Yale University has finally achieved the academic version of Nirvana, a state of perfect peace and enlightenment. A recent study found that the faculty had finally purged every Republican donor from its ranks. While 98 percent of the political donations went to Democrats, not a single professor could be found who gave to a single Republican candidate. The complete lock for Democrats is in a country that is split evenly between Republicans and Democrats.
The Yale Daily News reviewed more than 7,000 Federal Election Commission filings from 2025 listing Yale as the employer: “Of 1,099 filings that included ‘professor’ in their occupation, 97.6 percent of the donations went to Democrats, while the remaining 2.4 percent went to independent candidates or groups,” the student newspaper reported Jan. 14.”
The study reinforces the recent Buckley Institute report, which found that, of the 43 departments surveyed, 27 entire departments contained zero Republican professors.
Even if the study missed a couple of donations, the radical imbalance is a reflection of the lack of diversity at the school. It is not a perfect point of comparison. There can be a conservative or libertarian faculty member who does not make donations and does not register with any party.
Moreover, those of us who have criticized the lack of diversity have not argued for partisan criteria. Rather, these are metrics that help show the lack of diversity. Many scholars prefer to dismiss these criticisms as speculative or unproven. However, the problem has long been obvious and these studies reinforce what critics have said for years.
One professor is quoted as acknowledging the apparent problem. Carlos Eire, a history and religious studies professor, said, “It’s true, there is very, very, very little intellectual diversity at Yale and at most institutions of higher learning when it comes to politics.” Professor Eire added,“Academics in the US, Canada and Europe have been leaning left for the past three or four generations. And this is something that shows no signs of being corrected or correcting itself anytime soon.”
He is correct.
I was asked by the president of a top-ranked university how he could reverse this problem. He was convinced that the lack of intellectual diversity was causing lasting harm to higher education. I told him that one thing is clear: you cannot rely on faculty members to restore diversity.
I was at a dinner not long ago with a Harvard Law Professor who told me and others that he could not be expected to vote for a faculty candidate with whom he disagreed. Two of us objected that we do that all the time to reinforce intellectual diversity. He was entirely unapologetic and unyielding that he would not vote for faculty candidates who embrace conservative views of the Constitution that he considers wrong.
Faculty members have privately acknowledged for years that they have largely eliminated conservatives and libertarians, but rationalize their records on not finding “intellectually promising” conservative candidates. If the imbalance involved race or gender, a court would crush arguments that the lack of diversity is some unintended consequence of the applicant pool.
University presidents must create enclaves of diversity outside these departments, through institutes and centers that faculty members do not control.
Some faculty are more honest than others.
As I discuss in my book “The Indispensable Right,” Harvard is not just an academic echo chamber. It is a virtual academic sensory deprivation tank.
In a country with a majority of conservative and libertarian voters, fewer than 9 percent of the Harvard student body and less than 3 percent of the faculty members identify as conservative.
For years, Harvard faculty have brushed away complaints over its liberal orthodoxy, including purging conservative faculty. It has created one of the most hostile schools for free speech in the nation, ranking dead last among universities in annual studies by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).
Only a third of students at Harvard feel comfortable speaking on campus despite being overwhelmingly liberal at an overwhelmingly liberal institution. (The percentage is much higher for the small number of conservative students).
Not long ago, I debated Professor Randall Kennedy at Harvard Law School about the lack of ideological diversity at the school. I respect Kennedy and I do not view him as anti-free speech or intolerant. Yet when I noted the statistics on the vanishing number of conservative students and faculty in comparison to the nation, Kennedy responded that Harvard “is an elite university” and does not have to “look like America.”
Of course, the problem is that Harvard does not even look like Massachusetts, which is nearly 30 percent Republican.
Yale, however, is now a perfect echo chamber where moderate, libertarian, and conservative students (if they can make it into the school) are left to self-censor and avoid backlash for their views.
I’m sorry to bring up something speciously OT, but bear with me a second (to relate this to Yale)..
We will likely agree that Charlie Kirk and Renee Good represented opposite ends of a political spectrum, and both suffered tragic death as a consequence. I was not familiar with either prior to that, and I likely would not have aligned with either.
Yet, standing back and looking at this from the perspective of universities like Yale, I am comfortable with inductively inferring the following:
If a left-wing professor were engaging in some lecture that was politically objectionable, Charlie Kirk would have taken a classroom across the hall and invited students in to argue with him.
If a right-wing professor were engaging in some lecture that was politically objectionable, Renee Good would have stood in the back of the classroom blowing a whistle and banging on a drum to disrupt/prevent the speech and create chaos.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/37875930/renee-good-blocks-ice-agents-fatal-minneapolis-shooting/
Promethean Action
Check it out on the internet. If you’re old enough to remember America the site is spot on with the analysis and what is happening. A new awakening for our country.
