering new radical ideas that are worthy of exploring or considering. That alone is what attracts students and professors to Colleges and Universities where those ideas are debated and explored. Turley seems to lament the fact that there are no conservative ideas or points of view being discussed in those settings. He neglects the fact that, unfortunately, conservative ideas and points of view are not ‘new’ or interesting enough to debate in the same way progressive ideas and views are. Just the fact that progressive ideas and points of view bring about the most controversy and ire from the right is because they are new and radical and they can’t add to it if all they want to do is shoot down those ideas and use them as an excuse to denigrate and demonize others for having those ideas instead of offering their own ‘new’ ideas or views into the discussion.
“Kevin, that’s an accurate representation of what I’m saying.”
LMAO he quoted you, ya imbecile.
This is what Svelaz resorts to every time. He says something incredibly stupid, and spends the rest of the day saying he didn’t say that.
“Progressivism is about pushing the boundaries by offering new radical ideas that are worthy of exploring or considering. That alone is what attracts students and professors to Colleges and Universities where those ideas are debated and explored.”
Here Svelaz again takes the liberty of saying the dumbest, off the wall shlt imaginable. It’s non stop with this idiot.
NO ONE I know went to college for that reason. NO ONE. And I’ve known thousands of college educated people in my life.
A better life after college is what attracts 90% of people to college. The other 10% went there because they were told they should go.
Here ya go, nicompoop….I know you hate facts but…
According to a variety of surveys, students are attracted to college for anumber of reasons, including:
Academic quality
Students and parents consider academic quality to be the most important factor when choosing a college.
Cost
Cost is the second most important factor for students and parents. Students are willing to pay for college if they believe it will lead to a higher-paying career.
Location
Proximity to home is a top reason for choosing a college, especially for community college students.
Financial aid
Financial aid packages and scholarships are important factors for students.
Campus appearance
The appearance of a college’s campus is a factor in students’ decisions.
Campus facilities
Students are more influenced by the architecture, outdoor spaces, and recreation centers on campus than by academic-related facilities.
Career opportunities
Students are motivated to choose a college to develop skills for a high-quality career.
Personal growth
Students may choose a college that offers a challenging curriculum and faculty to help them grow personally.
LMAO where do you see “progressivism” on that list. Even if we take personal growth as a loose approximation (which its
not), its number 8 on the list.
And then there is this. Go find what you claim there. Bwahahahahahaha. Idiot.
Students Approach Admissions Strategically and Practically
https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2022/03/21/survey-student-college-choices-both-practical-and-strategic
“ “Kevin, that’s an accurate representation of what I’m saying.”
LMAO he quoted you, ya imbecile.”
and…….? Was it inaccurate?
“ NO ONE I know went to college for that reason. NO ONE. And I’ve known thousands of college-educated people in my life.”
You went to college decades ago. Courses offered today like CRT or other “woke” subjects did not exist. Of course, that wasn’t the norm when YOU went to college. We are not talking about YOUR college years. We are talking about college today.
“ According to a variety of surveys, students are attracted to college for a number of reasons, including:
Academic quality
Students and parents consider academic quality to be the most important factor when choosing a college.
Cost
Cost is the second most important factor for students and parents. Students are willing to pay for college if they believe it will lead to a higher-paying career.
Location
Proximity to home is a top reason for choosing a college, especially for community college students.
Financial aid
Financial aid packages and scholarships are important factors for students.
Campus appearance
The appearance of a college’s campus is a factor in students’ decisions.
Campus facilities
Students are more influenced by the architecture, outdoor spaces, and recreation centers on campus than by academic-related facilities.
Career opportunities
Students are motivated to choose a college to develop skills for a high-quality career.
Personal growth
Students may choose a college that offers a challenging curriculum and faculty to help them grow personally.”
Where the progressivism? Wow, you have a serious reading comprehension issue. I mean it’s embarrassingly bad. I feel sorry for you.
The reasons you listed are only a few of the ‘many’ reasons students choose Colleges and Universities. That’s just a few of the reasons, they are not listing all of them.
Your attempt at being “smart” went off the rails when you tried to tie what I said into your unorganized rant. That’s why reading comprehension is an important skill to learn and you have not benefitted from that skill. It explains why you resort to insults instead of rational dialogue.
“The reasons you listed are only a few of the ‘many’ reasons students choose Colleges and Universities. That’s just a few of the reasons, they are not listing all of them.”
No, thats all of them. LMAO who the F are you to say? THAT was the survey, moron. The kids named their reasons. You said discussing and debating progressive ideas is the ONLY reason. Its not even on the list! Bwahahahahahaha fool.
“Your attempt at being “smart” went off the rails when you tried to tie what I said into your unorganized rant.”
Just keep pulling down your pants. I’m sorry you cant keep up, truly. Perhaps a better education would have helped.
“You went to college decades ago. Courses offered today like CRT or other “woke” subjects did not exist.”
I NEVER mentioned my college experience, spastic. Are you stupid on purpose? Reading comprehensin indeed.
I made a statement of fact. That your ridiculous comment that the ONLY reason kids go to college is to discuss and debate progressive ideas, was STUPID and factually WRONG. I gave anecdotal support. I gave a survey of students as evidence. It’s not even A reason. And your stupid ass response amounted to “uh-uh”.
“Those arent the only reasons. The students left out their number one reason.”—- Svelaz the Spastic Idiot.
Anonymous, your reading comprehension is getting worse with your emotional outbursts.
“ “The reasons you listed are only a few of the ‘many’ reasons students choose Colleges and Universities. That’s just a few of the reasons, they are not listing all of them.”
No, thats all of them.”
Nope. Pay attention.
“ According to a variety of surveys, students are attracted to college for anumber of reasons, including:…”
“a number of reasons, including”. This means there are more than what was listed. Leaving the number up in the air by stating. “a number of reasons” insinuates there are more than just the listed reasons. When they say “including” means there are more than those. They are not going to list all of them. They just listed the more important ones.
“ I NEVER mentioned my college experience,”
Duh,
“ NO ONE I know went to college for that reason. NO ONE. And I’ve known thousands of college-educated people in my life.”
Who would you know did not go to college for that reason? Your kids? other. People’s kids? Friends? former College buddies? You said, “in your life”. That’s quite vague and I’m sure you meant your college experience including those you know. Because you seem to compare things with YOUR experience often.
