Conservatives need not apply? < "stupid people are generally conservative ">

Charleston.net ^ | Wednesday, February 11, 2004 | Editors

[SpinyNorman]

Robert Brandon, chair of the Duke University Philosophy Department, gives this explanation of why faculties at U.S. universities usually lean to the political left: "We try to hire the best, smartest people available. If, as John Stuart Mill said, stupid people are generally conservative, then there are lots of conservatives we will never hire." Professor Brandon, expounding on the 21st century implications of that 19th century British philosopher's observation: "Mill's analysis may go some way towards explaining the power of the Republican party in our society and the relative scarcity of Republicans in academia. Players in the NBA tend to be taller than average. There is a good reason for this. Members of academia tend to be a bit smarter than average. There is a good reason for this too."

If this is an example of his analytical skills, then the students using his books are being sorely deprived.

To wit: let's use his own example, "Players in the NBA tend to be taller than average. There is a good reason for this." Now to compare apples and apples, the analogous statement should be "Members of academia tend to be more liberal. There is a good reason for this."

In both cases, it is because the people who hire them hire those who will be team players, and be agreeable with the staff or administration, and presumably can do the job. If basketball players were turned down for the job, regardless of how well they played, simply because they were conservatives, would that mean that conservative basketball players are lousy players? I think Charles Barkley would disagree. That is what Brandon's department is doing, segregating out conservatives for their political beliefs, not their relative intelligence, and using twisted logic to justify his biased hiring. Of course, it will get to the point where conservative applicants will simply refuse to even apply, knowing his department's biases, and then he will assume (bad practice for a scientist of any sort) that only liberals are "smart" enought to be candidates for his department. This is first order cyclical reasoning. If he liked white candidates rather than black candidates, he would be called on it, but the subtleness of political orientations allows him to discriminate without risk.

If Brandon's dishonest comparisons are his "good reasons," and designed to mask his bias, and he should be called on it. It is a disservice to the university and the students. Maybe conservatives need "affirmative action" LOL!

Publicly presenting such an illogical argument is a testament to his own arrogance and lack of intelligence. That, and tenure.

[Cooter]

Also, Dick Cheney. They can't tag him with the stupid label, so he's portrayed as mean/evil.

[SpinyNorman]

Is it just me, or does ignorance go hand in hand with liberalism and terrorism?

That is what Sean Hannity's new book must be all about. Definitely a must-read!

[WOSG]

Anyone who has read Mill, of course, realizes that to him, and in 19th century England generally, "liberal" meant being free market oriented as opposed to those of inherited wealth in the British aristocracy, who believed in status. The terms have almost, but not quite, been completely reversed today in America. A "liberal" in 19th century England today in America would be considered libertarian conservative. It is somewhat dishonest for a professor of philosophy at a leading university to use Mill's version of liberalism as if it were equivalent to the Statists who call themselves liberal in America today. Mill had no confidence in the mechamisms of the State nor in the kind of speech fascism that is attendant upon modern American "liberalism."

Right. John Stuart Mill was a 'classical liberal' and a a rationalist would be aghast at the socialistic pretensions and irrational behavior of the 'liberal' elites.

The trashing at Duke today of what today are labeled "conservative" thinkers and speakers and students would be appalling to John Stuart Mill. Any decent intellectual would be ashamed of the vast wasteland that US humanities depts have become. They are barbaric palaces where yahoos scream insults at people and things that are decent, honorable and wise. The base their belief systems on easily refutable foundation and survive only through intimidation of views that are contrary; the whole PC facade survives through repression of opposition. They are the inmates and they run the asylum. Mill would be appalled.

[sandbar]

I don't think that it is that conservatives are 'stupid', but that the liberal idiots don't know how to function intellectually when someone is constantly challenging thier beliefs. In other words, "Don't confuse me with the truth!"

[kevkrom]

If, as John Stuart Mill said, stupid people are generally conservative

In addition to all of the other debunking going on, let me point out that the term "conservative" does not necessarily mean the same thing today as it did in Mill's time. The Founding Fathers would be considered very conservative in today's language, but were radically liberal in their own times.

