<p>I'm almost 100% sure that UChicago's poli sci department is very conservative. Chicago's econ department has a mix of neo-conservative and liberal thinkers in it, but it is famous for bringing what can be considered "conservative economics" to the United States. For what it's worth, the only econ prof that I know of who teaches there, Daniel Drezner, is conservative (his blog is pretty good: danieldrezner.com/blog/).</p>
<p>generally, there is a huge conservative backlash on every college campus right now. conservatives will be fine anywhere.
I know nobody asked for my two cents.. but all this bashing of "liberal faculty" is absolutely ridiculous. Perhaps it just so happens that as people become more educated, they grow more liberal, so professors, as the most educated people in the country, are obviously going to be more liberal.
The argument for liberal professors ruining education is total bunk.. its like saying "how dare rich people be republican!".</p>
<p>Of course sociology professors are going to lean left.. they are studying and seeing most clearly how american neoconservative imperialism is destroying societies and cultures around the world</p>
<p>of course chemists and geologists and biologists et. al are going to lean left, they understand best of all of us how retarded the anti-evolution movement is, how ridiculously terrible Bush's air quality standards are, how drilling in ANWAR will have a direct, adverse effect on nature in the area. These are the people who actually did the studies on global warming and evolution and such, of course they are going to be liberal when teh conservatives are saying "No no, thats bunk"</p>
<p>of course psychologists are going to be liberal... the root of psychology is the fact that humans have motivated behavior, an fact of life which flies totally in the face of republican "personal responsibility".. and psychologists have done the studies on homosexuality, and come to the scientific conclusions that its not a dissease or an abnormality or something bad or whatever, but, just like heterosexual behavior, is a motivated action. </p>
<p>Of course economics professors are going to tend to be republican... low taxes and the ability to disregard every other single factor in human life except money is exactly what they need to make more money.</p>
<p>Blaming universities for being liberal is like blaming the facts for being correct. There are not two sides to every argument, there is the truth. </p>
<p>/let the flamewar begin.</p>
<p>yeah that whole deal is pretty sad. well professors are liberal because they're smart. heard that a million times, and it doesn't work at all. I don't care much about libs, just flamin' commies like a lot of profs. OK so when a prof tries to turn his class Marxist, is that smart? Because I think a "smart" person should be able to tell when an ideology has failed over and over again throughout the world. Do "smart" profs try to tell us we are all rascist when they advocate affirmative action? is it "smart" to call 9/11 victims "little Eichmanns" and blame 9/11 on, guess who, Americans. Is it smart to say all the people in the world hate us when the leaders of our two main allies win elections? Is it "smart" people that tell my domino theory was a bunch of crap when what it predicted woudl happen happened exactly. Do "smart" people also realize that back it the 70's the scare was Global Cooling and the reason given was, guess what, CO2. "Smart" people should realize that in ANWR they are complaining over a piece of land half the size of O'Hare airport in a reserve the size of South Carolina? I also think it's not a "smart" person in my state who talks about all the tax loopholes for big business made by Republicans putting us in debt when IL is in debt becasue our grand lib Governor took away the tax loopholes and tripled fees for everything across the board. URGGGG, this is why I will major in Political Science, but call me what you may, I don't want to be taught by professors I am "smarter" than.</p>
<p>well sir, i dont see why you need to go to college...if you already know everything about communism and terrorism and economics and environmentalism. </p>
<p>nevertheless, I am bored, so I will go through your comments piece by piece, futile though my attempts at reason may be in light of such unreasonable passion and fury. </p>
<p>i havent seen any statistics on profs being registered socialists, my comparisons were based on the fields where there are highest proportions of registered dems. </p>
<p>last i checked, marxism has never been really tried in any country. Perhaps what you are thinking of is communism, or stalinism. Either way, that was rule by a dictator, not the people, and is not what Marx was looking for. By the way, I havent heard of too many psychologists trying to influence our economic systems, and last i checked, the economics departments are overwhelmingly conservative at most of the more renowned econ schools. </p>