Perhaps you should clarify, who exactly were you referring to, I’m not talking about names, I’m talking about friends. Kids? Friends of your kids? or former college buddies? What?
You do have a reading comprehension issue. It gets worse the more emotional you get and it shows. Every response to my posts gets worse with things I didn’t say or imply. Your frustration is just making it worse for you. Perhaps you should calm down a bit and try again.
You’re getting too emotional to think rationally. Witherspoon seems to share that trait with you.
“ That your ridiculous comment that the ONLY reason kids go to college is to discuss and debate progressive ideas, was STUPID and factually WRONG.”
I didn’t say it was the ONLY reason. Quote me saying that. Making things up is not helping your already bad emotional argument.
Progressivism is the constant exploration of new ideas and seeing if they work or not.
What a sophomoric, lame explanation.
Well George, having said that, as your progressivism has been telling us for years that men can menstruate, go enlist Tim Walz to help you insert a tampon. Tell us how pushing that boundary worked out for you.
There’s a reason you’re now called “progressives”.
You called it communism as you fell into lockstep behind Marx’s Communist Manifesto.
When that name left a foul taste in peoples’ mouths, you called called it Marxism.
When Marxism left a foul taste in peoples’ mouths, you called it Socialism.
When Socialism left a foul taste in peoples’ mouths, you started calling it Liberalism.
And now here we are: you call it progressivism.
That was Svelaz the spastic idiot non savant who said that.
He will claim that you have a reading comprehension problem, to deflect from the fact that you just schooled him like a college freshman.
“Afraid to compete? No. How do you compete against old stale ideas from conservatives? ”
This unwittingly describes the evolution of a society enthralled with “progressive” ideas. A society that evolves sensibly is one that is experimental, if you will. It carefully adopts new ideas in response to a reason– I.e. a problem to be solved. It then evaluates the response, and if the new idea doesn’t solve the problem, or if it actually makes the problem worse or creates now problems of its own, well, a sensible society would discard this “new idea”.
Excellent comment Kevin!
It’s not that conservative “ideas” are old and stale, it’s that they are quite often a dose of reality that the progressive does not accept. Conservatives don’t have a problem with fresh, new and/or exciting ideas. That’s how civilizations have evolved. Conservatism is more like the guardrails for that evolution, especially when the progressive “fresh” idea conflicts the “stale” foundational principles of our form of government and security of rights.
Olly, the point Turley doesn’t understand is students today are not interested in conservative ideas they see and hear about every day outside of academia. They know about them and what they are and they already made up their minds about what they don’t like about them. What they want is something new to explore or consider. An entirely different perspective could change or alter their worldview from what they already know based on conservative ideas and views.
They see this all the time on podcasts, blogs, and social media. News, politicians. And they know how bad or impractical they are. That does not mean conservative ideas are not worth exploring or studying. The problem is they want to prefer something different besides what they have already been offered all their lives through family and conservative media. The sad fact remains that conservatives don’t offer anything new or exciting to learn or explore. If some do want to there’s choices all over, They can enroll in Prager U. Liberty University, Brigham Young, or any Christian private college that is thoroughly conservative in their offerings.
the point Turley doesn’t understand is students today are not interested in conservative ideas they see and hear about every day outside of academia.
What makes you believe JT doesn’t understand that? The point you don’t seem to understand that JT has been very consistent on relates directly to these two statements from you:
That does not mean conservative ideas are not worth exploring or studying.
If some do want to there’s choices all over, They can enroll in Prager U. Liberty University, Brigham Young, or any Christian private college that is thoroughly conservative in their offerings.
More “separate, but equal” intolerance funded by the American taxpayers. Oops, that’s such an old, stale idea.
[Unfortunately, it is my humble opinion that the continued deterrence of a valuable higher education, -to wit-, de-emphasizing critical/STEM courses while pushing electives like “History of Slavery in America” or “Options in a Transgendered Society,” –are intended to not only create a dumbed-down class of future revolutionaries, but also to further the equal distribution of wealth among earners and non-earning gimme-gimmes alike.
2024 Halloween Nightmare: There are no more Edisons, Newtons, Carvers, Einsteins, Salks, Curies, Musks, Jobs. Only masses of Bart Simpson families, demanding their next meal. But raiders have already emptied the Lost Ark.
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP73B00296R000200040087-1.pdf
Lin,
Well said. When I see some of our fine leftist friends, grossly obese, pink, blue, green hair, the only thing they can talk about is whatever their DEI degree is in. They never offer any kind of reasonable solution. And the ones they do, as you point out, is taking from the productive members of society and giving their wealth to others.
Lin. So what if students want to have elective studies in the History of Slavery in America or Options in aTransgengered society? Granted some classes are a bit ‘out there’ it’s still about students choosing to attend those classes or that there is demand for them. Schools are going to offer what students want when it’s students that are paying for it. If it keeps students enrolling and bringing in revenue why should it be an issue? It’s a free market philosophy at work. Not a good one, but still it is a basic truth that schools will conform to what students prefer in addition to their primary courses of study. Isn’t that the point libertarians are always arguing? Personal liberty also means personal choice and schools are addressing that by offering courses that conservatives believe are “woke” or “leftist indoctrination”.
Conservatives have their Universities and Colleges. Prager U. Liberty University, Brigham Young, etc. Do those schools include an equal amount of liberal professors and staff? How about staff and professors who identify as Democrats? Should they be required to have a balanced education offering as Turley insists others do?
Is BYU a publicly university, King Straw Man? They, in fact, eschew public funding, other than student and research grants.
For you, every day, its like a contest with yourself to see which post will contain the stupidest shlt.
(sorry, did not see your comment while writing mine, and yes, the first thing that hit me was George’s shallow comparisonn, which triggered my response.)
Its ok, lin, you always have a more eloquent method of calling out Svelaz’s stupidity.
He never sees it, because he has a double digit IQ, but I always leave him room to flounder a little more, because its entertaining. He never disappoints.
It’s like the idiot who thinks he can avoid checkmate of his King vs my King and Rook. So much fun, yet tedious at the same time. Truly a labor of love.
