Good post - though I have doubts about the utility of your classification of academics: communists versus not.I found (at College and University) that there were two types of academics. Those who told you openly - in one case, 'I'm a Communist' - and those who didn't. For anyone with a modicum of understanding of politics, it's hard to be in a room with someone, week after week, without having a good idea of their political position. Because 9 times out of 10, it's bleeding obvious.
I would say they were a good range overall. Perhaps more 'true' liberals than in the world generally. But what I never found was someone with views like Nigel Farage. I suspect that's because someone with such a barren worldview would never pass the necessary exams to get a Doctorate. But on the other hand, there were certainly people I would describe as 'proper' conservatives, with views about the limitations of state power and with theoretical concerns about personal liberty. And having studied politics, as such, all views were discussed in depth. together with their theoretical underpinnings which, frankly, the overwhelming majority of citizens would never bother reading. The thing is no one ever said 'This philosophy is shit' or 'This philosophy is dead right.' That was left to you to decide. Your essays would be marked down if you did not substantiate your arguments sufficiently, but never for taking a particular position.
I wasn't aware of drawing that distinction. I apologise for any confusion.Good post - though I have doubts about the utility of your classification of academics: communists versus not.
And it's not clear what you mean by "communist" - do you mean, by "communist," - socialist? And if so, what of those who are left leaning, but believe in capitalism?
Is it that, or is it they have earned enough money that they want to protect at all costs?As people get older they get wiser - note the voting patterns over age groups
see https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election
Youngsters (and the academics that pander to them) tend to start left wing.
But as evidenced in that link, people generally get smarter and more tuned to the real world as they get older and realise their mistake when they're young and drift rightwards. This is a truism and no amount of left wing arguments can deny it.
Fortunately, the internet more than makes up for the other rhetoric.It's not just universities, the entire education system is infected with these cranky intersectionalist beliefs.
It's not just universities, the entire education system is infected with these cranky intersectionalist beliefs.
Do you feel this way because the University of Western super mare declined your application?
Older people vote conservative because what conservatives stand for shifts leftward, at least socially, as they lose every single social debate over time. Conservatives were the face of misogyny, the face of racism, the face of homophobia, the face of climate change denial, and one by one, those policies shifted as they lost the debate to the point that it was a Tory government who introduced gay marriage and the Tory government boasting of their eco-credentials to the point of changing their logo. Who would have believed that in the 80s when they were banning schools from mentioning gay people and blaming them for AIDS? Older people who no doubt considered themselves progressive in their youth are currently struggling with the trans debate. Their views haven't changed, society has shifted around them and they're no longer progressive.As people get older they get wiser - note the voting patterns over age groups
see https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election
Youngsters (and the academics that pander to them) tend to start left wing.
But as evidenced in that link, people generally get smarter and more tuned to the real world as they get older and realise their mistake when they're young and drift rightwards. This is a truism and no amount of left wing arguments can deny it.
If I may ask, when were you in college?I found (at College and University) that there were two types of academics. Those who told you openly - in one case, 'I'm a Communist' - and those who didn't. For anyone with a modicum of understanding of politics, it's hard to be in a room with someone, week after week, without having a good idea of their political position. Because 9 times out of 10, it's bleeding obvious.
I would say they were a good range overall. Perhaps more 'true' liberals than in the world generally. But what I never found was someone with views like Nigel Farage. I suspect that's because someone with such a barren worldview would never pass the necessary exams to get a Doctorate. But on the other hand, there were certainly people I would describe as 'proper' conservatives, with views about the limitations of state power and with theoretical concerns about personal liberty. And having studied politics, as such, all views were discussed in depth. together with their theoretical underpinnings which, frankly, the overwhelming majority of citizens would never bother reading. The thing is no one ever said 'This philosophy is shit' or 'This philosophy is dead right.' That was left to you to decide. Your essays would be marked down if you did not substantiate your arguments sufficiently, but never for taking a particular position.