I just received an account from a very sharp reader on an important

symposium held recently at the American Enterprise Institute on the problem

of political bias on our college campuses. Here’s his report:

On February 14, the American Enterprise Institute hosted a session on
liberal bias in higher education. Daniel Klein went first and recounted
the findings of his study of voter registration. The tally ranged from
department to department (economics: Dems 3-1; anthro: Dems 30-1), but
overall the discrepancy was more than 8-1 Democat to Repub. And the problem
is worsening: the younger the faculty members are, the more Leftist they
are. One interesting thing was that when Klein asked faculty about their
attitudes toward different policies (such as tariffs on imports), the
Republicans showed far greater viewpoint diversity than did the Democrats.
Republicans were all over the board, while Democrats clustered at one end.
So, within the Republican professorate one finds much wider latitude on
political issues.
Then, Anne Neal of ACTA spoke. She presented strong findings from the
student survey showing that 29 percent believe that if they don’t toe the
prof’s political line it will cost them in the grade. 49 percent stated
that profs bring politics into the class even though it is unrelated to the
material.
Then, Roger Bowen of the AAUP spoke. It was amazing. Here were his rejoinders:
1. It is no surprise that most faculty in social sciences are liberals,
since those fields traditionally have been about questioning identity,
writing “progressive” history, and other causes.
2. Among liberals, there is a tremendous range of opinion, and critics such
as Klein are simplifying their ranks.
3. Outsiders haven’t the “expertise” to police the faculty. Professors have
undergone rigorous training that makes us trust their judgment more than
that of journalists and the public.
4. Folks such as David Horowitz are mounting an intimidation campaign.
(Bowen recalled his own experience having his class visited in the early
80s by rabble-rousers at Accuracy in Academia).
5. Conservatives prefer going into business, while liberals have a stronger
social bent.
6. Most students come into college with too many conservative prejudices
and they need to be shaken up.
7. He has never heard of a hiring committee that asked a candidate about
political affiliation.
8. Finally, he said, “So the faculty is Democrat. So what?”
Yes, he actually argued these points. David French, of FIRE, took him to
task for many of them. French said, ” So what? Here’s what: diversity
orientation seminars that are manipulative and coercive; speech codes; star
chambers; religious organizations asked to strip themselves of their
religion; etc.” He noted that if a discipline comes to define itself by an
agenda (such as questioning the government), it’s no longer a discipline..
Or rather, it’s an agenda passing itself off as a discipline. This is why
they don’t have to ask about political affiliation. All they need do is
examine the work to see if it meets “disciplinary criteria,” which are
already politically-coded. At that point, a political judgment may be
expressed in disciplinary terms, appearing entirely within the protocols of
peer review. French also agreed that many students enter college with
prejudices, but why is it that the prejudices of Red-state, rural,
evangelicals are the only ones challenged, and not the prejudices of
upper-west-side cosmopolitan students that are challenged?
Unfortunately, though, Bowen was able to drone on and on, making one
spurious justification after another, changing the subject when it suited
him, avoiding the problem, and slipping into simple denial mode. It was
frustrating.
One response must be made, though, to the line, “Republicans are greedy,
and so avoid academia, while Democrats care about social justice, and so
they flock to academia.” Anybody who thinks that higher education is a
place to improve social justice hasn’t been there for very
long. Egalitarian? Selfless? Duty-based? In truth, academic departments
are some of the most hierarchical places in the nation, and professors are
quick as lightning to insist on their prerogatives. They want small
classes, light administrative loads, and long vacations­and they get
them. It’s an elitist enclave, where accountability is low and ego is high.