Whether they eschew public funding or not is irrelevant. Turley argues that because the majority of Colleges and Universities lean left or have mostly liberal or progressive professors and faculty there should be an equal representation of conservative and Republican views. The problem is students don’t show interest in those ideas and views. Colleges and Universities, yes even public ones, cater to what students are interested in and there is enough of it to keep enrolling students. They are doing what makes financial sense and meets the needs of a curious and open-minded student body. Conservative ideas are not that appealing to students. It has nothing to do with “purgings” and “eliminations” of conservative professors and faculty. That is Turley’s BS narrative trying to drum up sympathy for a lack of conservative views and ideas in higher education in general. Students who do want to explore conservative ideas and views have options. They can enroll in conservative dominant Universities like Prager U. Liberty U. BYU, etc. They can enroll in online universities or attend any of the private Christian colleges and universities that offer the worldviews and ideas that cater to conservative students. Should those schools offer liberal worldviews? Hire liberal professors and faculty for a well-balanced education?
Its entirely relevant. Get a grip. Everything thing you just said is irrelevant.
Teach whatever you want at your privately funded club. Nobody gives a rats ass.
George: Prager U. is not a university. Liberty and Brigham Young are private, Christian colleges. Your naming of them to spark disagreement is quite amusing.
Likewise, I do not believe Professor Turley was pointing to Mount Holyoke (“a Western Massachusetts private liberal arts college for female, transgender, and nonbinary students.”) or Pitzer ( a “socially responsible and progressive” liberal arts and sciences college”) or Scripps College in his.
Please note his reference to “universities.”
Would you like to reframe your argument? Thanks in advance.
https://www.princetonreview.com/college-rankings?rankings=most-liberal-students
correction: Liberty U is a private Christian university, not college.
Prager U is not a University? So why does it call itself a University? The “U” is short for university. No?
Turley is making an argument based on the false claim that conservative professors have been purged from state universities without offering proof Conservative professors and. faculty have been purged because of their ideology. He argues on the basis that there should be some sort of equal representation of conservative views and ideas in public colleges and Universities because they are public. But you know free market forces are at play here not ideology. State Universities are mostly semi-independent organizations now due to the lower state revenue they receive every year and most are supported by tuition and grants or endowments. They are still required to have financially sound business plans to remain relevant as a university. If students are more interested in liberal arts and issues like gender studies and the History of slavery in America and CRT. Then they are obligated to meet that interest if it means keeping enrollments up. Since a majority of students want to explore those subjects and issues in addition to their regular studies why would they force something they have no interest in? It would not make financial sense if conservative professors offered classes exploring conservative ideas and views were not getting enough sign-ups?
Students have choices outside of state colleges. If they want to study using conservative ideas they have plenty of choices.
From your favorite educator, george, wikipedia
“The Prager University Foundation, known as PragerU, is an American 501(c)(3) nonprofit advocacy group and media organization that creates content promoting conservative and capitalist viewpoints on various political, economic, and sociological topics. It was co-founded in 2009 by Allen Estrin and talk show host Dennis Prager. Despite the name including the word “university”, it is not an academic institution and does not confer degrees. “
“Prager U is not a University? So why does it call itself a University? The “U” is short for university. No?”
Svelaz once again proves what an ignorant spastic he is.
Constantly saying stupid shlt and then doubling down on it.
George: “Prager U is not a University? So why does it call itself a University?”
And why do Marxists like you call men with dangling junk women?
Because they say they’re women?
Lin,
“ Liberty and Brigham Young are private, Christian colleges.”
No, They are Universities, the “U” in BYU stands for University. Liberty University is not a college.
https://www.liberty.edu/
Pretty sure Both have “University” in their titles.
Thanks George, but I already said that Liberty was actually a university, -yet you insistently started out by citing “Prager U” as a university, remember? Pretty sure Prager has “university” in its title. ”
Indeed, as cited above, “Despite the name including the word ‘university,’ it is not an academic institution and does not confer degrees.
My emphasis, as I pointed out, was that Liberty and Brigham were both PRIVATE, CHRISTIAN schools, not like public universities. did you miss that?
Thanks anyway. Sorry if you did.
George disappears when cornered.
Svelaz got all emotional and completely missed your correction, lin. Now he wants to deflect from his IGNORANT assumption that every organization with the word “university” in its name, is indeed a university.
Beahahahahahahahahaha what a stooge.
Interesting paper. It certainly illustrates that politicians lying in their teeth to advance a particular agenda (here, as is often the case, the interests of the MIC, now Deep State) is nothing new. Nor is deliberate MSM collaboration in publicizing and reinforcing those lies.
Interesting paper. It vividly illustrates that politicians lying in their teeth to advance a particular agenda (here, as is often the case, that is the advancement of the then MIC, now Deep State’s interests) is nothing new. Nor is the active collaboration of the MSM to support those lies.
This claim that conservatives are being “purged” from colleges is utterly absurd.
Turley claims that the low number of self described conservatives in colleges is proof that they are being actively “fired” or “purged”. It is the equivalent of saying that blue-eyed people or left-handed people are being “purged” because they represent less than 10% of college faculty. This “proof” by innuendo is utterly ridiculous.
If this claim that conservatives are being “purged” has any validity, then where are these individuals who have suffered this fate. The only legitimate proof that this is happening is to produce the individuals who have been “purged”.
There are about 1.5 million college faculty members in the US. According to Turley’s theory, hundreds of thousands must have been “purged” to account for the alleged predominance of liberals.
Where are these conservatives who have been “purged”?
Why are they not screaming from the rooftops about this injustice?
Why doesn’t Turley provide a list of these individuals?
The answer is, they do not exist. This is a completely false narrative perpetuated by the extreme right.
You may claim that these conservatives are denied college faculty positions in the first place because of their views. If so, there must be hundreds of thousands of them.
Why are they not complaining bitterly about this discrimination?
This is an entirely false narrative concocted by the far right.
Lolol.
Fine, then the decline of colleges, which is following the decline of K-12 public schools, is simply a democrat phenomenon, like all other democrat machinations.
I suppose next we’ll hear you say that in fact, it is the conservatives who are responsible for the decline because they left academia – sort of like Zimbabwe’s complaint about agriculture after all the white farmers “left.”
There is no “decline in colleges”. This is part of a completely false narrative.
The right falsely claims that colleges are “purging” conservatives. There is absolutely no evidence for this.
