Phi Beta Cons

What’s Liberal about Liberal Ed?

Daniel Drezner has a very fine review of Michael Berube’s What’s Liberal About the Liberal Arts on The Valve. He begins with a fine point about debates over political leanings in academia:

About the only thing I like about this debate is how it forces both sides of the political spectrum to subvert their traditional arguments and appropriate the other side’s rhetoric.  Conservatives wind up arguing that the bias problem is a structural one – and therefore the way to fix it is through some kind of ideological affirmative action program.  Liberals, when confronted with the numbers, nevertheless insist that the academy is a strict meritocracy with no old-boy networks whatsoever – and that aspiring conservative academics should quit whining and pick themselves up by their bootstraps.

His sense of the liberal perspective is highly accurate, but the conservative view is a simplification. How many serious conservative critics advocate some sort of “ideological affirmative action program”? I’ve not seen too many.  Otherwise, he’s quite correct. Conservatives have, in the past, perhaps been overly dismissive of claims of structural discouragement or obstacles to women and minorities in academia. Liberals have, in turn, been both nobly and excessively solicitous of such claims – they’re ever eager to scrutinize themselves to make sure they’ve not forgotten any possible psychological barrier to minorities (see the recent Diversity in Academic Careers issue of The Chronicle for example).  For a college to look at its faculty and realize that it lacks proportionate minority representation would prove directly self-incriminating and would be met with calls for immediate remedies. A comparable lack of conservatives would likely be met with a bemused shrug, and statement that there’s nothing to be done. Most colleges are not engaged in conscious discrimination against minorities or conservatives, but regardless of intention, a lack of the former is cause for severe self-examination while the latter is cause for… I don’t know, maybe another look at the Harper’s Index. Berube is not entirely untroubled by this. Drezner continues:

As for the effects of liberal bias, Bérubé admits that this is not a good thing within his own discipline.  The absence of traditional conservative scholarship creates the Millian problem of “dead dogma” – without being challenged, some tenets become accepted as given when they shouldn’t be.  The other problem, which Bérubé does not discuss in detail, is one of power.  In almost every social setting, those with less power tend to exaggerate the extent to which they need to please the more powerful to advance in life.  So it is in the academy.  Bérubé maintains that undergrads do not read his essays in Dissent or The Nation.  That’s probably true – but I bet they read his blog, and I have to wonder if some potential English Ph.D.’s fear the ideological gap between them and their instructor, and choose to take a pass?  This problem is not Bérubé’s fault, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Exactly – which relates directly to another liberal cause – of self-perpetuating homogeneity. Look to recent piece on search committees by Caroline Sotello Viernes-Turner in The Chronicle.

Many committees create a job description that would attract faculty members much like themselves. They advertise the position in publications that people mostly like themselves read. They evaluate résumés of people who often resemble themselves, invite three to five candidates for campus interviews who — again — are similar to themselves, and then make an offer to the person with whom they are most comfortable. Over time that process has inevitably resulted in campuses that are more homogeneous than not.

Of course she was speaking about race. Could academics consider, for a moment, that comparable processes might have something to do with the academy’s political composition?
Read Drezner’s review for a fine analysis, as well as the site’s larger Liberalpalooza discussion of the volume.

Most Popular

PC Culture

‘White Women’ Becomes a Disparaging Term

Using “white men” as a putdown is no longer extreme enough for the Left. Now it is moving on to doing the same for “white women.” How rapidly this transpired. It was less than two years ago that the approximately 98.7 percent of white women working in media who were openly rooting for Hillary Clinton ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Beatification of Beto

The media’s treatment of Texas Democratic candidate Beto O’Rourke wasn’t the most egregiously unfair coverage of the past year -- that would be the treatment of Brett Kavanaugh -- but it ranks among 2018’s most annoying. The endless glowing profiles of O’Rourke in every publication from Vanity Fair to ... Read More

The Odds Are Slim to Nunes

When the history of the 2018 midterms is written, there will be a chapter on missed opportunities for Democrats. Some may wonder if they should have spent so much money supporting Beto O’Rourke in Texas, or whether Heidi Heitkamp was doomed from the start in North Dakota. One painful question for progressives ... Read More