<p>Most reasonable students of sociology have come to the conclusion that there is an enormous amount of racism that still exists in society today, due in large part to unequal footing in education. At northwestern next year, i might be so lucky to have Alex Kotlowitz as a professor in journalism... his experience is of visiting public high schools in east st. louis, in your home state. perhaps you already know about the absolutely dreadful conditions the public school that was 99% non-white was in (if not, youll have to read the book to truly understand), while the public school in the white neighborhood less than 10 miles away had brand new facilities. And you are going to tell him that theres not a bit of racism at play there? I guess than, it would be worthless for you to get a college education, cus you already know better. </p>
<p>Is it smart to have overblown reactions to a professors overblown remarks about the cause of 9/11? no. Is ward churchill an assclown? yes. Is american imperialism partially to blame for 9/11? well, isnt it at least worth asking the question? He was referring to how the purely economic motives of people who work at the World Trade Center have led america to force its will on foreign countries, causing the kind of abject poverty that allowed terrorists to recruit suicide bombers. </p>
<p>Im sure you didnt vote for george w. just because you like the war. If i lived in england, id vote for tony blair too. Im sure if you went to college, listened to him speak, learned about how genuine and forthcoming he truly is, you would approve as well. Do europeans generally think americans are dumb? probably, but that may be because on average, we are less educated, and more obese than them. </p>
<p>I didnt know the domino theory was yours, but it sure as hell hasnt worked in southeast asia. </p>
<p>Im not entirely sure how to respond to your global cooling statement... I guess your idea is that scientists are just plain wrong.. so why would you go to a college that encourages science anyways? your just paying for them to come up with cockamamie ideas like a greenhouse effect or global warming. But i guess your point may be well taken, that if we keep pumping chemicals into the atmosphere that corrode the ozone layer and prevent heat from escaping, along with myriad other effects, this will have absolutely no impact on human life. I understand completely. And the exponential rise in asthma rates is purely coincidental, to be sure. </p>
<p>Smart people may have spoken to the indigenous people who live in alaska..who make their life off the land, just like a good republican should, personal responsibility, right.. who were no longer able to after the exxon valdez accident ruined the fish and wildlife habitat, thereby reducing the size of available fish and game resources. I guess people who are too smart for college feel like a big long line of pipe across the wilderness will do nothing to destroy the view.. and with man's handprint finally well known on the farest reach of the globe, nothing will be lost. </p>
<p>As for your point about tax loopholes... the tax code has far far far too many complexities for you or I or the governor to fully understand. </p>
<p>Congratulations on your choice of major, political science. In four years, you will be fully equipped with the managerial skills to run and control aspects of human existence which you appear to have absolutely no concern or appreciation for.</p>
<p>Dartmouth is, overall, very liberal. However, the reason I'm going (I am pretty conservative) is the feeling I got from the school and talking with others that conservatives are not ostracized for their beliefs. I have heard the conservative community there is "small but vocal", and my host's roommate at Dimensions stated that, although he was liberal, the conservative Dartmouth Review was the best paper on campus.</p>
<p>Professors aren't generally more liberal because they are smart!</p>
<p>They are liberal because if they were conservative, they would have gone into employment at firms and tried to make lots of money - conservatives go into businesses, liberals tend to prevail more in academia</p>
<p>and Marxism has never failed, though its lesser, more authoritarian variants certainly have.</p>
<p>why do you think you are smarter than your professors? instead, it just seems you disagree with liberal professors. I guess when you are young, you think you are always right and whenever someone disagrees they must be wrong (don't worry, I'm more guilty of this than you are).</p>
<p>If professors are as smart as you say they are then they would see that other people don't have to agree with them. However, this is hardly the case in my experience in the last two years of college. Professors get upset when you don't agree with their political viewpoint, and they automatically dismiss any opponent because they somehow are more "right" since they have a Ph.D. That's not smart at all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Of course economics professors are going to tend to be republican... low taxes and the ability to disregard every other single factor in human life except money is exactly what they need to make more money.
