Lack of Conservative Intellectuals (OxyMoran) at colleges.

This article is about 20 months old but it still is relevant. I just seeth with near hatred for people like dinesh d'souza, shelby steele, jc watts, faoud what ever his last name is, and other sellouts. Now it appears there is a lack of conservative voice on campuses. There is a reason for that, the university is one of the few, if not only, places where there is a free exchange of ideas, and not liable to be stifled by a corporate media. The thing that bothers me now, is the burgeoning conservative colleges, many of which exist soley for the purpose of producing politicians. These so-called conservative colleges have psychology departments (many of which promulgate Whitney's blacks are genetically inferior believe, and the Bell Curve). Also what is with the admission that they were created to prevent students from losing faith? I'm sorry but any student of psychology or the humanities who is religiousm is not qualified to be in the field. The studies prove it, yet the Morans want to breakdown intellectual order.

(i know frontpage is david horowitz paper but it serves to prove my point)
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=2722
------------------snip------------------
Few conservatives make it past the gauntlet of faculty hiring in departments such as political science, history, or English. When a reporter from Denver's Rocky Mountain News did a survey of the humanities and social sciences at the University of Colorado (Boulder), he found, "Of the 190 professors affiliated with a political party, 184 were Democrats." There wasn't a single Republican in the English, psychology, journalism or philosophy departments; nor were there any in such enclaves of freedom as women's studies, ethnic studies, or gay and lesbian studies. A 1999 survey of history departments found 22 Democrats at Stanford, and 2 Republicans. At Cornell and Dartmouth there were 29 and 10 Democrats, respectively; but not a single Republican in either school's history department.

The dearth of conservatives in psychology departments is so striking, that one (politically liberal) professor has proposed affirmative action outreach. Richard Redding, a professor of psychology at Villanova University, writing in a recent issue of American Psychologist, notes that of the 31 social policy articles that appeared in American Psychologist between 1990 and 1999, 30 could be classified as liberal; one as conservative. The key issue, as Redding rightly sees it, is not the preponderance of Democrats over Republicans, but the liberal policy of systematically excluding conservatives. Redding cites an experiment in which several graduate departments received mock applications from two candidates nearly identical in all ways save one: one "applicant" disclosed that he was a conservative Christian. The professors judged the non-conservative to be the significantly better candidate. Redding asks, rhetorically: "Do we want a professional world where our liberal world view prevents us from considering valuable strengths of conservative approaches to social problems . . .where conservatives are reluctant to enter the profession and we tacitly discriminate against them if they do? That, in fact, is the academic world we now have and it is being perpetuated."

----------------------------------------------------------


Now most idoits would see that as intolerance, but it is justified. Pick any conservative speaker, anyone, and i guarantee you will find a history of racism, sexism, homophobia et cetra. I'll pick a random one, Dinesh D'souza


Dinesh D'Souza is associated with the American Enterprise Institute, a
conservative think-tank. As an undergraduate student at Dartmouth College,
D'Souza founded and served as editor of the ultra-conservative Dartmouth
Review. The Review was reportedly kicked off campus after a student uproar
following the paper's publishing of "humorous" articles featuring KKK-type
stereotypes of Black students. During D'Souza's term as editor, the Review
also reportedly published private correspondence of gay students stolen by
its staff members.

D'Souza's next journalistic stint was as editor of Prospect, a paper that
under his leadership published an attack on women's studies and an "expose"
of the sex life of a woman undergraduate student, without her permission


D’Souza’s book “The End of Racism” argues that low-income Black people are
basically "pathological" and that white racism isn't really racism at all,
just a logical response to this "pathology."

Given that he is against Affirmative action, is for
the repealing of the Civil Right Act of 1964, and argues that slavery was
not racist … We can only imagine what he will say about Muslims and his
justifications for the current “War on Terror.”




Gee I wonder why that shit is ridiculed on campuses. I literally think Conservative Intellectual is an oxymoron. There is some mental/chracter defect (in my opinion) if someone who has a college degree promulgates shit like homosexuality is antitical to society.


I admit i am an admirer of Camille Paglia, but she is hardly a conservative. The main thing i disagree with her on is rush limbaugh, i think she is just trying to be funny when she makes semi-positive remarks about him. But this is not the mind of a conservative woman.

