by Nicholas Kristof
Hat tip: Dr. Jean-Charles Bensoussan
When perspectives are unrepresented in
discussions, when some kinds of thinkers aren’t at the table, classrooms
become echo chambers rather than sounding boards — and we all lose.
We
progressives believe in diversity, and we want women, blacks,
Latinos, gays and Muslims at the table — er, so long as they aren’t
conservatives.
Universities are the bedrock of progressive values, but the one kind
of diversity that universities disregard is ideological and religious.
We’re fine with people who don’t look like us, as long as they think
like us.
OK, that’s a little harsh. But consider George Yancey, a sociologist who is black and evangelical.
“Outside of academia I faced more problems as a black,” he told me.
“But inside academia I face more problems as a Christian, and it is not
even close.”
I’ve been thinking about this because on Facebook recently I wondered
aloud whether universities stigmatize conservatives and undermine
intellectual diversity. The scornful reaction from my fellow liberals
proved the point.
“Much of the ‘conservative’ worldview consists of ideas that are known empirically to be false,” said Carmi.
“The truth has a liberal slant,” wrote Michelle.
“Why stop there?” asked Steven. “How about we make faculties more diverse by hiring idiots?”
To me, the conversation illuminated primarily liberal arrogance — the
implication that conservatives don’t have anything significant to add
to the discussion. My Facebook followers have incredible compassion for
war victims in South Sudan, for kids who have been trafficked, even for
abused chickens, but no obvious empathy for conservative scholars
facing discrimination.
The stakes involve not just fairness to conservatives or evangelical
Christians, not just whether progressives will be true to their own
values, not just the benefits that come from diversity (and diversity of
thought is arguably among the most important kinds), but also the
quality of education itself. When perspectives are unrepresented in
discussions, when some kinds of thinkers aren’t at the table, classrooms
become echo chambers rather than sounding boards — and we all lose.
Four studies found that the proportion of professors in the humanities
who are Republicans ranges between 6 and 11 percent, and in the social
sciences between 7 and 9 percent.
Conservatives can be spotted in the sciences and in economics, but
they are virtually an endangered species in fields like anthropology,
sociology, history and literature. One study found that only 2 percent
of English professors are Republicans (although a large share are
independents).
In contrast, some 18 percent of social scientists say they are
Marxist. So it’s easier to find a Marxist in some disciplines than a
Republican.
The scarcity of conservatives seems driven in part by discrimination.
One peer-reviewed study found that one-third of social psychologists
admitted that if choosing between two equally qualified job candidates,
they would be inclined to discriminate against the more conservative
candidate.
Yancey, the black sociologist, who now teaches at the University of
North Texas, conducted a survey in which up to 30 percent of academics
said that they would be less likely to support a job seeker if they knew
that the person was a Republican.
The discrimination becomes worse if the applicant is an evangelical
Christian. According to Yancey’s study, 59 percent of anthropologists
and 53 percent of English professors would be less likely to hire
someone they found out was an evangelical.
“Of course there are biases against evangelicals on campuses,” notes Jonathan L. Walton, the Plummer Professor ofChristian
Morals at Harvard. Walton, a black evangelical, adds that the
condescension toward evangelicals echoes the patronizing attitude
toward racial minorities: “The same arguments I hear people make about
evangelicals sound so familiar to the ways people often describe folk
of color, i.e. politically unsophisticated, lacking education, angry,
bitter, emotional, poor.”
A study published in the American Journal of Political Science
underscored how powerful political bias can be. In an experiment,
Democrats and Republicans were asked to choose a scholarship winner
from among (fictitious) finalists, with the experiment tweaked so that
applicants sometimes included the president of the Democratic or
Republican club, while varying the credentials and race of each.
Four-fifths of Democrats and Republicans alike chose a student of their
own party to win a scholarship, and discrimination against people of the
other party was much greater than discrimination based on race.
“I am the equivalent of someone who was gay in Mississippi in 1950,” a
conservative professor is quoted as saying in “Passing on the Right,” a
new book about right-wing faculty members by Jon A. Shields and Joshua
M. Dunn Sr. That’s a metaphor that conservative scholars often use,
with talk of remaining in the closet early in one’s career and then
“comingout” after receiving tenure.
This bias on campuses creates liberal privilege. A friend is studying
for the Law School Admission Test, and the test preparation company she
is using offers test-takers a tip: Reading comprehension questions will
typically have a liberal slant and a liberal answer.
Some liberals think that right-wingers self-select away from academic
paths in part because they are money-grubbers who prefer more lucrative
professions. But that doesn’t explain why there are conservative math
professors but not many right-wing anthropologists.
It’s also liberal poppycock that there aren’t smart conservatives or
evangelicals. Richard Posner is a more-or-less conservative who is the
most cited legal scholar of all time. With her experience and intellect,
Condoleezza Rice would enhance any political science department.
Francis Collins is an evangelical Christian and famed geneticist who has
led the Human Genome Project and the National Institutes of Health.
And if you’re saying that conservatives may be tolerable, but
evangelical Christians aren’t — well, are you really saying you would
have discriminated against the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.?
Jonathan Haidt, a centrist social psychologist at New York
University, cites data suggesting that the share of conservatives in
academia has plunged, and he has started a website, Heterodox Academy,
to champion ideological diversity on campuses.
“Universities are unlike other institutions in that they absolutely
require that people challenge each other so that the truth can emerge
from limited, biased, flawed individuals,” he says. “If they lose
intellectual diversity, or if they develop norms of ‘safety’ that trump
challenge, they die. And this is what has been happening since the
1990s.”
Should universities offer affirmative action for conservatives and
evangelicals? I don’t think so, partly because surveys find that
conservative scholars themselves oppose the idea. But it’s important to
have a frank discussion on campuses about ideological diversity. To me,
this seems a liberal blind spot.
Universities should be a hubbub of the full range of political
perspectives from A to Z, not just from V to Z. So maybe we progressives
could take a brief break from attacking the other side and more broadly
incorporate values that we supposedlycherish — like diversity — in our
own dominions.
Nicholas Kristof is a columnist for the New York Times.
Source: http://santarosapressdemocrat.ca.newsmemory.com/publink.php?shareid=0d5214ea8#.V1C39HBHBn0.gmail
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
