<p>Bay, yes. And one of the things that I think the “Choosing the RIGHT College” book and website do well is highlight colleges that follow a Great Books curriculum and/or emphasize a core curriculum made up of what (used to, at least) might constitute a “classic” liberal arts education. It is just that the authors themselves bring the cultural/social issues into the mix, which makes me take them less seriously. For instance, in the quote about Macalester above, why would multiculturalism be “wrong” from an ideological perspective that emphasizes the great works of world literature? I just don’t see the logical flow from their philosophy of higher education curricula to their issues with contemporary campus culture.</p>
<p>I don’t know why people have such a “problem” with Marxism, personally. I mean, the way it has been put into practice has been awful, but that may have actually just had more to do with the general way people “viewed” things back then. It’s tough to go from Tsarist Russia to Marxism without people trying to be czars. Tough to go from dictatorships to Marxism without the military taking over.</p>
<p>But, there’s actually not that much wrong with Marxism, in theory,just something wrong with the way we practice any government, as a species.</p>
<p>There’s not that much wrong with Libertarianism, either, since enlightened self interest would dictate that people take care of each other. It’s just that people don’t really act in their best interest, unfortunately, not long term. </p>
<p>Otherwise there would be no wars.</p>
<p>^ Bay - I’m going to resist the temptation to request a definition of what comprises “conservative point of view” these days. </p>
<p>Forty years ago (yeah I know, before your time), there were at least three distinct perspectives on Conservatism: Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, and Social Policy. Fiscal Conservatives had a range of views on Social Policy, for example, with some of those positions decidedly liberal. Those of us who grew up in those times don’t recognize what passes for conservatism today. </p>
<p>“All the policy positions I need I get from the Bible.” Really? Then why all the vehement objections to taking care of the poor and disadvantaged?</p>
<p>(That last bit is directed at politicians Bay, not you.)</p>
<p>^This is why I don’t regard contemporary evangelical denominations as true forms of Christianity. They cherry-pick the Bible to fit their politically motivated world view, and little of what they do can be seen as “Christ-like.”</p>
<p>
I’ve also read the book. I had a different take. Red light for teaching gender studies … a green light for teaching that follows the words of the bible. While the into … sticking to a traditional liberal arts study has some interest … the jist of the book was conservative=good and liberal=bad … there was little interest in a spectrum of viewpoints or a balanced environment … the interest was in a conservative viewpoint.</p>
<p>I’ve also read the report the OP cited and did not find it compelling. </p>
<ul>
<li><p>There are complaints about options for first year analysis/writing courses on topics such as feminist studies. I assume the sponsor would approve of a course on the
“Why the Reagan Revolution was The Best Thing That Ever Happened to the US” … but how is that any better than a course from the other end of the political spectrum. Frankly I think any balanced interesting offering list would have a few a student thinks look very interesting and a bunch that hold no interest/disagree with.</p></li>
<li><p>I do not doubt at all the faculty on campuses are overwhelming liberal … however I’ve never seen anything close to evidence that conservative applicants are being proportionally shut out. (Interesting “Choosing the RIGHT College” gives points to schools for staffing the faculty with profs who back traditional education and the biblical teaching … or in other words … a liberal litmus test for faculty is vile … but we give credit for having a conservative litmus test).</p></li>
<li><p>Finally, the stories of profs forcing their beliefs on their students. I’m sure among the million plus faculty members in the US there are a few who have pulled some stupid stunts … but again not exactly a lot of proof of any wide spread problem. Earlier in this thread someone ask how would a conservative feel if their prof told them they were a Marxist … probably about the same as I would feel if my prof told me they were a supply side economist. The issue is not that a students views differ from the profs but can the prof teach alternative views and be tolerant of those who disagree with them.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>^ I read the book too, and got a slightly different view. It seemed to me that the book gave preference to schools that emphasized Western Civilization and the values derived therefrom. Nothing wrong with that of course. But it also discredited schools with more progressive curricula. Was that called for? Umm …</p>
<p>I am a conservative Christian, probably one of the few on CC. I used the book Choosing the Right College when guiding my son to look at schools. I have received plenty of criticism and snide remarks on CC for my beliefs but I say, yay for freedom of speech. I know the crowd I’m dealing with here. :-)</p>