Jonathan, Where do you think Elihu Yale would stand on this issue today? (Conservative | Moderate | Liberal)
The present day question is:
Should a University be allow to evolve from its founding?
—
AI: Elihu Yale religion
Elihu Yale was a deeply religious Christian, specifically involved with Anglican traditions, though his early education is debated, with suggestions of conservative Anglican schooling. He supported Christian theology and history in his extensive book collection and donated books and textiles to the fledgling Yale College, a gift leading to the institution being named after him, highlighting the strong Protestant roots of the college itself.
Personal Faith: Yale’s letters and charitable choices demonstrate his deep religious commitment, focusing on Christian theology and history in his personal library.
Anglican Connections: His family’s leanings were conservative, favoring Anglican practices, and he married into a family with Anglican ties in India.
Donation to Yale: His significant gifts, including theological books, were instrumental in the college’s early development, aligning with the Puritan/Congregationalist origins of the New Haven colony.
Legacy at Yale: While Yale University began with Puritan roots, its namesake was a devout Anglican, reflecting the broader Protestant Christian foundation of the institution.
—
AI: Elihu Yale
(1649–1721) was a British-American merchant, colonial administrator, and philanthropist primarily remembered as the benefactor for whom Yale University is named.
Biography and Career
Early Life: Born in Boston, Massachusetts, he moved to London with his family at age three and never returned to America.
East India Company: In 1672, he arrived in Madras (now Chennai), India, as a clerk for the East India Company. He rose through the ranks to become the Governor of Fort St. George (1687–1692).
Fortune: He amassed a vast personal fortune through private trading in diamonds and other commodities. However, his career was marred by allegations of corruption and “self-aggrandizement,” leading to his removal from office and a forced fine.
Later Life: He returned to London in 1699, where he became a renowned art collector and philanthropist.
Connection to Yale University
In 1718, following a request from Cotton Mather, Yale donated a cargo of goods (including 417 books, textiles, and a portrait of King George I) to the Collegiate School of Connecticut. The sale of these goods raised approximately £800 (a significant sum at the time), which funded a new building. In recognition of this gift, the school was renamed Yale College.
Slavery Controversy:
Modern historical research, including the Yale & Slavery Research Project, has highlighted Yale’s direct involvement in the slave trade.
Administrative Role: As Governor of Madras, he oversaw the trafficking of hundreds of enslaved people through Fort St. George.
Portraits: Famous portraits of Yale, such as those held at the Yale Center for British Art, often depict him with an unnamed, collared enslaved child, symbolizing the wealth he derived from imperial globalization.
Personal Details:
Born: April 5, 1649, Boston, Massachusetts.
Died: July 8, 1721, London, England.
Burial: He is buried at St Giles’ Church in Wrexham, Wales.
Collections: At the time of his death, he owned more than 7,000 paintings and thousands of other luxury items, which were sold at landmark auctions.
—
AI: Who were Yale’s family members?
Elihu Yale’s family included prominent early American colonists, influential British aristocrats, and members of the East India Company.
Immediate Family:
Parents: His father, David Yale (1613–1690), was a wealthy merchant and attorney. His mother was Ursula Knight (died 1699).
Spouse: He married Catherine Elford Hynmers (1651–1728), a wealthy widow and daughter of merchant Walter Elford, in 1680 at Fort St. George, India.
Children (Legitimate): Yale and Catherine had four children:
David Yale (1684–1687): Died at age three and is buried in Chennai.
Katherine Yale (1685–1715): Married Dudley North, a Member of Parliament.
Anne Yale (1687–1734): Married Lord James Cavendish, son of the 1st Duke of Devonshire.
Ursula Yale (c. 1689–1721): Died unmarried.
Illegitimate Son: Yale had a son named Charles Yale (1690–1712) with his mistress, Hieronima da Paiva, a merchant widow in Madras.
Extended Family and Ancestry:
Grandparents: His paternal grandmother, Anne Lloyd, married Theophilus Eaton, the co-founder and first Governor of the New Haven Colony, after the death of her first husband (Elihu’s grandfather).
Siblings: He had several siblings, including Thomas Yale, who served as an ambassador to the King of Siam for the East India Company.
Adopted Heir: Having no surviving sons of his own, Yale sought an heir from his Connecticut relations and eventually chose his cousin’s son, David Yale of New Haven.
Ancestry: The family descended from the Lords of Yale in North Wales, specifically the estates of Plas-yn-Yale and Plas Grono near Wrexham.
—
This is Off Topic but if you read the comments on this post or any others of Prof. Turley you will find the relevance.
