LAC mistake for a conservative kid?

JHS · February 25, 2009, 3:46pm

winchester, I have two kids at the University of Chicago. While there’s no question that there is a lot of liberal faculty there, and that a majority of the students are more liberal than not, there’s also a critical mass (and more) of conservative faculty and conservative students, too. And it is very much the goal of the university to foster and encourage diversity of political thought, as well as rigor and respectfulness of political dialogue. Everyone – liberal and conservative – is committed to that, and proud of their success in achieving it.

It’s an admirable institution – not perfect, but pretty darn good. I have been pleased with the extent to which my kids have had to learn classic conservative ideas and arguments. One rarely if ever hears complaints like the OP’s about Chicago.

It’s also a place where essentially no one hews to any particular party line. It’s more “let a thousand idiosyncratic flowers bloom!”

teriwtt · February 25, 2009, 3:57pm

I’m not sure what you meant by this. I’ve lived ten of my adult year lives in major college towns (Austin and Madison), and am a bleeding heart liberal. However, I stayed home with both of my kids and nursed the two for a combination of 42 months. The liberal stance that I followed was that it was my choice.

winchester · February 25, 2009, 4:13pm

JHS

Congratulations on having two kids at the University of Chicago.

Seriously, putting aside the “sport” of spirited political debate for a moment to talk about real life, I have to say that that’s a true accomplishment that I’m sure you are justifiably very proud of. My son is a freshman in a large state university. My daughter is a high school senior awaiting responses from the schools she applied to. We looked closely at Chicago for both of them so I’m familiar with the academic reputation of that school. As it turned out, that school was in the “reach” category for my kids so they both ended up applying elsewhere. At the risk of sounding patronizing, which I truly do not intend, that fact that you have two kids there is a reflection not only of your kids but also of heir upbringing. Congrats to all.

winchester · February 25, 2009, 4:16pm

Here’s one more survey that I found, entitled “A Profile of American College Faculty, Volume I: Political Beliefs & Behavior” by Gary A. Tobin and Aryeh K. Weinberg, of the Institute for Jewish & Community Research.

Their findings corroborate my stance.

<a href=“http://jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultySurvey_Web.pdf[/url]”>http://jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultySurvey_Web.pdf</a>

afadad · February 25, 2009, 4:22pm

Excellent point teriwtt. The problem is; there’s a lot of your liberal brothers and sisters who specifically believe that their liberalism specifically means each person is allowed their own choice and opinion. UNLESS of course it differs with their opinion and choice. I.e. How much conflict was there during the election when groups like NOW supports a “Woman’s Right/Choice”; but they didn’t LIKE the choice Sarah Palin made having a large family and keeping a baby that had downs syndrome instead of having an abortion. They didn’t even go there. And the national headquarters apparently had some issues when some of their district officers supported and appeared with Governor Palin. It was in conflict with their liberal/democratic support and social position.

So while I applaud that your liberalism means you get to think and do for yourself, there are many liberals who wouldn’t even want you in the same room as them because you didn’t do it the way they would have “suggested”.

geeps20 · February 25, 2009, 5:56pm

"your kid likely didn’t want to hear ideas that oppose yours… er… his. It’s not whether a professor pushes his/her beliefs that is objectionable, however – it’s only if those beliefs are not conservative ones that are the issue.

So it’s not correct to claim that your kid doesn’t want to hear a professor’s political beliefs in a classroom discussion. Your kid just doesn’t want to hear liberal ideas."

whatever you say…it sounds like you have it all figured out…you didn’t even have to ask the question.

winchester · February 26, 2009, 9:55am

JHS

You said I don’t agree with you that Ronald Reagan was anything like an intellectual conservative.

With respect:

<ul>
<li>Of Course * Ronald Reagan was an intellectual.</li>
</ul>

Read his writings:

The Reagan Diaries by Ronald Reagan

Reagan, In His Own Hand: The Writings of Ronald Reagan that Reveal His Revolutionary Vision for America by George P. Shultz, Kiron K. Skinner, Annelise Anderson, and Martin Anderson

Listen to his radio addresses:

Reagan in His Own Voice: Ronald Reagan’s Radio Addresses by Ronald Reagan

He was highly intelligent and deeply thoughtful; introspective and forward looking. He was principled; holding to a set of fundamental beliefs that were thoroughly thought out and highly rational. He was visionary; able to translate his beliefs into practical action. He was a gifted communicator; able to convey his beliefs in language that was simple yet elegant. If thats not intellectual then nothing is.

Side topic:

You know, when you say that Reagan was not intellectual one has to wonder if youre even paying attention. (And again, Im talking to the collective you, not you personally. Your statement is a common one, from liberals anyway.) And it plays right into the image of liberalism - in the eyes of conservatives - of smug, self righteous, we know better elitism that in the light of day appears void of true understanding.

You dont know better. You really dont. And neither do conservatives. The difference is that conservatives recognize this. Which is why conservatism relies more heavily on the lessons of history than it does on the latest great idea.

