Translation: "We are STRONG!"
Posted on 12/03/2004 8:17:38 AM PST by bondserv
The Politics of Academic Scientists: Democrats Vastly Outnumber Republicans 12/02/2004
A news item in Science1 entitled “Academia as a ‘One Party’ will probably attract the attention conservative talk show hosts:
Universities in the United States are very keen on fostering “diversity” as long as it’s not ideological diversity, according to the National Association of Scholars (NAS), a conservative group of academics. Last year NAS surveyed members of scholarly societies in six fields in the social sciences, asking which political party they identified with. About 30% of the 5486 people polled responded; of these, 80% were Democrats. Economist Daniel B. Klein of Santa Clara University in California and Charlotta Stern of the Institute for Social Research in Stockholm, Sweden, conclude that because the prevalence of Democrats was even higher among younger academics, it appears that “lopsidedness has become more extreme over the past decades, and ... unless we believe that current professors occasionally mature into Republicans, it will become even more extreme in the future.”The ratios of Democrats to Republicans varied from 3 to 1 in Economics to 30 to 1 in Anthropology, with Political Science, History, Philosophy and Sociology scaling in between.2 Surprising as it may seem, it appears that Republicans are an endangered species on college campuses.
“The ‘one-party campus’ is a problem irrespective of what one’s own views happen to be,” the authors warn. (Klein says Stern is a liberal and he himself is a libertarian.) They suggest that measures could be taken--such as “proportional voting on curriculum and hiring decisions”--to enable political minority voices to be heard. (Emphasis added in all quotes.)
A ratio of even 2 to 1 is deadly to the minority. A ratio of 5 to 1 means marginalization. Someone of a minority viewpoint is dependent frequently on the cooperation of her departmental colleagues for many small considerations. Lopsidedness means that dissenters are avoided or expelled, and that any who survive are very unlikely to be vocal critics of the dominant viewpoints.
These facts are inherently important. Academia is a major part of the political culture; it profoundly influences how tens of millions of Americans will understand social affairs and, indeed, their own personal selfhood. The next step, then, is full awareness. All interested parties—students, parents, taxpayers, and the faculty themselves—should become aware of the facts.
Here is our long-sought data to corroborate what we declared was intuitively obvious back on 09/22/2003: the Darwin Party is virtually synonymous with the Democratic Party, most of whom are liberals, secularists and socialists. Who are the ones writing all those Darwinian just-so stories in the science journals? Are they the neutral, objective, unbiased scientists in lab coats? Do they represent the cross-section of American culture, values, and ideals? No: they are the same ones protesting the war against terrorism, voting for same-sex marriage, standing silent as courts trump the will of the people, and loathing the military. Since Republicans are more likely to hold conservative family values, attend church, believe in God and oppose abortion, this should make the light finally go on about the connection between Darwinism and secular liberalism, and make academics question whether Darwinian evolution is strictly a scientific issue. It’s also alarming to note the rise in anti-Semitism on college campuses, as Palestinian terrorists are given a pass while Israelite actions for their own defense are painted in the vilest terms. Notice also how the liberal academics also see the U.N. as the solution to all problems and castigate America for not taking action global warming. Are these mere coincidences? Do you begin to suspect that on some issues political idealogues are co-opting “science” to rationalize their world views?
Whatever the cause, and whatever it means, the political situation on American campuses is severely broken and needs “affirmative action” in the best sense of the phrase. How ironic that the party that parades its values of inclusiveness, diversity and tolerance should have such a wildly one-sided political spectrum in the very institution that is supposed to represent the open marketplace of ideas. These statistics should alarm Democrats as well as Republicans; imagine Congress with ratios like these, and the laws they could pass to perpetuate their dominance and suppress dissent. No one should stand for this kind of inequity in academia. We suspect that if parity is ever achieved, the Darwin Party will lose its hubris and be forced to get off the sofa (see 12/22/2003 commentary) and do real science. If that happens, Darwinism is doomed.
Common sense Ping!
I put this in chat because it is not news to most of us.
Not surprising at all
ping
Even with the odds greatly against us, they're losing the battle. The truth is hard to destroy.
One other thing is to insure you have the most recent page when you browse, make sure you have the "every visit to this page" button checked. To do this go to Tools, Internet options, General tab, Temporary Internet files section, click the Settings button. under Check for newer versions of stored pages check "every visit to this page".
Happy Freeping!
As C.S. Lewis said (paraphrasing), "Unleash the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, and He will defend Himself".
Once familiar with the authentic truth, deception is harder to swallow. The enemy, via the Universities deceptions, has reigned long enough.
Another predictable outcome, perhaps worthy of its own theory.
LOL...
It looks like the Manger scene won't be displayed in the "Hard" science departments this year. :-)
Like you, I am encouraged.
The power of persuasion, and the lack of a need to use dirty tactics, are our strengths.
Think many evos will show up to defend their liberal buddies?
Thanks for the ping!
They had to perform a study to determine this? We've known this for a long time.
Add Steven Weinberg to the enemies lists.Outgoing Armey says liberals don't have sci-IQScience, according to Armey, is the stomping ground of conservatives. "Conservatives," said the Texas Republican, "have a deeper intellect and tend to have occupations of the brain in fields like engineering, science and economics. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to flock to occupations of the heart."
Popular Science
Dec 2002
...[I]t's not hard to find blue chip scientists who take issue with Armey—including some of the 53 Nobel laureates on the board of the Federation of American Scientists, a social policy organization often described as a "liberal think tank."
"Armey is just completely wrong," says Nobel physicist Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas at Austin. "I have lots of political conversations with other physicists and my impression is that, on average, physicists are extremely liberal in their politics. I certainly am."
Translation: "We are STRONG!"
This drive has found fertile ground in this part of Pennsylvania, where billboards reading, "Many books inform but only the Bible transforms" line the road, and family restaurants offer free booklets titled "What the Bible says about moral purity" and "The Bible is God's word" at the door.
"These brochures give you an idea where some people in this community are coming from," said Jeff Brown, 54, who, along with his wife Carol, 57, resigned from the school board after they voted against changing the biology curriculum.
Yingling, who voted in favor, said she believes God created the world in six days and doesn't believe in evolution "at all." Another board member who supported the measure, William Buckingham, refused to say what he believes but has identified himself as a born-again Christian.
...
"A guy came up to me and said, 'Wait a minute, you believe in God and evolution at the same time? Evolution isn't in the Bible!' " said Brown, nibbling on a deep-fried mozzarella stick at the Shiloh Family Restaurant on Route 74. As he became more agitated, his voice grew louder, and other customers -- mostly gray-haired women and elderly men in baseball hats -- turned their heads to look at the couple. Carol Brown kept putting her index finger to her lips, gesturing for her husband to be quieter.
After the Browns left the restaurant, a waitress in her 30s slipped a note to a Chronicle reporter.
"Beware," it read. "God wrote over 2,000 years ago that there would be false prophets and teachers. If you would like to know the truth read the Bible."
- Anti-evolution teachings gain foothold in U.S. schools
It's posts like this (not yours, Jenny, the original article!)which illustrate the attitude which has driven so many bright people away from even considering examining the ideas of conservatism or libertarianism. And for the record, The National Association of Scholars, the most powerful organization standing up for conservatives in the academy, is strongly pro-evolution, and against the injection of junk like Intelligent Design (the postmodernism of the Right) into any educational curriculum.
Why the focus on Science?
ALL fields of study are this way!
Even though you don't like their theology and politial view: they SURE know how to proselyze!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.