[/quote]
After reading that quote, I suggest you brush up on your economics so you don't make such outrageous quotes in the future.</p>
<p>I second Driver's recommendaton of the ISI book, Choosing the Right College. It is probably going to be your best bet to uncover how conservative students are treated on any particular campus.</p>
<p>The ISI book is also a good reference for other folks --- while it's focus is on the political climate of various schools, it also provides what is probably the most thorough description of the core requirements of the schools it discusses. This makes it worth a look even for people who are not conservative.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have heard the conservative community there is "small but vocal", and my host's roommate at Dimensions stated that, although he was liberal, the conservative Dartmouth Review was the best paper on campus.
[/quote]
The Review is the best paper on campus, one of the best in the country, and the model for all the other "------Review" conservative college papers out there. However, it is banned from the campus by the administration. They publish off campus using private funds (they get nothing from the college), are not allowed to set up a table at the student activity fair (to recruit new members), and can't even distribute the paper in the dorms. You can't even link to The Dartmouth Review--perhaps the college's most famous publication-- through the college web site. Here's the URL to their privately-run site. You should read it regularly. By all means attend Dartmouth if you want--it's a great place--regardless of your political POV--just be aware that the "Dartmouth is conservative" canard is just that. <a href="http://www.dartreview.com/%5B/url%5D">http://www.dartreview.com/</a></p>
<p>American U seemed like a place where a conservative or liberal could feel at home. I would suspect Dartmouth is like that also.</p>
<p>i would say tex-austin is probably most conservative, and maybe uva</p>
<p>y would u pick a school because of its political leaning anyways? lol. i dont understand this. all these schools have a liberal leaning, BUT the conservatives on the school still voice their opinions. political leaning is probably the last thing i would worry about while choosing a school</p>
<p>Ucla: 7
Ucb: 8
Ucsd: 5</p>
<p>uc_benz: I dont know too much about economics, that should be apparent by now. if all somebody cares about is money, theyre going to be a republican... thats just the way it is, im not here to argue that.</p>
<p>but: "If professors are as smart as you say they are then they would see that other people don't have to agree with them. However, this is hardly the case in my experience in the last two years of college. Professors get upset when you don't agree with their political viewpoint, and they automatically dismiss any opponent because they somehow are more "right" since they have a Ph.D. That's not smart at all."</p>
<p>thats the most garbage ive ever heard. So you are saying that when a professor has done a study on something.. say, studying the carbon levels in ice cores from the arctic circle, and noting that the level of carbon in the atmosphere stayed steady for tens of thousands of years, except for one period over ten thousand years ago when most of the world was covered in water (its why there is salt in utah now). Over the past few centuries, ever since the invention of the locomotive, carbon levels have been increasing. the increase has been most profound in the past 50 years and will be more pronounced in the next 50 years if nothing changes. </p>
<p>I dont see what is wrong with the professors who have done those studies saying to you "i know more about carbon levels in our atmosphere and the impacts of that on global warming than you do, and you cant pretend to know more about it than me because you have a degree and thats elitist!"