(I know my rhetoric may sound a bit over the top when I go on about the elitism of liberalism. I dont mean to sound overly strident. But a personal pet peeve of mine about people in general, unrelated to politics, is when they get all up in your face about something, and talk with a tone of authority and confidence because they’re certain that they’re correct, when in truth it is clear that they are either uniformed, not thinking clearly, or both. Getting back to politics, the holier than though tone, backed up by misrepresented facts and reason that is twisted to meet the desired end seems to me to be a common malady among liberals.)

winchester · February 26, 2009, 9:56am

JHS

You said, “I think it’s a little disingenuous to characterize them as simply picking and choosing the tried-and-true.”

I’ve addressed this already but I’ve thought about it a little more and I’d like to add this:

You’re correct when you say that the founders didn’t “pick and choose.” I grant you that that’s an oversimplification that kind of makes is sound as simple as deciding between Cheerios and Corn Flakes at the supermarket.

But they were definitely students of history who made a serious attempt to learn the lessons that it teaches and apply them to the new government they were creating; Madison in particular. He spent the months leading up to the Constitutional convention studying previous civilizations and their governments. He studies the Greeks, Romans, Athenians and others. He wrote a paper on his findings. The paper was not for publication. His sole purpose in writing it was to prepare for the convention; to be intellectually ready to speak extemporaneously during the intense debates that he knew were on the horizon. He wrote a second paper, for the same reasons, analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the U.S. government - the confederation - that existed prior to the adoption of the Constitution.

Oh, you also said “not to mention that the very idea of a written constitution was a novel and somewhat radical idea.”

Also correct. The ideas within it are conservative (there’s at least one whole book on this topic alone), as was the approach that was used to write it (as I’ve described), but your words are quite similar to those used by Forrest McDonald in his book Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution. (I don’t have the book in front of me so I can’t offer the exact quote, but if memory serves, your words are close enough; “horseshoes and hand grenades,” as they say.) That said, I question this notion somewhat, because constitutions existed within the 13 colonies prior to the writing of the U.S. Constitution, as did other governing documents such as the Magna Carta and even the Mayflower Compact 160 years prior. I think that the “radical” element of the U.S. Constitution, the “New Order for the Ages” (Novus ordo seclorum) was Republicanism; the rule of law and popular sovereignty.

yorkyfan · February 26, 2009, 11:29am

The OP has a valid question when I think about it. We are a third-generation atheist family with democratic leanings. If my atheist son wanted to have his world view seriously challenged, he would have attended colleges like Christendom, Liberty, Patrick Henry or Eastern Mennonite. No doubt, at those schools he would have had his atheism and liberalism challenged by students and professors alike on a daily basis.

But… that is not the experience he wanted. He is passionate about biology, computers and mathematics. He wants to study and think about those areas; he is not interested in constantly defending his atheism. (He has had to do that since elementary school and he is tired of it.) Does that mean that his education is somehow inferior to a kid who goes to school to have his world views challenged? No, I don’t think so. He has deepened his passion for biology and chemistry. He calls us every week with news of exciting lab work. When he graduates, I doubt his politics or atheism will have changed at all.

The OP son sounds like he is interested in business. He is not interested in constantly having his conservative views challenged by faculty and students. And I do believe that, if he attended a highly selective NE LAC, he would have to defend his conservative views much more than a liberal student would have to defend his or her liberal views.

But, the good news is that there are many schools in NE where he can get an outstanding education and not have to constantly defend himself. Good luck to him!

Cardinal_Fang · February 26, 2009, 11:52am

Yorkyfan, your son could not go to Liberty or Patrick Henry. No matter what his academic achievements, he would not be accepted there. Unlike elite academic schools, Liberty and Patrick Henry require a Statement of Faith. They are not interested in diversity of opinion. They do not accept atheists, period.

Anecdotally, it’s difficult for conservatives at schools like ultra-liberal Macalester. But there are some conservatives there, and no one is ejected from Macalester for being an avowed Republican. An avowed atheist would be ejected from Liberty.

owlice · February 26, 2009, 12:00pm

But I did ask the question, and I’m still waiting for an answer to it.

yorkyfan · February 26, 2009, 12:30pm

Cardinal Fang,
You’re right. Patrick Henry, Liberty are not good examples. However I can add to the list of schools that might well have accepted my son. Catholic University of America, Ave Maria, University of Dallas… The point is that there are many faith-based schools that could have accepted my son. At these schools my son’s atheism may very well have been constantly challenged.

In fact, we did consider briefly Holy Cross in Massachusetts and Fairfield in Connecticut. These schools are excellent liberal arts universities and you gotta love their 4-year grad rates! But my son was leery. Many students who attend these schools are graduates of New England parochial schools and he was worried that his atheism would come under constant attack. So he quickly discarded those schools. The point is he didn’t want to defend his world view; he just wanted to study science, make some friends, and (most of important of all) get away from his parents! So he self-selected against religious schools.