This false premise is then used as “proof” that colleges are in decline.
If hundreds of thousands of conservatives are being “purged” from colleges, where are they?
Why do we not hear from them?
Even if only 1% of these “purged” conservatives spoke out, there would be thousands of individuals complaining. This is not happening. It is completely false.
If anything, conservatives have been purged from the R party.
Libtard says what?
There is no “decline in colleges” as you claim. This is part of a completely false narrative.
The right falsely claims that colleges are “purging” conservatives. There is absolutely no evidence for this.
This false premise is then used as “proof” that colleges are in decline.
If hundreds of thousands of conservatives are being “purged” from colleges, where are they?
Why do we not hear from them?
Even if only 1% of these “purged” conservatives spoke out, there would be thousands of individuals complaining. This is not happening. It is completely false.
“If hundreds of thousands of conservatives are being “purged” from colleges, where are they?”
Who the fvck ever said there were hundreds of thousands of them to begin with?? Only you.
You’ve assertions have no more basis in fact than Turley’s, perhaps less. At least Turley can compare what’s going on in colleges with what’s going on with Trump, Flynn, Giuliani, Stone, ….
That’s a false equivalence. Anonymous is right. Where are all these conservative professors and faculty claiming they have been purged?
It seems Turley is making things up to rile up his base or he’s way off about the reality of what Academia consists of. Liberal thinkers. There are more liberal thinkers than conservative thinkers and that may just be an unfortunate truth.
“There are about 1.5 million college faculty members in the US”
What are you, fvcking Rain Man? Nice Google AI number you got there. By all means, lets count the volleyball and archery coaches. Idiot non savant.
According to Zippia
College professor demographics research summary. Zippia estimates college professor demographics and statistics in the United States by using a database of 30 million profiles. Our college professor estimates are verified against BLS, Census, and current job openings data for accuracy. Zippia’s data science team found the following key facts about college professors after extensive research and analysis:
There are over 130,377 college professors currently employed in the United States.
49.8% of all college professors are women, while 50.2% are men.
The average college professor age is 46 years old.
The most common ethnicity of college professors is White (66.3%), followed by Asian (11.3%), Hispanic or Latino (10.1%) and Black or African American (7.1%).
In 2022, women earned 94% of what men earned.
16% of all college professors are LGBT.
College professors are 84% more likely to work at education companies in comparison to private companies.
And my personal favorite 80% of college professors come from 20% of the institutions
The remainder of your “analysis” is similarly hogwash
He said FACULTY. Meaning not just professors. It’s including administration, undergrad professors, researchers, instructors, and other lower ranked academics. Not just professors.
Yea, faculty includes the goddam football coach, RAIN MAN. Reading comprehension would allow you to see that was EXACTLY my point. Who gives a rats ass about coaches or lower level faculty?
The point is, he used the google AI number for FACULTY, and then used that to surmise that there are 100’s of thousands of pissed off conservatives out there. Nobody claimed conservative volleyball coaches were being purged, dum dum.
Surveys show the reasons. Deny them if you want. But poor math and inability to analyze statistics shows what a poor education you and the other rain man have.
For instance, 16% of college prfessors are LGBT, DOUBLE the rate of society as a whole.
What is your IQ, like 60?
He meant FACULTY. Not just professors. You purposefully narrowed it down to just professors to make an asinine point that had nothing to do with his because of your reading comprehension problem.
Faculty includes way more than professors. His point was asinine and so are you. We arent talking about volleyball coaches and faculty admin dipshlt. Get a grip.
“According to Zippia”
Zippia ????????
You are joking, right.
There are 5,916 colleges in the US.
If there are only 130,377 professors, then each college has an average of 22 professors.
Colleges have more than 22 departments, let alone faculty.
The National Center for Educational Statistics reports 1.5 million faculty members.
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/csc/postsecondary-faculty
The National Center for Educational Statistics numbers include all teaching faculty, including professors, associate professors, assistant professors, instructors, lecturers, assisting professors, adjunct professors, and interim professors.
Teaching faculty includes coaches, because they teach a sport. Faculty is a useless number for this discussion. USELESS
Faculty includes those teaching sports, and many other things besides professors, Rain Man.
Professors and faculty, not the same thing. I know a lot of college dpartments that dont have a professor, idiot non savant. So yea, we’ll work with your number for professors, when you find one.
Your other premise is that this just happened yesterday, or was a matter of just up and firing conservative professors. Or that there EVER were a substantial plurality of conservative professors in the last 50 years. Your entire argument is one big straw man.
Get a grip, Lawn Boy.
So you know a lot of college departments that don’t have a professor
Care to name a few so I can verify.
You said “a lot”, but give us just 10 departments
with no professor so we can check how truthful you are.
The new york school of cosmetology. Zero professors.
Rain man, you think there are 5k large universities, dont you? Beahahahahahahahahah
“There are 5,916 colleges in the US.”
Hey RAIN MAN
Why dont you go ask Google AI or the NCES how many of those are full time degree granting schools?
Any cosmetology schools in there? Culinary schools? How many departments do they have? How many professors?
How many depertments does Jefferson State Community College have? How many professors.
You’re an idiot like Svelaz, who thinks a 5 minute google search serves you well.
So you are saying that colleges have only 130,377 professors but over a million football, volleyball and archery coaches.
Maybe that is the real reason “colleges are in decline” ???
And associates, and lecturers, and part timers, etc, etc. For instance. The University of Georgia has about 700 professors. They have over 3000 “faculty”.
Jefferson State has only 275 full time “faculty”, and only 33 professors.
FACT
These 5000+ colleges includes MANY small schools and even some specialty schools.
The number this idiot is using is worthless. He sounds like Rain Man, guessing that a candy bar and a car both cost a dollar.
““This joke does not reflect the views of President Trump or the campaign,” Danielle Alvarez, a senior adviser to the Trump campaign said in a statement after the rally addressing the comedian’s comment about Puerto Rico.”
I’m sorry, it exactly reflects trumps feelings. Why was he invited? Did trump not know he was associating himself with racist A Holes? BS. trump knew exactly who he invited.
This is the current state of what used to be the Republican Party. Good luck winning elections with this platform of hate.
Get a grip pinhead.
Otherwise, you are going to have a really bad day on Nov 6th.