im suprised to hear that in two years of college, youve never met a professor who has had an opinion that is different than yours, but whom you still respect because they have studied the subject more. </p>
<p>the idea of a democracy is not that everybody is correcet. the idea is that the masses can take into consideration what the experts are saying. We shouldnt be coming to our own opinions about the environment, psychology, sociology, race, etc. and then demand that the experts come around to our point of view.. that just doesnt make any sense.</p>
<p>
[quote]
uc_benz: I dont know too much about economics, that should be apparent by now. if all somebody cares about is money, theyre going to be a republican... thats just the way it is, im not here to argue that.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, thats not the way it is. You spewing out ignorant statements is the way it is.</p>
<p>i think a few conservatives on college campus is actually good (i'm a liberal guy) coz u want to hear viewpoints from both sides</p>
<p>
[quote]
I second Driver's recommendaton of the ISI book, Choosing the Right College. It is probably going to be your best bet to uncover how conservative students are treated on any particular campus.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I would add a cautionary note to the recommendation of the ISI book. Their reviews are reasonably comprehensive, but fundamentally ISI is a political lobby group masquereding as a college guidebook publisher. Funded by right wing political contributiors, the organization hosts student political conventions, provides funding and editorial content for conservative newspapers, etc. The "student quotes" they sprinkle through their reviews are actually taken from students who attend their own political training seminars and are selected to support an agenda.</p>
<p>For example, they don't tell the story of how they partially funded a conservative student newspaper at Swarthmore -- the bulk of the funding coming from the college's discretionary fund. And, that the editor of the paper, Hillary Thompson (a strongly conservative student) resigned her post and stopped accepting funding from ISI because the organization was so confrontationally "Limbaugh-esque" right-wing in its whole approach. She felt that it was a counter-productive.Here's a link to an article in Salon Magazine by a Swarthmore Senior about Hillary Thompson:</p>
<p>And, if you scroll down this link, you'll find Ms. Thompson's own account of her relationship with ISI as published in the Swarthmore Alumni Bulletin:</p>
<p>In other cases, they outright mislead the reader. For example, in a condemnation of Swarthmore's intro freshmen English offerings, they write:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The PDCs cover a variety of time periods, cultures, and current critical theories. But not one such course in the English department, for example, surveys classic Western literaturenot even from a revisionist point of view. English instead offers courses like
"Cultural Practices and Social Texts" and "Illicit Desires in Literature."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What they don't tell you is that these are freshman seminars, limited to 12 students, focused on teaching writing skills. if you look at the syllabi for these seminars, the readings are based on a survey of Western Literature, the Greeks, moving up through Chaucer, Shakespeare, British poetry, British and American short stories and novels, etc. Further, they don't tell you that a further prereq in the English department is to follow one of these seminars with a core survey course focused on a period of traditional Euro/American literature.</p>
<p>ENGL 010CC. Survey I: Beowulf to Milton
ENGL 011CC. Survey II: Neo-Classical to Post-Colonial
ENGL 019CC. Chaucer and Shakespeare
ENGL 045CC. Modern British Poetry
ENGL 066CC. American Literature Survey I</p>
<p>They don't tell you that for every "ENGL 059. The Harlem Renaissance" in the catalog, there is a "ENGL 022. Literature of the English Renaissance". Or, for every "ENGL 071K. Lesbian Novels Since World War II", there is a "ENGL 026. English Drama Before 1642".</p>
<p>Like any politically motivated article, it's often what is left out that is most telling.</p>
<p>Personally, I enjoy watching Fox News and reading the ISI Guidebook. But, both hide quite a bit of "agenda" driven reporting behind a patina of "fair and balanced" reporting. The ISI Guide is certainly worth adding to the collection, but I would take its comments on issues like tolerance for conservatives, liberal professors, and the decline of traditional curriculum covering "Western Culture" for what they are -- a political diatribe cloaked in intellectual clothing. </p>
<p>For example, I don't think that the addition of courses focused on Africa, Asia, and Latin America to the traditional emphasis on European history/politics is anywhere near as threatening as ISI seems to feel it is. I actually think it's a good thing given the world today's kids will need to thrive in.</p>
<p>?????
ive never met a rich person who was a democrat because they thought the democrats would let them keep more of their income. </p>
<p>now, as for your whole argument that a professor's research and expertise don't make him or her more qualified than you, an outsider with presumably little or no experience in the field, to make a statement about global warming or inner-city racism or homosexuality etc.., what was your argument again? I didnt catch a response.</p>
<p>I thought it was the liberals who called people ignorant? And i thought conservatives hated that statement because it killed any attempt at a reasoned debate? But then again, as it appears from drummerdudes statement, that what you want is not a reasoned argument, but a shouting match.</p>
<p>Donald Trump has been quoted that he would "fire" George W. Bush.</p>
<p>Although being conservative doesn't necessarily mean you support Bush. I'm conservative and I voted against Bush because I think he's a dumbass.</p>
<p>lol, i'm libertarian, so its obvious why i would 'fire' bush</p>