<p>My son is happily at MIT, one of the “green light” schools. It’s been a fabulous experience for him. He’s in the great minority as a Christian but has found friendships with a wonderful diverse group of students and I’ve heard nothing about disrespect for his beliefs.</p>
<p>Mini, </p>
<p>I think it’s great that Dartmouth has a Marxist professor. I don’t agree with it but I hope there can be respectful dialog between that kind of prof and other folks who don’t think like him.</p>
<p>Princeton fascinated me (my son ultimately decided not to attend) because it has the likes of Peter Singer and Robert George on campus. And Cornell West taught there before he moved on. Having that kind of diversity of thought seems appealing to me.</p>
<p>^^sbjdorlo, I like your post.</p>
<p>And just want to add that some friends who identify as devout Christians also identify as communist and Marxist. This may have been more common in the 1970s & 80s. Liberation theology seemed a pretty conservative and traditional reading of the gospels to me.</p>
<p>Haha…I love this thread! So many good insights from all points of view. I tend to agree that conservative values often = religious values. I also know “conservatives” that understand this and are able to take religion out of their arguments ( that works for me!). So… The 6,000 year old earth? Sorry, it has no business being taught on a college campus. It might however be taught in a social science class that studies why people believe what they do…and why we should strive to understand them ( even if we don’t agree).</p>
<p>I had a very " liberal" ( too me that means social policy) HS math teacher. A student in the class wanted to discuss( debate?) the young planet theory ( some math problem had to do with the age of the universe… Or something like that) and the teacher said, " and I might believe that there are little leprechauns running around Saturn with toothbrushes, but this wouldn’t be the place to debate that." LMAO</p>
<p>IMO all points of view should be welcome atba university, it’s just important that they are studied, taught, debated, etc…in the correct context.</p>
<p>I don’t agree that conservative = very religious, but I certainly think that some evangelical conservatives have tried to brand (in the “namebrand” sense, not in the “branding cattle”) conservatism that way. I know conservatives who are gay, who are atheists, who are way into conservation of the environment. I’m sure the gay Republican I know would be interested to find out that having LGBT groups on campus makes a school “not conservative”. </p>
<p>I also know plenty of religious liberals, so I’m annoyed with this false dichotomy of “religious = conservative, non-religious = liberal”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. I am an atheist conservative, so there you have it.</p>
<p>I think too many people confuse “conservative” thought with a political party platform. They are not the same.</p>
<p>It might be helpful to talk about conservative views that have nothing to do with religion. I don’t know how well represented they are at colleges nowadays, so I cannot opine whether they are fairly represented or not. I think a balance is what is important.</p>
<p>Small government
Individual freedoms
Personal responsibility
Free markets
Minimal regulation
Emphasis on private enterprise
Hard work
Self-reliance
Government out of our private lives
Freedom of association, speech and religion
Nuclear families
Private charities
Low taxes
Patriotism</p>
<p>Those are just a few I can think of off the top of my head. I am a pro-choice conservative, which works for me, in that I think it is none of the government’s business what I choose to do with my reproductive system. I do not subscribe to Intelligent Design theory, because I am an atheist, but I believe in protecting peoples’ freedom to decide (not the government) for themselves what they want to believe, study and teach.</p>
<p>Maybe college classes aren’t the intellectual forums you people expect them to be.</p>
<p>Hunt-</p>
<p>With you there. My first read was that this was a request that colleges and universities relax their hiring standards in order to hire “conservative” professors whose scholarship doesn’t quite measure up to that of the competition.</p>
<p>Heck, before reading the thread I expected that the call for “intellectual diversity” would be about admitting students with a wider range of academic abilities. Didn’t realize that it would really be about political diversity. Of course using affirmative action to bring in more “conservative” scholars may have the effect of promoting diversity in “intellect,” if these studies are to be believed. [Your</a> Brain on Politics: The Cognitive Neuroscience of Liberals and Conservatives : The Intersection](<a href=“http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/07/your-brain-on-politics-the-cognitive-neuroscience-of-liberals-and-conservatives/#.UXRINcyDVFU]Your”>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/07/your-brain-on-politics-the-cognitive-neuroscience-of-liberals-and-conservatives/#.UXRINcyDVFU)</p>
<p>Bay, I like your list. Things I haven’t been taught in college ( so far)</p>
<p>big government = good
Individual freedom = bad, in fact quite the opposite.