About 20 years ago I was standing in a bus station in Munich. Sporadically I would hear the sound of a light buzz resembling a mosquito. After hearing several repetitions of the buzzing I heard a slap. No more buzzing. A little while later the same pattern happened, the buzzing and then the slap. Finally the bus came and the noise stopped.
I have not yet found nor been able to create that ring tone, sadly.
Jersey Flip.
Change nothing but the team colors.
If 97.6% of Yale faculty political donations went to Republicans and conservatives, and 0% to Democrats, would this still be waved away as meaningless? Would we be told that liberal ideas simply “don’t interest students,” or that no one should question the hiring climate?
This isn’t about quotas or partisan balance. It’s about whether institutions that claim to exist for free inquiry and civic formation have become ideological monocultures.
Yale’s own student paper found that among professors, 97.6% of political donations went to Democrats and none to Republicans. Donations are an imperfect proxy, but an imbalance this extreme is at least a signal worth examining. When entire departments show no ideological dissent, disagreement becomes professionally risky.
A self-governing republic requires citizens trained to argue ideas, not avoid them. Universities that cannot tolerate sustained internal disagreement are not preparing students for civic life. They are preparing them for echo chambers.
A republic survives only if its institutions teach people how to disagree without silencing.
“The next time some academics tell you how important diversity is, ask how many Republicans there are in their sociology department.” – Thomas Sowell
Exactly. Same point, different framing.
If the jerseys were flipped, this wouldn’t be shrugged off. It would trigger lawsuits, protests, pressure campaigns, defunding threats, deplatforming, and institutional investigations within weeks.
That asymmetry is the issue. When one ideological monopoly is treated as “normal” and the other as an existential crisis, the problem isn’t diversity. It’s power.
What does party affiliation have to do with diversity of thought? Is there a requirement that there be an even number of Republicans in college or university faculty?
Diversity is not exclusive to party affiliation. You can have republicans who teach philosophy, mathematics, physics, biology, arts, etc. Are Republicans forbidden from teaching these subjects by the Republican Party?
What are the percentages for Liberty University?
“A republic survives only if its institutions teach people how to disagree without silencing.”
It wasn’t Democrats scaling the walls of the Capitol building rather than using the stairs or the Postal System or telephone to try to contact their representatives.
Perhaps it is conservatives who need to learn to argue ideas rather than choosing violence.
Liberty is mission-defined; Yale claims pluralism.
Violence is wrong everywhere, but one riot doesn’t justify institutional monoculture.
Olly, Turley defines lack of diversity of thought because no Republicans are in faculty. Independents don’t count? You don’t think political science professors discuss conservative ideas or views in their classes? Because Turley never really discusses such things. He just throws out these unsubstantiated claims without no real facts to support them.
For example he talks about these “purges” but he never, not once, talks about who was purged or what discipline was axed or “purged”. His first instinct is to focus on political affiliation instead of which conservative ideas or views are being “purged” or denied by these schools.
Can you name a new or valid conservative view or idea that students would benefit from hearing or learning about?
I see a lot of complaining of leftist monopolies, but no arguments for why conservative ideas or views should be appealing to students who ultimately choose what is being taught at universities or colleges.
Well said, Olly. Professor Randall Kennedy’ response that Harvard is “an elite university” pretty much sums up why none of them will ever accept opposing points of view. They are elite, and the rest of us aren’t. Greg
Very good point, Greg. Claims of being “elite” are often just marketing, used to justify extravagant tuition. A solid education can be had at many schools for far less. What students are really paying for is someone else’s definition of prestige.
Real elites don’t operate that way. The most elite military units don’t advertise themselves, issue manifestos, or lead with credentials. They don’t fear scrutiny. They just get the job done, quietly, and let the results speak for themselves.
If a university has to assert that it is elite in order to insulate itself from challenge or dissent, then it isn’t elite at all. It’s branding.
True excellence welcomes being tested. It doesn’t silence those who test it.
Yale needs a new motto instead of lights a nd truth in Hebrew which no one knows because it’s not a requirement for admission.
Meantime in the rest of the United States, Universities in the South and Midwest are bursting at the seams as they accept students all the time who used to go to those Northeastern Universities. Those students are following their parent as they leave the old crustaceans of the northeast and travel to Florida, Georgia, South and North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas, as well as Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, etc. Businesses are moving our way and bringing their employees with them. There are boom times all across the land. Seems low taxes and welcoming attitudes towards business seem to go along with divergent and varying points of view and politics. Strange is it not.
Why don’t you support you comments with provable facts.
You also have a habit of plagiarizing.
It would seem, then, that there are plenty of conservative campuses; there is no need for Yale to join them.
The clamor for Yale to accept more close-minded conservatives is borne of jealousy because Yale is a far better school. I cannot imagine that conservatives are so concerned that Yale should fundamentally change except those conservatives wish to capture the aura that Yale has without earning the aura that Yale has.