…which is why I can understand and sympathize with OP and her son. Her son concerns are valid.

geeps20 · February 26, 2009, 12:42pm

"But I did ask the question, and I’m still waiting for an answer to it. "

pointless…move on

Cardinal_Fang · February 26, 2009, 1:08pm

Yorky,

Whether an atheist could be happy at Holy Cross, Catholic University or University of Dallas would be an interesting discussion. I bet there are atheists at those schools. Is their atheism constantly being challenged by professors? I suspect not, but I don’t know.

No doubt if such students are open about their non-belief, they are frequently challenged by other students. I suspect a strong-willed atheist who loved to debate might like it there, but a more mellow atheist would not. Some atheists considering these schools might want to know how many like-minded students attend; would they be completely isolated in their belief, or would they find other atheists to support them?

For an individual atheist considering such schools and asking for information about them, we’d want to know what would constitute unwelcome religious overtures. For the OP in this thread, we want to know what would constitute unwelcome injection of political belief, but the OP won’t tell us.

geeps20 · February 26, 2009, 1:14pm

“For the OP in this thread, we want to know what would constitute unwelcome injection of political belief, but the OP won’t tell us.”

…you really can’t figure it out ?

“He doesn’t want teacher’s expressing their political beliefs in classes that don’t warrant a political viewpoint…is that asking too much?”

“This is basically my main concern…do professors at LACs in general want their viewpoint upheld and hold grudges against differing views?”

“That was never mentioned…just concerned in regards to schools where their professors push there views.”

“Again, I’m looking for schools were professors do not express their personal beliefs in classes were they are not needed…that’s all.”

“Slithey…I agree…that would be a great discussion for the classroom…if the teacher is preaching it as a fact though, and belittling any other views…then that would be wrong.”

.“I don’t know how to be any clearer…I don’t want anything discussed as fact, if it is not…that goes for religion, global warming, whatever. A good professor will create an atmosphere where all views can be heard… no one being scorned or ridiculed.”

“and again, not “occasional liberal view”…pushing, and or stating liberal opinion as fact”

“I don’t know how many ways I can say it…and to be honest, this is getting old. I think my point is and was clear…I don’t believe professors should be talking about controversial topics as if only one view should be the accepted view.”

my OP was not to find conservative colleges…I was asking if NE LAC have a tendency to express their liberal opinions in classes where that would not be appropriate or needed.

“It’s obvious that most colleges slant to the left, it is another question if their bias is carried over to the classroom”

“My post was simply to find out whether the NE LACs tended to show more bias than other colleges”

“I’m not looking for any specific type of college…AGAIN, I was inquiring if NE LACs were made up of predominantly biased prof who liked to push their views…that’s it…period…there is no hidden agenda.”

“the only thing I find relevant is what colleges have a reputation for pushing the liberal agenda…that’s all. Somehow this thread turned into liberals defending why this is OK…as everyone should hear all views. Hearing all views is fine, a professor pushing the liberal agenda on students is not. Big difference there.”

Cardinal_Fang · February 26, 2009, 1:25pm

Yes, yes, yes, you’ve repeatedly said that you don’t want professors pushing their liberal agenda, expressing their political beliefs, being biased. But you have not explained what would constitute pushing a liberal agenda. You know what you mean, but I don’t.

Would “the theory of evolution is the central organizing principle of modern biology” count as pushing a liberal agenda? What about “in the history of the United States, black people have experienced serious, systematic discrimination”? What about “I am gay”?

3togo · February 26, 2009, 1:33pm

This has been both a very interesting and frustrating thread at the same time.

Geeps … the whole list of “replies” you quoted do not, to me, answer the question … I’m not trying to be difficult … I’m trying to understand how do you define “pushing their liberal views”? Does teaching evolution in Biology class count as pushing a liberal view or not? Not knowing what you consider pushing views makes responding pretty diffcult. While many folks have criticized many of the liberal responders to me they have tried to be helpful. First, trying to understand what you mean by “pushing liberal views” … if teaching evolution is bad then lots and lots of schools would be a bad fit … if it not OK for an Econ prof to say Regan and the Repubs were idiots for Supply Side economics I’d agree that is bad but I’d think very infrequent (how about presenting data not particularly favorable to supply side economics). In addtion, posters raised the issue of the campus culture and how liberal it is … and the issue of if this culture is homogeneous and tolerates alternative opinions. I know you think you’ve been clear but I’m one poster who thinks most responses have been reasonable given a very ambiguous request.

geeps20 · February 26, 2009, 1:40pm

Funny how some find it more than obvious what pushing a liberal agendas would be…and yet, some who I assume to be liberals, just don’t get it. Are you upset with the idea that some liberal professors do indeed push an agenda? Do you not want to believe it? Are you embarrassed?

Cardinal_Fang · February 26, 2009, 1:42pm

That’s right. We don’t get it. So how about helping us out and explaining? Since it’s so obvious to you, you should have no trouble explaining it to me.

geeps20 · February 26, 2009, 1:47pm

Fang…I’m sorry…I just find it pointless to keep this going.
I have ruled out most LACs…not what my son needs or what I believe college is all about.

LAC mistake for a conservative kid?

CONNECT WITH US