I’m sorry, it exactly reflects trumps feelings. Why was he invited? Did trump not know he was associating himself with racist A Holes? BS. trump knew exactly who he invited.
Yes, you are a sorry Anonymous waste of skin and rations – you don’t need to keep reminding us you are.
That ‘racist A Holes’ were unlike those racist A Holes, Moochelle Obama and her wife Beta Male Barry? Who did their grifter appearance about the same time? Yes, their weekend of racist rage at White Trump Bad. The racism of Biden telling black Americans that if they didn’t vote for him they weren’t black? The ongoing, seven days a week racism from the entertainers on The View?
If the Trump campaign was aware those kind of jokes would be told while trying to win over the undecided vote, that amounts to not just stepping on your dick – but first pulling it out of your pocket so you can step on it.
The enormous difference is that the Trump campaign in essence apologized. Not one of the racists pimping for Harris has EVER apologized. Including the head racist, Biden, who has NEVER apologized for his 40+ years of racism in office.
Which means your offense at those remarks is just as fake as Kamala Harris. If you couldn’t spend your time race baiting and channeling your racism on Trump, you’d have nothing to campaign on.
This is the current state of what used to be the Republican Party. Good luck winning elections with this platform of hate.
The KKK and new Third Reich home for todays genocidal Anti-Semitic Democrats… hoping to lecture Republicans on the state of their party.
As for who is going to have luck winning elections… check back with us after the election.
Dear Mr. Turley, I completely agree with GEB. I also have stated that we NEED the marketplace of ideas. How else will the commonplace folks, who often write here, be able to sort out any ideas or thoughts being presented to them? This “marketplace of ideas” was taught during my college experience, and I have never forgotten it. Anytime a group of folks who may think they have the society “all sewn up” with their arguments need to think twice.
” VIRGINIA ASKS SUPREME COURT TO ALLOW REMOVAL OF SUSPECTED NONCITIZENS FROM VOTER ROLLS”
Democrats sued to prevent this from happening, but Democrats and people like Pbinca prefer to close their eyes and commit Public Fraud.
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/virginia-asks-supreme-court-allow-removal-suspected-noncitizens-voter-rolls?utm_source=breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
I think it probable that DOJ will win this one, because the action appears to have been “systematic” and took place with 90 days of the election. Whether politics motivated DOJ to bring this challenge is of course a different question.
SCOTUS may even decide not to hear it.
Yes, unfortunately a bad law is still a law. When I read about the appeal to SCOTUS this morning, my reaction was skepticism that they will accept the case. Virginia also skipped the 4th Circuit, which Youngkin and Miyares had initially said would be their first appeal. I’m sure that they will claim (with justification) that the short time before the election was the reason for going directly to SCOTUS, but I don’t think that line of reasoning helps their prospects much.
Jonathan: The Insider Higher Ed poll is not surprising. University professors will overwhelmingly vote for Kamala Harris and only 8% will vote for DJT. It seems the more educated you are the more you support progressive ideas.
But in every column on this subject you claim the presence of so few conservatives on university faculties is the result of “the gradual purging of departments around the country…”. I have seen no evidence to support your claim–nor your claim that the “lack of political and intellectual diversity” is driving donor decisions. You have never provided any data to support your allegations.
The Q you never answer is why there are so few conservatives on university campuses? The data shows most conservatives are concentrated in economic departments. The stark divide is in the the social sciences and humanities where “liberal” faculty dominate. “Progress in knowledge” is the guiding theme in these departments. Conservatives tend to eschew “progress”–preferring to dwell in past theories and concepts that have been rejected by the vast majority of academics. So conservative tend to avoid the social sciences and the humanities. It amounts to self-sorting, not discrimination or “purging”.
When it comes to politics Republicans, especially the MAGA crowd, are increasingly anti-science and anti-intellectual, e.g., denying climate change is a reality. Republican presidents also tend to be anti-intellectual. Ronald Reagan was a former Hollywood actor. George W. Bush was unabashedly anti-intellectual. DJT, despite claiming he is a “very stable genius”, doesn’t read much–except for the speeches of Hitler. He doesn’t display any intellectual curiosity. He claims climate change is a “hoax”, refuses to this day to accept that he lost the 2020 election and pushed quack remedies during the Covid-19 pandemic. DJT is probably the most anti-intellectual president in recent memory.
In contrast, Obama was educated at Harvard and was the editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review–the most prestigious student position at any law school in the country. Kamala Harris has a similar intellectual pedigree. She went to Berkeley, served for years as an experienced prosecutor and was California’s AG–as well as the elected Senator from the golden state. This probably explains why the vast majority of university professors will be voting for Harris and not DJT.
Dennis offered this: When it comes to politics Republicans, especially the MAGA crowd, are increasingly anti-science and anti-intellectual
And we Marxist Democrats say the science shows us our men can menstruate and get pregnant in comparison! Dennis… will you do the tampon insertion demonstration for the undergrads?
In contrast, Obama was educated at Harvard
Ooohhh… impressive! And after eight years in the White House lecturing Americans that the rising oceans from global warming were about to flood our cities – he dropped $13 MILLION purchasing a mansion a mere few feet ASL and about a hundred yards from the waters edge.
So one of those Harvard educated geniuses lecturing on global warming spent millions buying a mansion that the rising oceans are going to come through the front door any minute now.
What better real life example to demonstrate how Harvard is a fraud and its luminaries like Obama are even more fraudulent – grifters who fleece people like Dennis who stare at him like a calf stares at a teat..
So Turley is worried that university professors who can read and see for themselves what Trump has done to the republican party, is now worried that they can read and see for themselves the damage Trump has done to the nation.
Nice intro. Now, did you have anything intelligent to add?
It took you that long to translate English to your native Russian? And I’m sure your all stocked up on TIKI touch fuel, right? Getting excited for your next march are you?
Fishstick, what has Trump done to the Republican party? Seems to be a very strong party, one that rejects wokeism, forever wars. One that is for putting America and Americans first. It is not like they are the ones cutting off healthy organs or promoting chemical castration. It is not the Republican party is the one letting unvetted illegals in who go on to commit crime like assault, rape and even murder. Care to guess which party is for all that?
Trump supporters are concerned that the Madison Square rally’s rage, disdain and thuggery is distracting from the Trump campaign’s core message of rage, disdain and thuggery.