“ I cannot imagine that conservatives are so concerned that Yale should fundamentally change except those conservatives wish to capture the aura that Yale has without earning the aura that Yale has.”
That’s a great point.
Why aren’t these “purged” conservative faculty or professors creating their own University or College and aspire to be the Yale of conservative schools?
Turley, unfortunately, often portrays the intellectual highjacking of academia as a fairly recent phenomenon. Carlos Eire gets it right that Gramaci’s “long march through the institutions” began three or four generations ago.
FDR’s invention of the regulatory welfare state is probably the best marker for the beginning. As I’ve said many times, we now know with certainty from the Venona decrypts that FDR’s administration was filled with Soviet spies. It is not an exaggeration to say that there were easily 400-500 Soviet spies that were part of his administration who were members of numerous spy rings.
Many, if not most, had academic pedigrees from American elite academic institutions. Some of those spies, like Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, and Lauchlin Currie held positions high enough in FDR’s administration that they helped craft policy. These were not schlubs passing confidential info to their Soviet paymasters. They could, and did, not only influence policy but crafted it. Soviet spy White effectively founded the IMF and was the chief negotiator at Breton Woods. The IMF sitll exists and the global currency regime that came out of Breton Woods remains in place today. The United Nation was Hiss’s project. He was the nominal Secretary General during its conceptual phase. Those two globalist institutions still remain funded by taxpayers and play a role in governing world affairs to this day.
Makes one wonder who actually won the Cold War, no?
William F. Buckley fired the warning flare in 1951 when he wrote “God and Man at Yale” and subsequently founded “National Review”. The highjacking was already well underway at that point, and despite his best efforts, it has only gotten worse.
Great comment, now please create a name so we will know when you are adding to the discussion and that you aren’t one of the usual “Anonymous” goons.
Too bad you lack the brains to post such a comment. And you’re welcome.
Boom
Burn ointment aisle 9
‘ It’s true, there is very, very, very little intellectual diversity at Yale and at most institutions of higher learning when it comes to politics.” Professor Eire added,“Academics in the US, Canada and Europe have been leaning left for the past three or four generations. And this is something that shows no signs of being corrected or correcting itself anytime soon.”
Academics have always been left leaning. They are more open to exploring and discussing radical ideas and views. The key word here is “politics”. Turley is essentially complaining about the lack of political diversity instead of real ideological diversity.
This is not because Republicans, conservatives, or libertarians are being “purged” from these schools. That is complete hogwash. It’s really self inflicted by Republicans, conservatives, and libertarians. Because these are the same folks who are constantly bashing institutions of higher learning and calling College and University education worthless or a waste of time. These are the same people who are bashing PhD’s, academics because they are more educated than those who are doing the bashing and denigrating. But at the same time they are complaining about the lack of diversity and inclusion of THEIR views and ideas at the institutions that they despise.
What professor Turley should be doing is asking those “purged” faculty who are rarely named or pointed out what their ideas or views are why they left or why they are not organizing to create their own University or College? Shouldn’t there be a “purged” conservative or Republican group calling out these schools or colleges? Where are these faculty Turley seems so worried about? I have not seen any names or academic disciplines that have been “purged” that the Professor talks about. It’s more likely a poor reason to complain about the lack of diversity from those who have been bashing the idea of diversity and inclusion. Turley is essentially being woke about the lack of Republican or conservative viewpoints.
Excuse me, you just posted the same stupid stuff in your two comments this morning.
Is this guy soft or what?
Just emphasizing a point two different ways. Nothing wrong with that.
So you’re the type of troll, who screams insanities the loudest and the most often , means you’re smarter?
No, I’m the type who offers a different point of view, contributing to the diversity of thought on this blog. I would have thought you would be smart enough to recognize something that is ironically the point Turley is trying to make.
You diverse? Hysterical is more like it. This, “you would be smart enough to recognize something that is ironically the point Turley is trying …” We do, and you fail.
Getting testy this morning eh George? The responses getting through.
ROFL! Testy? Nope. You seem unable to make an argument or recognize the irony. That is the point and you still fail to see it.
What do you have to offer besides insults and projection? Surely you can offer more than that.
X’s Delusions Of Adequacy, with his daily assurances he’s smart enough to be right every day – while Professor Turley is always wrong with his inferior intellect. If there were a prize for baseless self praise, X would be laughingly named the winner.
Where his version of “a different point of view” consists of nothing but denying, deflecting, defending, and lying. He’s essentially a kindergarten level literary cancer on this blog – benign, because what he posts is so feeble it does not spread throughout those who read here.