Personal responsibility …hmmm…maybe that those who have it are more likely to do well
Free markets… I need to still learn a lot more about this
Minimal regulation…seems like that is what happened on Wall Street…can be bad if people behave in predictable ways ( greedy? Maybe I have been taught this)
Private enterprise…yes, yes, yes, we all want to start our own companies ( start up =$$$)
Hard work, yes, I could never graduate without doing it.
Self reliance, same as above
Gov out of private life…probably have more to learn here
freedom of association ( hello LBGT groups)
Nuclear families… Sorry , have not been taught this = bad, just there are other families
Low taxes…again no direct info here ( but my parents say I will learn quick once I have to pay them)
Patriotism…sad that this is considered conservative, I don’t know I have been taught this is bad</p>
<p>No, they do not, and it is to the detriment of liberal and conservative students.</p>
<p>Students are taught to attack their opponents as bigots, rubes, Bible-thumpers, and Glenn Beck devotees. They have never read Thomas Sowell, Von Mises, Clarence Thomas, Milton Friedman, Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict, or even heard Reagan’s speech about chicken eggs and taxes. </p>
<p>Hanna inadvertently showed her ignorance of conservative thought when she blasted us for opposing sustainability. Well, has anyone here ever listened to what conservatives have to say about environmentalism? About costs-benefit analyses, the role of the free market (isn’t the Whole Foods CEO an ObamaCare opposing conservative?), and the fact that we do not want to impose expensive yuppie fads, based on unproven science, on working class people? </p>
<p>Tens of millions of college-educated people (doctors, engineers, scientists, public policy analysts, financiers) voted for Mitt Romney. Instead of assuming that they/we are rubes, why not find out what we think? Start with the assumption that we have something of value to say?</p>
<p>Aries, no offense but that’s as ignorant as the OP.</p>
<p>Two of my textbooks right now were written by Romney and Bush advisors. My econ prof is ridiculously right winged as is the textbook. He’s still a good prof though, if annoying. The textbook’s useless but not because of its slant…</p>
<p>It is a VAST stretch to call Pope John Paul II “a conservative”. He had some opinions that fall in with what Americans call “conservative” (like abortion) and some opinions that fall in with what Americans call “liberal” (like encouraging the forgiveness of debts and care for the poor). Personally, I would say that in the context of the history of Catholicism, he was quite liberal.</p>
<p>A short list of things heard on my college campus, or taught by professors there:</p>
<p>Religion oppresses women.</p>
<p>If you voted for George Bush, you hate the environment. </p>
<p>Anyone who questions global warming is a scientific rube. (Ironic when said by a poli sci major to engineers.)</p>
<p>Only repressed women wait for sex.</p>
<p>All feminists are pro-abortion and should have an abortion if pregnant in college. (This was also something I heard from a professor of economics at another school.)</p>
<p>People who vote Republican are ignorant, homophobic, hate poor people, etc. that type of hate speech is what passed for intelligent debate.</p>
<p>Many discussions of how the Constitution is racist, sexist, etc. Most students do not know, for example, that abolitionists wanted slaves to not be counted as people, and slave owners wanted them as full people.</p>
<p>More recently, the Red Cross’ rejection of blood donors who are men who have slept with men is outdated, homophobic, and relies on stereotypes that are not true. (I threw a few stats at them, which were shouted down with the most laughably faulty logic, of the type usually reserved for grade schoolers.)</p>
<p>Ah, formal logic and precision of language. Do not even get me started on how schools are not teaching any type of logic and civics.</p>
<p>Romani: I was unaware that you attended my alma mater in the late 90s. </p>
<p>Oh, you did not? Then take that “ignorant” label you tried to put on me and, no offense, superglue it to your own forehead. ;)</p>
<p>(We are speaking in the context of ideologically unbalanced universities. That you may not attend one does not disprove their existence, which you would have learned in the first ten minutes of logic class.)</p>
<p>And I could give you a list of ridiculous things I’ve heard from the right on campus by professors. </p>
<p>If you didn’t like it, you could have transferred. </p>
<p>But to say that
</p>
<p>is just wrong. Could a few profs be off their rocker? Absolutely. To generalize is ignorant.</p>
<p>Aries, if you had said “at my alma mater in the late 90s” then I would not have argued. I don’t know your experiences. You said “students” which means… well… “students” in general. NOT those at your alma mater in the late 90s.</p>