<p>I too am amused at Republicans' worry about a political taint in their college education. These are the ones who fight for the interjection of Christian theology in the teaching of evolution in public schools, and who push for government-funded poverty programs to be administered by Christian organizations who screen employees for the "corrrect" religious bias!</p>
<p>Under the test Digimedia cited, I've matured from a young person with no heart (Republican) to an older person with no brain (now a Democrat). (I think it's the parties that have changed, not me, by the way. The Republican party was once known to stand for fiscal responsibility, against foreign adventurism, and against undue interference in the lives of individuals. It was also the party of civil rights.)</p>
<p>I attended Cornell, Stanford, and Berkeley as a young conservative. Arguing with liberals (in and out of class) brought discipline and rigor to my political thinking. I also found conservative professors at all three schools. (It's my impression that all three places have drafted a bit toward the center since my day.)</p>
<p>I had a lot of spirited debates, but never felt persecuted in any way as a result of my beliefs. (I do have a fond memory of a friend telling me with a warm smile I was the nicest fascist he'd ever met.)</p>
<p>those "Bible Men" came to William and Mary this year also. They were there for a day, at like 5 places around campus, handing out those things.</p>
<p>I think that farawayplaces slighty missed the issue. I think the issue is not so much what the professors are teaching (re: evolution), but more along the lines of if you take a different position than the professor holds, you end up with a lower grade.</p>
<p>I consider myself a conservative student... at least, I voted for Bush (i'm: for the war, pro death penalty, pro choice, pro stem cell research, pro privatized social security). I've had many debates with people about politics and current events, and none have ever really ended badly. I mean, it's not like political views make or break friendships. It's easy to be friends with people with different views, it's not like they come all the time.</p>
<p>As for the professors, it's given that most of them have liberal views, but a good professor won't interject them heavily into class. A good professor will let the student decide, and, if the professor does interject too many of his own (likely liberal) views, fall back on this: It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
- Aristotle</p>
<p>I haven't fully jumped into my IR classes (intended major), but I haven't heard of anyone getting a lower grade because of the position they took on a paper. I think the idea that professors grade unfairly based on political views is probably overblown. I would be much more concerned about the aspect of fitting in with the other students, and having them be respectful of a students' views.</p>
<p>Do you believe in freedom of choice? Who doesn't? Do you believe in the right to life? Absolutely! Who wins this battle of the rhetoriticians? Bush lied. People died. But it all depends on what the meaning of is is doesn't it? Do you believe in discriminatio? Absolutely not but diversity, now that is another thing! Are your local aliens illegal or just undocumented?</p>
<p>Anybody want to speculate on what the chances are that the courts would have pulled terry Schiavo's feeding tube if she were a convicted killer on death row? or your chances of getting an 'A' on a paper if you had the impertinence to raise such a question at say Wesleyen or Oberlin or Brown?</p>
<p>Winston churchill is the source of that quote, digs;</p>
<p>
[quote]
Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>"My advice to the majority party. Quit bellyaching. You run the joint and have for decades. Honestly, the whining makes it sound like you are afraid of being exposed to different viewpoints. It's not like the wicked witch in the Wizard of Oz. You won't melt just because somebody disagrees with you. Stop with the red-meat demagog buzzwords (e.g. "leftist thought")." </p>
<p>Thanks, but no thanks for the first part of your advice!</p>
<p>There is a great difference between our political landscape and the academic world. The only reason one party "runs the joint" is because IT WON the majority of the past elections. Does the same "elective" process apply to the world of academia? </p>
<p>As far as whining and being afraid, could it be possible that it applies to a different group of "targets": the people who have long lived in ivory towers and enjoyed the benefits of cronyism and self-preservation measures such tenure. </p>
<p>Now, this part is sensible, "Stand up and state your case on campus." The beauty of the Ivory Tower is that the higher it reaches in the sky, the easier it becomes to topple! Anyone who expects this generation and the generations to come to accept the status quo of the last 50 years without "stating their case" must be blind or deaf. However, some of us prefer to do it at the voting booths, or with a polite reserve. After all there is truth in the adage, "les tonneaux vides font le plus de bruit", which is translated into" Empty Barrels Make The Most Noise." That should explain why the exit pollsters missed the last elections results by such a wide margin!</p>
<p>well, as a political moderate who starts at one of these "liberal" colleges in the fall, all i can ask is . . . please trust us! we all have opinions, we all have passions, and while some worry about us being "indoctrinated", remember that we all have brains. most of the students attending these schools got in to them because they can analyze issues thoughtfully and make up their own minds. now, we're never gonna agree on everything all the time, but challenged ideas are ones made stronger and in the end easier to hold on to. these are quality schools, with quality students who can make up their own minds about things.</p>
<p>Sorry, I did not anticipate this discussion going for so long. My son can survive as he can adept as his friend circle includes democrats and republicans. Debate is one of the skills, which he uses to exercise his mind. He likes to debate as he thinks it is okay to disagree and express ones opinions. However, this issue is minor as compared to $$$$$$ coming through financial aid. Looks like we have give Princeton a serious thought. Thanks a lot.</p>
<p>I would actually suggest anyone who wants to find the flaws in their own party to attend a school of that political orientation. Counter-intuitive, but you get to see the excesses of that side in action. I entered college as a liberal, thought "If these whack jobs are liberals, I'm something else," and departed a conservative (more of the "old" conservative - fiscal responsibility + civil rights - i.e. libertarian). I'm in the South so I can see the excesses of the conservative regime - though not the deep South, which might be better for that. ;) </p>