Now, when people call me a neocon, what kind of idiots are they? I'm someone who is on the record as being pro-pornography--all the way through kiddie porn and snuff films. I'm pro-prostitution--I mean really pro, not just pro-prostitute and against prostitution. I'm pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, pro-drag queens, pro-legalization of drugs. This is neoconservative? What kind of amateurishness is out there that people in the press--including The Village Voice and Mother Jones and things like that, which should be the voices of liberalism--what kind of stupid amateurish thinking is this to label me a neoconservative?


Now I admit i have a hard time trying to figure out prof.Paglia but since conservatives hate her, i figure she has to be in the moderate category, but with statements like that i soemtimes wonder.


The right wing has managed to gain control over every aspect of america. I hope the day never comes when they get into true academia/arts and entertainment. But i worry about this wanton greed. From my point of view, most commercial rappers seem to have a republican view of the world, where the bottom line is the ultimate goal in life, by any means neccesary.


The Ultimate hillarity is the scientist who is apart of the Intelligent Design crowd. This is the favored move of the right, trump someone out so you can say "Look look they agree". No scientist of any relevance endorses thier bullshit, but its sad that the 50 or so i know of, are mostly teachers at city colleges, so some students are being infected with illogic. When i hear a college grad say fatous things such as:
"Public schools aren't grounded in reality. I believe in creationism"

I wonder if the clock is rolling back.

We need to hire someone to teach communist or socialist economics rather than the strict diet of capitalism they teach in business schools now.

you wont hear das kapital quoted in a positive light at chicago u.

"conservative intellectuals" pretty much everywhere -- especially on talk radio! Heck, they're nearly as hard to find as "compassionate conservatives"!

2000.

Where will it stop, especially if Free Americans cannot stop Orwellian-Totalitarian-Bushevik Imperial Amerika from coming into being fully transformed.

In that case, the French Aristocracy of the 1780s or the post-Inquisition 1590s.

Can anyone guess the reason why?

It's obvious. If you start factoring in business, engineering, law, the administration, etc. then the whole notion of an academy dominated by "tenured radicals" falls apart.

That's why these "studies" always examine a few carefully selected departments that everyone knows to be liberal, like women's studies and English, and then extrapolate that very limited sample to the entire university.

It's self-selecting.

I was in graduate school with a few conservatives (in English/ Rhetoric). Did they catch some shit from time to time? Sure. You should have seen the shit caught by moderate liberals when the marxists were at full tilt! BTW: All the conservative PhDs that came out of my department got tenure-line jobs right out of graduate school, some in R-1s.

Can you do a women's studies major and be a conservative? yes. But you can't come in spouting the usual right wing bullshit and expect not to be called on it. You have to marshall your arguments carefully. That is, just as carefully as everybody else. It is also difficult to complete a degree and get tenure and promotion if your studies fall well outside the mainstream in a discipline. None of this is new, despite this latest series of lies from Horowitz and company.

There's no such thing as a conservative intellectual!

In fact, Bill Kristol will smack down almost anyone on DU in a stage debate. The man is well-read and well-trained in classical argumentation. Whether you agree with him or not is another question. See also Allen Bloom 9shitbird of first magnitude, but no dummy).

To me it's like Noam Chomsky being a right winger. When you are that educated, especially in political history, and still fall to the right, there is something sinister going on. It's just like those creation "scientists"

queer theory professors?

I mean, please. There are plenty of conservatives in economics, finance, the sciences, law, etc., etc., etc. Do the exact same study in Ag Sci.

This is a self-selecting problem, for the most part. No conservatives in women's studies? Why, has the Heritage Foundation been turning out women's studies fellows of late?

The premise of Horowitz rag is preposterous, and the data set dishonest.

It's that they're dumbasses.

You know why liberals dominate academic fields? Because conservatives can't rectify their stupid-ass beliefs with the rigorous scientific process that academia must go through. Take your example, for instance.


D’Souza’s book “The End of Racism” argues that low-income Black people are
basically "pathological" and that white racism isn't really racism at all,
just a logical response to this "pathology."

That's not just racist, it's stupid. It's not bourne out by any scientific evidence. In fact, it flies in the face of scientific evidence. It flies in the face of LOGIC.

Why, exactly, should universities hire morons to teach and research?

"Now we're working to establish Liberty University School of Law, which will open its doors in August 2004. We are going to teach lawyers to think in a biblical, Christian world view."