All I saw was joy.
You sure you werent watching an old boxing match. maybe Ali-Frazier 1?
Now, give your mom her phone back and go clean your room.
Yeah I watched it too and did not see any rage, disdain or thuggery. By contrast Kamala’s message is aimed at courting enraged women who scream profanities in little toddlers’ faces.
OldManFromKS,
In order to even fill a Harris rally, they had to spread misinformation Beyonce was going to preform a concert. They trotted Beyonce out, she mumbled a two-three minute speech and walked off. When it was obvious Beyonce was not going to preform and Harris took the stage, Harris got booed. People who where their, people who paid money to see Beyonce, were pissed. Many of them walked out. The situation was so bad the SS was stressed out. But, hey! The Harris campaign had their money.
How Harris runs her campaign is how Harris would run the country.
MALD
Imagine having to lie like that in order to deceive the female suburban xanax-addled crowd that the puppet you need to install in order to continue waging war around the globe to make money and friends.
You are pathetic. If you had had good professors and a spine, you wouldn’t need to bend over like that.
Neil Bobacon,
Ironic is it not that they are the ones screaming about misinformation, disinformation and malinformation when they come here everyday and spread exactly that.
I sense a weak commitment to progressive identity among over 50% of university faculty. Rather, I sense career-minded conformity — not rocking the boat. If the student body (undergrads and grad students) bring a more balanced (liberal-conservative) open-mindedness to our campuses, I predict that will undo the conformist pressure and isolate the closed-minded progressive faculty, who are a minority.
I can already see this beginning.
Regrettably, I see the opposite. The students are already so far hard-left that they cannot bring any sense of open-mindedness or balance to the university. The only hope is that alumni can clean house in the administration, which can then slowly turn the corner, if they have the guts to do that.
Once again, Pbinca, you are closing your eyes and trying to create a Public Fraud.
* What are the other demographic identifiers within the college faculties? Atheist or agnostic? That’s the true division.
As Musk bought Twitter as a sound horn so too do with colleges. Begin funding and staffing colleges fairly seeking truth and justice. Buy them. After all everything I’d for sale. Staff them with true scholars and not posers like Kennedy.
* is not I’d
Liberal academics are afraid to compete in the competitive world. They want the comfort of being surrounded by those who will not disagree. Their great desire is tenure. Tenure wraps them in a cacoon where they can sleep while earning a paycheck.
Is this an environment that leads to productive people and experimentation? No. It makes people lazy, ignorant and nonproductive, like Gigi, Dennis and George Svelaz.
I should add that one should compare the energy of Trump’s Madison Garden speech and the lackluster Kamala along with all the MSM girls. Trump was like raw meat to Kamala’s Jello.
Afraid to compete? No. How do you compete against old stale ideas from conservatives? What new ideas or views do conservatives bring to the table S. Meyer? Can you name any? Liberal progressives offer new ideas and views that students find appealing or interesting enough to explore. How do you compete against that from a conservative point of view?
Svelaz, you have no ideas. You copy, paste and use ideas from others, but being brainless, these ideas conflict. You want others to do the work for you because you are incompetent.
S. Meyer, nice deflection. Thanks for proving my point. There are no new conservative ideas students would find interesting. You can’t even offer one.
What I want is for you to articulate in your own words what new conservative ideas students would find interesting enough to justify demanding conservative professors or courses. You don’t have to search for anything. Use your own words and what you think are conservative ideas that students would find interesting or worthy of study. Can you do that?
Why dont you name the liberal one that students are all thrilled about, numbnuts?
Man made climate change, you imbecile? You fvcktards have been spewing that one since the 70’s.
Men in women’s sports? Oh yes, that has everyone jumping for joy. In fact, my granddaughter told me she cant wait to get to college and kick some male butt in softball.
Death to Iserael? Oh yes, very progressive! That one is brand new and has ’em dancing in the aisles.
Shouting down and intimidating speakers. Wow, thats a new one, rehashed from the Jim Crow days.
Conservative academics like Musk took us to the moon and will take us to Mars and beyond, while you retards are busy counting the genders.
What a stooge you are.
Anonynous, so you can’t provide a single new consevative idea. Thanks for proving my point.
Trump has had several lately. And Kamala copied them all. That’s new. Bwahahahahahahah.
And you’ve yet to provide a progressive one that has ’em knocking down the University door.
Thanks for proving my point and admitting I trashed yours to hell and back.
Ideas that students would find interesting dum dum, try again.
It’s pretty obvious you don’t haven any to offer. Thanks again for proving my point.
Thanks for admitting you cant name one. I named 4 that liberals bring to class. Which one are students psyched about?
Beahahahahahahaha
Thanks for admitting i trashed your nonsense again.
“S. Meyer, nice deflection. Thanks for proving my point. There are no new conservative ideas students would find interesting. You can’t even offer one.”
Students are interested in learning where their opinions do not cause them harm either physically or grade-wise. Democrats are pushing racism, antisemitism and DEI. That means people as stupid and racist as you are teaching our young, even if the teacher is a pedophile. Getting rid of these ideas and returning universities to centers of learning is all that is required.
S. Meyer, instead of accusing me of being incompetent why can’t you use your own words to articulate one conservative idea that students would find interesting enough to consider?
Just one thing off the top of your head. No work, research, or google is necessary if that would be too much work for you. Give me just one. One new conservative idea.
You ARE incompetent. But don’t blame the prrof on Meyer. That’s all your doing.
Aww look at at that Anonymous rushing to the S. Meyer’s rescue when he runs away. Thanks for proving that you or S. Mayer cannot produce one new conservative idea students would find interesting.
Name one yourself dunce. Hell, I gave you 4 suggestions.
And I also gave you an example of conservatives with big, interesting ideas. But you were too busy counting the genders.
You can’t name one. Thanks for proving me correct.
I named one you moron. Bwahahahaha you cant even count to one.
And four liberal ones just for you. Now you name one or admit you love the taste of shlt.
Beahahahahahaha
George posted FOUR TIMES Thanks for proving me correct.
Curious George, you reassured yourself by posting that four times. And yet not a single upvote of agreement – you forgot to upvote yourself again!
Clearly, what happened instead is you eagerly proved that he was correct.