350 remaining days in 2006 of abject personal failure met with being jeered and mocked, X/Anonymous/George/Svelez… 350 can you make it a perfect record?
You keep proving my point. You have nothing or offer. All you can muster are insults and petty whining.
Come on, man. You can do way better than that, can you?
X testy?
Are you kidding, we all know X has no testes…just mountains of propaganda BS.
X says Just emphasizing a point two different ways. Nothing wrong with that.
Just more deflections, denial and defense for the virulent Marxism at these universities. Why the refusal to build your own website and blog for your fellow Marxists, instead of being a parasite embedded in Professor Turley’s?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm”
Why don’t you have works by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
You are the exact kind of person who would have claimed there weren’t any black students at University because they are too uneducated to succeed and no worthwhile candidates applied. You are a bigoted racist, but about Conservative ideology instead of race. There is no help for you.
“Hi, I am Mr. X and I haven’t read the column yet but I am here to disagree with it no matter what it says, no matter how dumb I sound and no matter how many people ignore me.”
I know I didn’t read X’s comment and I am sure many others didn’t either.
We’ve been ignoring your garbage for a while … its just filled with insults. You must be the adult in the room then?
Hullbobby, you read my comment. It’s obvious. Otherwise you wouldn’t be whining about it.
I’m here to provide a different point of view. Turley is a big fan of diversity of thought as evidenced by the current subject. I of course disagree with this argument and therefore I am providing the reason and logic of my point of view.
You, on the other hand, what have you offered besides pithy complaints about my differing point of view? Why don’t you provide a defense or argument supporting Turley’s?
Make the case for conservative ideas or views at universities or colleges. Don’t just whine about leftists being leftists. Show us why YOU think conservative or Republican ideas should be interesting to students at these universities and colleges.
I’ve said students don’t find conservative ideas or views appealing or interesting because they have already experienced or seen them in action outside of academia. Universities and Colleges offer students opportunities to explore more than what they have already seen and experienced when it comes to conservative or Republican ideas.
So…what would make a conservative view or idea interesting to a student? You have any argument supporting good conservative ideas?
“I’m here to provide a different point of view. ”
Lies and denying, deflecting and defending are not a ‘different point of view’. Over years and different usernames, there has never been a single day where you agreed with your host Professor Turley. Professor Turley is always wrong. And you, of course, are always right.
You are the whining Democrat Karen Of A Thousand Faces.
X –
As usually you’re regurgitating disproven liberal propaganda. Professors today even admit they do not allow conservative professors to get tenure, or worse, will not even consider putting them on staff. This is blatant and has nothing to do with “self-inflicted wounds”. Conservative were very late to the party to realize that liberals were cleansing these institutions of diversity of thought or any semblance of critical thinking.
The few conservative professors I had in undergrad and grad school openly admitted they hid their political leanings until after they were tenured. “Just kept my head down for the first few years,” was a phrase I heard more than once. I think all agree that “academia is about exploring ideas.” But how do you only explore ideas from a single angle? Even in these hyper liberal echo chambers, liberals attack each other with stupid litmus tests. Whatever the “new” thing is in leftist POLITICAL ideology becomes a must with these intelligent elite. How is that possible if this isn’t about politics?
It of course is only about politics and power. It has ZERO to do with the exploration of ideas of critical thinking/analysis.
That is the problem, and I think JT did a solid job of addressing it that way in a short article.
For further analysis I think he wrote a book. He doesn’t mention it often, but I might have heard a rumor…
Anonymous,
“ As usually you’re regurgitating disproven liberal propaganda. Professors today even admit they do not allow conservative professors to get tenure, or worse, will not even consider putting them on staff.“
Disproven? Got any proof? What professors have admitted they do not allow conservative professors to get tenure, or worse will not even consider putting them on staff?
Any specific citation for that?
“ Conservative were very late to the party to realize that liberals were cleansing these institutions of diversity of thought or any semblance of critical thinking.”
Late to the party? You mean while they were busy bashing these institutions and blaming society’s ills on the same institutions Turley claims are “Purging” conservatives?
“ Even in these hyper liberal echo chambers, liberals attack each other with stupid litmus tests. Whatever the “new” thing is in leftist POLITICAL ideology becomes a must with these intelligent elite. How is that possible if this isn’t about politics?”
Attack? Litmus tests? You mean rational debates and criticism? That’s the normal part of academia, of course you wouldn’t understand because you’re already have a vehement animosity towards things you don’t understand.
You seem to think everything in academia is political. No wonder you’re so confused and upset.
“ It of course is only about politics and power. It has ZERO to do with the exploration of ideas of critical thinking/analysis.”
I take it’s been a while since you have been to a university or any sort of academic environment.