The terms "liberal" and "conservative" are poorly applied. They, along with "moderate", should be modifiers, not nouns. The real divisions are "individualist" vs. "statist/collectivist". Today's "liberals" are what I would call moderate-to-liberal collectivists. The majority of Republican elected officials are in the conservative collectivist to conservative individualist ranges (with obvious exceptions like Licoln Chafee [moderate collectivist] and Ran Paul [liberal individualist]). The average FR member is probably a conservative to moderate individualist, with a significant minority of liberal individualists and conservative collectivists.

[BlueNgold]

He finally stated publicly what they tell themselves and each other privately. And they wonder why the lovely and talented Ms. Ingraham calls them 'elites'??

[WV Mountain Mama]

Hey, I was a teacher! Of course, I planned on teaching until I had kids, which makes me not fit in with the others. I quit 3 years ago when I had my kids too. Now that I have carefully removed myself from being a stereotypical teacher (there were only a handful of us), I would have to say that a minimum 85% of all teachers are jerks that not only have forgotten that they used to be kids, they have forgotten how to think for themselves.

Let me also say that I had a college prof tell our class that acid was safer to do than weed. Oh yeah, she was one of the best and brightest alright! (sarcasm)

[WOSG]

I have an IQ of 150, did well throughout my schooling, and have a PhD from a top University (UIUC). And I'm conservative.

I never considered an academic career IN PART because the Universities are nests of liberal PC nonsense and my "karma" couldnt tolerate being in such a depressing environment and seeing such cr*p all the time. Moreover, I've seen enough bias in academia to know that white male conservatives would not be treated as well as others. For example, if I was wearing a dress instead of a suit, a PhD in my area would be enough to get a much more prestigious position ("affirmative action" and "diversity"ya know). The odds are stacked against the white male conservatives and i'd rather not play that game.

Plus, I didnt want to be a closeted conservative just to have a job.

I salute the conservatives who ARE on campus, on the front lines of the cultural and political battles. My hat's off to you!

[metesky]

Furthermore, how could he forget all those buttons on his shirt in that picture.....

Twenty five years ago it worked like a charm on the coeds and he's never gotten over it.

[Big Mack]

Those that can do, do! Those that can't do,become faculity.

[thackney]

Members of academia tend to be a bit smarter than average

Members of academia tend to find it difficult supporting themselves in the working world. Members of academia tend to depend of tenure to provide their income.

[HungarianGypsy]

IMHO, true intellect doesn't come from being able to quote textbooks and former professors (as many libs have a talent for). True intelligence is taking what you have learned and still being able to think for oneself.

[68skylark]

This professor may have a point. I've often thought that conservatives who donate to colleges are funding their enemies -- and that's a stupid thing to do.

[zygoat]

As a stupid rebulican I had a few questions for this mental giant. I asked him why the voters of the mentally superior party-couldn't figure out a simple ballot,- are trying to lower test scores so that even they could graduate (even after multiple chances), and on and on. I then informed him that without these moronic millions, and the slightly more intelligent communists that lead them, there would NEVER be another democrat in the Whitehouse. Then I called him an idiot, and told him to enjoy the November elections. Because I know I will.

[AppauledAtAppeasementConservat]

This professor lends credence to the evolutionary theory that he is a descendant of monkeys.

[ahumblefan]

Not everyone who lacks critical thinking skills is Liberal, but all Liberals lack critical thinking skills.

[TexasCajun]

A Legend in His Own Mind!!

Just another snobish, elitist, liberal democratic career student.

[mj81]

To an academic, there is no greater fear than intellectual scorn. Hence the conformity among them.

In addition, many facutly searches boil down to answering "Would this applicant make a colleague with whom we could work for years to come?" Change "colleague" to "comrade"....

[AppauledAtAppeasementConservat]

"Alas, the principles of Conservatism, such as smaller government, are looked down upon by those who depend on the government for their daily bread."

Seeing alot of these liberals lately crying at the thought of being weened from the government teet.