He clubbed you like you were a newborn seal. And you continue to tell yourself you won.
Did you play that knight in the Monty Python movie with his arms and legs lopped off?
“S. Meyer, instead of accusing me of being incompetent”
You are incompetent, which is the best thing I can say about you. I can also accuse you of being stupid, but you should already know that.
“one conservative idea”
Teach students why DEI is racist and why, in a civilization that hopes to move forward, merit counts. Then, you can teach the difference between bias and racism. Teach against anti-Semitism instead of promoting it. Teach the art of listening, not rioting. Teach that one is not supposed to riot in the street and burn cities down. Teach civics. Teach the Constitution. Teach MLK character, not color. Teach life is precious.
These things have been given to you numerous times, but you are stupid.
George flailed wildly: Afraid to compete? No. How do you compete against old stale ideas from conservatives? What new ideas or views do conservatives bring to the table S. Meyer?
George, just because you prefer to call Marx and Engels’ communism “progressivism” – doesn’t mean it’s fresh, rather than vile, corrupt, and a complete and abject failure.
How’s that Marxism going as far as it’s track record against conservativism and its point of view?
Although I am a conservative politically that does not mean that I am not willing to steal a good idea from anyone else when they have a product or process that works and which I need.
I repeatedly told my Nurse Practitioner students, who I had the pleasure of mentoring for 15 year approx, that no one, NO ONE, had all the answers. And that occurs in the hard sciences as well as the soft sciences and social sciences. Unanimity usually means someone has overlooked something important and it will stick it’s ugly head out at the least propitious moment and bite you in the ass.
Seeming victory often covers up or shoves unpleasant facts under the rug or misses an important point entirely until these failures build up and you trip over them and fall flat on your face and besides being embarrassing, it can be fatal.
History is replete with episodes of apparent unanimity in thought or intent failing and defeating a force or movement in an apparent impregnable position.
But of course you need to be able know and read history with a discerning eye and knowledge and the ability to read and understand the other side, in order to make any sort of valid judgement or assessment.
This global one mind is already driving students away to other universities and livelihoods and more and more of these one mind universities may fail. When more and more alumni stop giving or decide to give elsewhere then one slowly starts to understand the marketplace of ideas and the utility of a whole market of multiple stalls and countless products instead of a single stall with one product, and customers are declining fast
“If it disagrees with experiment, it is wrong.”
The Democrats experimented for four years, and their policies disagreed with the results. Therefore, they are wrong.
To save time, one can skip the first 35 seconds and let Richard Feynman explain in less than 2 minutes.
Inadvertently, you know all there is to know about being wrong.
You can say what you wish, but take note of the lack of substance in your writing. You prove yourself to be stupid.
Excellent clip, SMeyer.
GEB,
Well said and good observation about, well, life.
First, Jon, what’s labeled conservative currently isn’t actually conservative. What’s in vogue now on the right is basically just outright white supremacy. And trump surrogates such as yourself further that trend by holding Trump and Harris to wildly different standards. Your continual effort to whip up and enrage the right is just an extension, and the logical conclusion of, Nixon’s southern strategy.
No wonder academia has been wildly rejecting your viewpoints. You’re trying to appeal to sentiments in this nation that, despite your push in the trump years, is dying off. Rightfully dying off. Party on!!
^^ Paid DNcC troll. Ignore. ^^
Thanks for reading!
You’re welcome. Now give mommy her phone back and go clean your room.
My mom’s been dead a decade and a half you flagrantly idiotic f#$kwad. I’m pretty okay with her haunting your burnt fart dreams for the rest of your miserable trumpian existence as far as I’m concerned. By the way, Allan S Pukemeyer told me when you two are 69ing, if he gets the leverage just right, he can make you gurgle the f#$king alphabet you diesel powered moron. Have fun getting BUAK with Allan
More fantasies from lawn boy of dudes engaged in all sorts of strange acts. Quite odd what he finds sexually stimulating but to each their own.
Last week your mom was still alive, now she has been dead decades. Either way, she would be so proud to read your brilliant essays here.
I think you struck a troll nerve. Didn’t realize there actually were any neurons there…
Which university taught you that? Which uni gave you the tools to evaluate that thesis and then state it as fact (or regurgitate it)?
You are simply proving the fact that unis are worthless, every time you post, which is way too frequently – we get it already – you and the people that you what to think are abject morons.
Here, Lawn Boy displays his HPD, brought on by ARBD, and exacerbated by TDS.
After he spent the weekend posting all manner of nonsense under various fake names, he comes in this morning, obviously well into his second bottle of cooking sherry, signing his diarrhea in the lame hope that others won’t think the childishness from the weekend was him. He will likely deny, which is strange, since he “loves” getting under the skin of magats, and is here for no other purpose (self proclaimed). Notice though, how he keeps that left hand free to Toobin himself.
“ You’re trying to appeal to sentiments in this nation that, despite your push in the trump years, is dying off.”
That’s a great point. It buttresses my point about old stale ideas being forced to have relevance in today’s much-changed society. It’s in line with changes like same-sex marriage, miscegenation laws, segregation, women’s rights, etc. At one time same-sex marriage, homosexuality, interracial marriage, and segregation were all new ideas. Conservatives always seem to prevent those new ideas or changes from altering conservative ideas they believed were never going to change. Those views, ideas, and values died off and became less attractive to younger generations who have experienced and seen the damage conservative ideas or views had on others.
You’ve been buttressed by a drunkard. Good on ya, svelaz.
First, Jon, what’s labeled conservative currently isn’t actually conservative. What’s in vogue now on the right is basically just outright white supremacy.
“Jon”???? Forget to sign your name Dennis?
Or is that you Kamala Harris? Whoopie Goldberg?
Black Liars & Marxists is outright white supremacy? Antifa? America’s most successful racist Louis Farrakhan and Al Sharpton are white supremacy?
Bribery Biden telling black Americans that if they didn’t vote for him they couldn’t be black was actually Biden showing his conservative roots?
What do you commie fluffers hope will be your reward in response to posting such feeble crap in this forum?