Those conservative professors you mention seem more cowardly than intellectually capable. If they chose to “keep their heads down” until they got tenure does that mean they suddenly express entirely different views and ideas once they got tenure? Or were they ignored by the rest of the faculty because they didn’t care about their ideas or views? Perhaps students didn’t care. What were these professors of yours teaching? You didn’t mention that. Math, physics, political science, biology, arts, what?
“ That is the problem, and I think JT did a solid job of addressing it that way in a short article.”
All he did was whine about the lack of Republican donors at Yale and conflate that with some “purge” that he never explains in depth or who exactly has been purged. His article sounded more like a manufactured issue to attack the fact that Universities and Colleges have always been historically left leaning and there is a reason for that. Because prior to Universities and Colleges there were religious institutions that emphasized religious beliefs and morals more than critical thinking.
When the Renaissance came about it started the decline of dominance of religious institutions as sources of higher learning where questioning of doctrine or belief was considered heretical and punishable by torture or death. Being able to question and explore things forbidden by religious instruction and doctrine is the basis of today’s academic culture. That is why conservative ideas and views are not appealing or favorable with the majority of students. That is why I ask the question, what new conservative ideas or views have been brought forth for students to explore? Can you name a few, or even one?
X says Turley is essentially complaining about the lack of political diversity instead of real ideological diversity.
That’s your second version of BBBUUUTTTT…. MUH TURLEY!!!!! this morning. Followed by paragraphs of non-intellectual excuses and hogwash.
i>The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.
— Winston Churchill
Republicans need to learn how to divide, conquer and fight like Dems. The moral high ground isn’t working.
The problem is they don’t have a high ground. They are constantly attacking Diversity Equality and Inclusion while whining about the lack of diversity, equality, and inclusion of THEIR points of view.
Turley could have used DEI as reason to include more Republicans and conservatives in University faculties. But Republicans and conservatives are vehemently anti-DEI.
You’re cut-n-pasting your comments again today, rehashing them. Got anything original?
Cut and pasting? Nope. How about you? You got anything better than your usual whining? Why don’t you post something… original?
Now that’s original.
george
You got anything better than your usual whining?
_____________________________________
OMG george, do you ever look in the mirror?
We’ve been asking you that question for a long time and it still it hasn’t sunk in.
DEI
You are talking about our Newest Supreme court (person) who has no idea what a women is!.
Yeah that type of DEI hire.
And you have no idea what a liberal is. Look in the mirror again.
Dustoff, strangely at Universities and Colleges students can explore the meaning of “what a woman is” more thoroughly. But Republicans and conservatives are anti-DEI for the same reason most of them are. They have no idea what DEI is. In universities and colleges students explore in depth what DEI actually is. But, you prefer to revel in your own ignorance and bash those who seek to understand it more thoroughly than you.
It’s almost as if you are afraid to understand and get a different perspective because it’s scary to have a more nuanced or open view.
Xray: you are wrongly conflating government use of DEI – to favor some over merit – with diversity of thought in an academic institution. The former is toxic, the latter is the very essence of higher learning.
X –
You use the phrase DEI and you obviously have no idea what it means.
DEI is repacked affirmative action (reverse racism) that promises equality of OUTCOME not of opportunity.
No one who isn’t a looney liberal is demanding reverse racism or a guaranteed outcome. People want a level playing field and an opportunity. You know, a meritocracy. DEI is the OPPOSITE of a meritocracy. DEI is significantly closer to a kleptocracy, except it is done in the open and anyone who points out the failed corruption is labeled a racist!
It is astonishing that despite failure after failure of DEI implementation, people continue to point to it as if it’s a success. Critical thinking is obviously not a thing on the left.
The problem is you have a perfect record of never coming up with a persuasive argument to win others over to the cultural Marxism you defend. While whining that Republicans won’t accept your DEI beliefs that little boys can become girls simply by being castrated, that women must willingly subjugate themselves to men who claim to be women, and the remainder of your cultural rot.
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm”
Why don’t you have works by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
350 days left in 2026 for daily cringe-worthy personal failure from X.
GOP wake up!
End Federal Aid to colleges(including student loans, cities, states, non-profits
Outlaw public unions the political army of the democrats!
Then you would be without a job.
If you were employed by an org that was explicitly political, would you make a reportable contribution to the other side? Even if you are theoretically protected by “tenure”, that doesn’t protect research funding, lab space and the like.Ironically, the only place where explicit political discrimination is at all illegal is in federal government employment (Hatch Act).
Diversity of thought, the freedom to express one’s views without fear of retaliation provides the guardrails necessary for a civil, peaceful and secure society. When the institutions of power, knowledge and influence become dominated by a single party, anything can be rationalized for the sake of political purity and the accretion of power including violence as we are witnessing now. The easily influenced become cannon fodder in a battle for complete control. We are in decline and our future is in jeopardy as the unthinkable becomes commonplace.