As the academy goes more left, it becomes less able to think logically. Consider that yesterday the professor posted a story about a federal appeals court in Boston using an analogy that any grade schooler could have told you was inapt: supposedly a gun manufacturer selling guns to wholesalers equates to the government sending combat troops to injure Mexicans. Why would a federal appeals court publish such an idiotic piece of legal non-reasoning? Federal judges rely on clerks to draft opinions, and those clerks at the federal appellate level are generally newly-minted lawyers who just graduated from elite law schools. And who taught them at those elite law schools? The law faculty . . . which is made up of professors who are left-wing, anti-Constitution, and poor logical thinkers. They give to Democrats and they identify as liberal or very liberal.
Guess we need to start a movement to “Defund the Universities” (Withold Tax Dollars) in the same way they came after the police. Besides, I can think of a lot of better places to use the money…
“a movement to “Defund the Universities””
Unnecessary. The Constitution DOES NOT AUTHORIZE involvement of the Federal government in education. Period. What is necessary is getting that simple and obvious fact acknowledged. Once Federal mandates and Federal dollars are removed from education at all levels, I’m confident that the problem will resolve itself.
(OT)
A great example of the Left’s irrational method of thinking (aka random associations):
Trump held a rally at Madison Square Garden.
The Nazis held a rally at MSG (in 1939?!).
Therefore, Trump is a Nazi.
Given that pathological “thinking:”
Ali held an event at MSG. Therefore, Trump is a prize fighter.
The Knicks held an event at MSG. Therefore, Trump is a professional basketball player.
. . .
Sam,
I read one headline this morning that said something to the effect of “Worst Nazi rally ever!”
Like, a black woman sang the National Anthem.
Jews For Trump were there.
Apparently the only Nazi symbols shown were leftists banners holding up Nazi swastika’s outside.
OT, My wife and I listened to the entire three hours of The Joe Rogan Experience with Trump. We found him to be much more engaging, personal and likable than the MSM would have us believe. We also think a format like the JRE would be better than the staged MSM so called debates. The JRE could have put yet another nail into the MSM coffin.
He’s also a hockey player!!
Trump’s a Nazi because he calls citizens who disagree with him the enemy from within and that the military should deal with them.
Biden did the same thing with soldiers and a blood red background.
Get a grip.
According to something I read yesterday, Hillary Strapon herself held a political event at MSG in the past.
Of course, for Hillary, comparisons to Hitler might be a little closer to the mark…
Yes, their lack of self-awareness is eyebrow raising. They claim “hiring a conservative law professor is akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism to teach at a university.” while they are fine with hiring a leftist who cannot define what a women is, think there are 97 different sexes, use dumb pronouns like xi/zer/they/them, think pornography in elementary schools is fine, or that men should be allowed to play in women’s sports.
Lack of self-awareness indeed.
Good points, Upstate. I would add that many appear to hold these views with such religious conviction because they spend each day in an intellectual environment (I use the term loosely) in which they are seldom if ever challenged. As a result, their critical thinking abilities atrophy. I foresee a day some years hence where an updated version of the sixties’ Berkeley Free Speech movement will reappear, and where the tired, stale and calcified beliefs of today’s “thought leaders” will be exposed for the nonsense they represent. It will be liberating.
We need to begin referring to these institutions as the marxist/racist/mind-numbing over-valued indoctrination camps that they become. Just as I rail against referring to “hes” who delude themselves and a few others into calling themselves women; I will no longer refer to these businesses as institutions of higher learning. Until we confront these irrational people and deny them the façade of respectability we can expect nothing better. We have turned over the asylums to the sophomores who think they know everything and treat the world with a petulant disdain, if not hatred.
Whimsicalmama,
From now on, when I hear someone say they are “educated,” I find out what their degree is in and what school they went to. They can be “educated,” in disciplines like business, engineering, nursing etc. But they can also be “educated” in name only and just as “indoctrinated.”
But even engineers and other STEM degrees still get their minds polluted by the general atmosphere of the progressive filt.
In the survey Turley uses to make his argument he “neglected” to mention a particularly interesting point.
“ Most faculty respondents said they don’t intend to discuss the election in class or one-on-one with students. Almost half of respondents said they feel less free to discuss federal politics than a year ago. And, beyond just this election, most said their personal politics don’t affect their research or teaching very much. These results all cut against conservative criticisms that left-leaning professors are indoctrinating students.”
The claims of liberal professors indoctrinating students on left-leaning ideas and views are hogwash. Turley seems to focus on the political affiliation of professors and implies they are an influence on their teaching. He’s wrong. It’s the assumption and deliberate insinuation from conservatives like Turley and others as an excuse to complain that conservative ideas are being deliberately “purged” from academia. It seems Turley and those who are complaining about the lack of conservative or Republican professors in higher education are complaining about the lack of conservative political views in Colleges and Universities. Not their ideas.
“ Most faculty respondents said they don’t intend to discuss the election in class or one-on-one with students. Almost half of respondents said they feel less free to discuss federal politics than a year ago. And, beyond just this election, most said their personal politics don’t affect their research or teaching very much. These results all cut against conservative criticisms that left-leaning professors are indoctrinating students.”
My girlfriend just graduated in the spring with a masters from UA. 2 of her 3 liberal professors were ALREADY discussing the election back then. This is at a red school in a red state. The libtards can’t leave their triggered opinions at home. they just can’t.
Oh my gawd, the lefty indoctrinators LIED and said they weren’t indoctrinating students!!! Imagine that!
Naw, we fully expected them to admit to indoctrination. Idiot.
You have no idea what is hogwash. How many kids have you put through college? My guess is NONE, since you’re a bot. Just running that fat mouth again. What are you basing your ignorant opinion on? Someone else’s opinion. Maybe Jimmy Fallon? When you have anecdotal evidence, bring it. Otherwise, you’re just a stooge.
I have four kids who graduated university. And each time, the indoctrination got worse. Grades in almost every subject affected by how woke your answers are. Entire lectures that had NOTHING to do with the subject matter. Exercises meant to single out those who didn’t “think” right. Some of the stories I heard would make a conservatives blood boil.
Thankfully, all of my kids came out more conservative than they went in, when they witnessed the lunacy of these people.
“Almost half of respondents said they feel less free to discuss federal politics than a year ago.”
There is all you need to know, nincompoop. Why are they all discussing federal politics at all? Do they all teach poli-sci?
Bwahahahahahahahaha, what a stooge. Tripped over your own reading comprehension problem.