Sounds like Yale.
Just look at what is being debated at the Supreme Court!
And what might that be?
“ Moreover, those of us who have criticized the lack of diversity have not argued for partisan criteria. Rather, these are metrics that help show the lack of diversity.”
But you ARE using partisan criteria to complain about lack of diversity because you keep implying that there has to be some equal balance of Democrat vs Republican or Independent in higher education faculties.
There ARE wholly conservative schools around the country and we don’t see the Professor complaining about the lack of more liberal or Democratic faculty at those institutions. Brigham Young, Liberty University, and others have plenty of conservatives and Republicans in their staffing but not enough liberals and Democrats, right? Should these schools be more diverse in their representation?
This is not a “lack of diversity” issue. It’s a student demand issue. Students are NOT interested in conservative ideas or views. If they were there would be more ‘Republican’ or conservative faculty. Professor Turley himself is a life long Democrat, why doesn’t he register as a Republican and start the trend he longs for? There is no lack of diversity in schools regarding faculty. It’s a lack of interest by students and they are not attracted to conservative ideals and views. It’s just that simple. Younger people are not naturally conservative. Some may come from strictly conservative upbringings and therefore are not interested in what they already know. To them a different point of view that is more interesting and attractive and NEW to them is a liberal point of view and subjects often seen as taboo in conservative households. If conservative views and ideals are more interesting they do have choices of wholly conservative schools, christian schools, Mormon schools, etc. They exist.
So what if Yale has no republican donors? Is the Professor jealous or claiming it’s unfair that the most elite schools do not prescribe to diversity of party affiliation or philosophy? It’s important to remember that it is Republicans and conservatives who despise higher education, the elite and the “experts” they spend time demonizing and denigrating. Yet Turley doesn’t seen to understand why there are not more Republicans or conservatives in university or college faculties. Because they are generally opposed to the idea of higher education. How ironic.
Sounds like George’s pet poodle is doing the commenting this morning.
Republicans are generally opposed to higher education??? Sounds like at least one radical poster has no idea what he/she/it is talking about. Too many of these radical purists at Yale is Turley’s point.
Who is always basing higher education? Republicans, conservatives. Who cares if Yale has zero Republican donors? Is there a law or state statute requiring school staff donate equally among parties?
Turley is complaining about schools where there are more left leaning faculty than right leaning faculty because those on the right are being “purged” which is pure BS.
Turley considers himself a Libertarian who comes from a Democrat leaning family. How is it he hasn’t been “purged” from his school? He seems to be doing fine. Why doesn’t he start an organization representing these “purged” faculty? That is the biggest take from all this, he never mentions who these “purged” faculty are or if they even exist.
Will you be making sense anytime soon?
X/Anonymous/George/Svelez… what’s your purpose for coming here each day to post BS and be mocked and jeered because it’s crap. Hoping to establish a Marxist outpost here?
The problem is you have a perfect record of never coming up with a persuasive argument to win others over to the cultural Marxism you defend. While whining that Republicans won’t accept your DEI beliefs that little boys can become girls simply being castrated, that women must willingly subjugate themselves to men who claim to be women, and the remainder of your cultural rot.
Why don’t you have works by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
350 days left in 2026 for daily cringe-worthy personal failure from X.
What is the point of the article? Professor Turley is complaining about the lack of diversity in higher education? Perhaps he forgot that the Trump administration made sure “diversity” is a dirty word among Republicans and conservatives.
Since when is party affiliation a reason to claim lack of diversity? There is on law or statue requiring higher education to be politically diverse. Remember Trump’s administration is AGAINST forced diversity. But here we are Professor Turley implying it should be forced in some way because it’s unfair that an equal number of Republican staff are not present at universities. That’s a pretty stupid view. Perhaps he should focus on the merits of the staff instead of political affiliation.
I’ve made this point many times and I will continue to do so because it IS relevant. Republicans don’t seem to have the ideas or views that students find interesting or appealing. If the Professor wants more Republicans, conservatives, or libertarians in college or university faculty then THEY should make their case by expressing their ideas and views to the students. They need to convince students their ideas have merit or are interesting enough to demand schools have them. But they are not doing that. Instead they are whining and complaining that it is “not fair” that they are not being included in faculty, griping about lack of…diversity which is hilarious because their own views and ideas are seen as anti-diversity and anti-inclusion. How Professor Turley doesn’t see it is quite frankly hilariously stupid. Perhaps he’s irony impaired on this issue. Turley is essentially having a DEI issue regarding the lack of Republicans, conservatives, and libertarians at higher education institutions.
Maybe re-read the article. Do you hear yourself? He said diversity of thought…
Maybe you should read for comprehension. Diversity of thought is still diversity. Transgender studies, DEI, women’s studies, critical race theory, etc. all are diversity of thought yet Republicans and conservatives have been attacking them and removing them from schools. And Turley is complaining about the lack of conservative and Republican points of view in higher education. Yeah, really weird, right? Maybe they should take a good look at their own rhetoric first before complaining about the lack of diversity of thought in higher education. I hear the Trump administration likes to pull funding from schools who have diversity of thought they don’t like. Crazy stuff eh?
“Maybe you should read for comprehension.” …. maybe you should write for comprehension?
“Transgender studies, DEI, women’s studies, critical race theory, etc. all are diversity of thought”
Just call it “the Democrat Marxist/communist political platform “. The platform based on cultural Marxism and critical communist theory converted into black racist theory.
X making a pitch in defense of Marxism in all it’s destructive forms. Predictable. A communist parasite who won’t create his own blog, but uses Professor Turley’s instead.
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
“What is the point of the article? “. What is the point of your criticism?
“Republicans don’t seem to have the ideas or views that students find interesting or appealing.”
You summed up your comments here: “is quite frankly hilariously stupid.”
“Republicans don’t seem to have the ideas or views that students find interesting or appealing.”
Which is why Charlie Kirk was invited to appear at MANY campuses and could fill campus arenas with students who wanted to hear him speak.
So they killed him.
Um …. who is “they”?
Crazy libs.
You know, the ones who only like what they say is free speech.
You make no sense.
Um … who are “you”?
Still lying george
Trump administration made sure “diversity” is a dirty word among Republicans and conservatives.
_____________________________
You feel it’s OK to attack Jews on college campus.
Is that your idea of (diversity)
I’d guess X is a true bloviator.
You’re on a roll walt.
“Republicans don’t seem to have the ideas or views that students find interesting or appealing.”
Earth to X: your “diversity” candidate, The Brown Vagina DEI Hire, LOST THE LAST ELECTION. A rational mind would recognize the winner had ideas and views that were far more appealing.
“How Professor Turley doesn’t see it is quite frankly hilariously stupid.”
1. Every day of the year, Professor Turley is always stupid and wrong.
2. Every day of the year I, your magnificent explainer, X, am always brilliant and right.
How’s that for diversity of thought from this blog’s parasite, X/Anonymous/George/Svelez?
What is Mr. Turley’s view on the media malpractice unfolding in Minnesota? Has the press crossed a line, or does he still see their actions as protected by the First Amendment? How long will he shield these practices under the 1A? At what point does accountability outweigh protection? Could his position change if the spread of misinformation continues and more lives are taken?
“What is Mr. Turley’s view on the media malpractice”.
We’re discussing the lack of conservatives at Yale today.
We already knew this was inevitable! What is unforeseen is the blatant media malpractice occurring and cnn as of 2025 has a new name, adjudicated fake news!
Wrong thread buddy. Got anything else?
J. Turley, as Carlos Eire said in your piece, diversity of political persuasion has been absent for decades in academia. BUT, as a new visitor to this webpage, I must inform you that it is also absent HERE. Do you read these comments, do you notice the trolls? Free speech or harassment against differences of opinion? Even the president gives the finger….
If I done agree must be a troll. Well if necessary I’m here to troll you. They bring their own demise thru the free market. It works. I and an adjunct. It really sucks these days. Academies isn’t that. It’s baby sitting.
Stop lying. “Diversity of political persuasion” is NOT absent from this blog’s comment section.
He’s not lying, he’s just too stupid to recognize it. Like dustoff.
Its just a bunch of wacky trolls. And nursing home patients.
Hey meathead, no one is forcing you to read the comments. Whew, there’s always one in every crowd, a troll that is.
There is no greater cesspool of intolerance than academia. Once leftwing fascists take over, they root out all dissent, as they did in Germany during the 1930s, the Soviet Union during the 1920s, and China during the 1950s.
To the degree that most educators are liberal, and to the degree that they engage in more indoctrination than education, the situation is self-perpetuating.
Maybe, just maybe, there are more conservs. at Yale than meets the eye. Maybe they’re donating to democrats so they won’t become targets when in fact they support conservatives. I wonder what the average donation is? That would gauge the degree of their liberalism. The fake liberals donate over $100 donors to avoid suspicion and really are conservatives, while the $10 donors are real liberals.
Nice one.
In the US, Canada, France, German, UK, Poland, Romania, Hungary etc… So it’s really nothing new.
Instead there are emasculated “Trans Democrats” of the Bush “New World Order” school of thought
LOL.. now that’s funny
If dustoff thinks something is funny, its because he says so.
No you fool, because it was. To bad you don’t get it.
Just another sour puss lib.