<p>IMO, you hear the best liberal arguments at the conservative schools and the best conservative arguments at the liberal schools. The people who know they are in the minority are forced to make more rational, intelligent, and articulate arguments in order to be taken seriously.</p>
<p>"I too am amused at Republicans' worry about a political taint in their college education."</p>
<p>My worry is not a "taint" in my education - from either angle - but flat-out brainwashing. In engineering, it doesn't matter: numbers don't care about politics. Law is another beast - brutally political - which is why, IMO, it would be rational to attend a school at which the professors are actually teaching the law, not their own, skewed version of what it should be. There are certainly people who, on the finals, write not what they think to be a rational interpretation of the law, but rather what their (overtly political) professors believe the law to be. I imagine that this would apply, to a lesser extent, to government or political science majors undergrad.</p>
<br>
<p>There are social tools you will need to survive as a conservative on an elite college campus. They are very similar to the adaptations that Blacks in general and Black men in particular needed to make in order to survive in the post-reconstruction South. If you want to avoid being lynched get good at grinning and shuffling and let the Man think you are a boob and a yokel, more to be pitied than censored.</p>
<br>
<p>WHAT?!? Conservative students are being torn from their beds at night and hung by their necks from trees?? What an awful tragedy...this must stop!</p>
<p>Oh. You mean that if a liberal professor gives you a B for what you consider A-plus work, than that's like lynching. Even though you have no data to show that there's any kind of widespread pattern -- or even much anecdotal evidence -- of liberal professors downgrading papers that present conservative viewpoints. Quite a striking parallel to the Jim Crow south.</p>
<br>
<p>which is why, IMO, it would be rational to attend a school at which the professors are actually teaching the law, not their own, skewed version of what it should be. </p>
<br>
<p>Pondering what the law ought to be is the raison d'etre of the top schools. If you want three years of bar exam prep, there are plenty of schools in the fourth tier to serve your needs.</p>
<p>I wish these conservatives would get off their whole victimization kick and take personal responsibility for the popularity or lack there of their ideas among the highly educated classes. </p>
<p>Studies do show that the more education a person has beyond highschool, and even more so beyong a bachelor's degree, the more liberal their views tend to become. I think that those who profess to value higher education should reflect on what this suggests about the validity of conservative vs liberal views on the issues, since generally as one's knowlege and ability to reason grows during higher education, one tends to take more liberal stands.</p>
<p>Hanna - please - learn to read. The exact analogy was to methods of survival, NOT to the effects of not using said methods. </p>
<p>Dear, I'm a law student. There is a vast difference between "bar exam prep" and teaching a skewed version of the law (from either side). The beauty of the law is in the underlying tension between different social policies (and the ramifications of them), and professors who ignore that tension short-change their students. I am not spending over a hundred thousand dollars to be indoctrinated, nor for what I could get at a Bar-Bri review course. I do expect professors to at least acknowledge, if not address, the conflicting policies which we discuss. </p>
<p>My advice to you, dear, is that you a) calm down before responding, even on a message board, as it is good practice for life and b) read more carefully and learn to think critically.</p>
<p>Cite sources, texdad. Last time I checked, the majority of college graduates have, for the past 50 years, voted Republican. Same goes for those with master's degrees. The only reversal is for Ph.D.s, but I believe that the majority of people with professional degrees voted Republican.</p>
<p>Not much time to research, but this suggests that Dmocrats do best with the highschool and under crowd and also with the graduate degreed crowd. <a href="http://dabacon.org/pontiff/?p=539%5B/url%5D">http://dabacon.org/pontiff/?p=539</a></p>
<p>I'm kinda chuckling over the notion of a lawyer who doesn't advocate a "skewed version of the law."</p>
<p>Corrected by Xiggi (naturally). Quote is oft used but not a Churchill original. My bad!</p>
<p>
[quote]
"An orphan quote [unattributed quote in search of a home] sometimes
attributed to Georges Clemenceau is:
Any man who is not a socialist at age 20 has no heart.
Any man who is still a socialist at age 40 has no head.
The most likely reason is that Bennet Cerf once reported Clemenceau's
response to a visitor's alarm about his son being a communist:
If he had not become a Communist at 22, I would have disowned him.
If he is still a Communist at 30, I will do it then.
George Seldes later quoted Lloyd George as having said:
A young man who isn't a socialist hasn't got a heart;
an old man who is a socialist hasn't got a head.
The earliest known version of this observation is attributed to
mid-nineteenth century historian and statesman Fran</p>
<p>I've seen it broken down by bachelors (Republican), masters (Republican, I think), and Ph.D. (Democrat, although I've heard that, when you remove the people with Ph.D.s in education, it swings back Republican - or maybe that is only when it's Ph.D. + professional, terminal degrees).</p>
<p>IMO, some of this is shaped by preferences. If you are a doctor, you want tort reform. If you are John Edwards, tort reform stinks. ;) If you get a masters in sociology, you're probably more of the Democrat type than the person who gets a masters in engineering and then does DoD work. Also, gender preferences- females tend to be Democrat, males tend to be Republican (the possible basis of the little-known fact that Republicans apparently enjoy sex more - sorry for the side note, but it's somewhat relevant here), and women are probably more into the Ph.Ds in things like liberal arts, while men go for the professional degrees (although that is slowly changing, and women make up more than 50% of med school applicants). The numbers also have changed as more people get college educations - i.e. those people with college degrees represent a broader spectrum of incomes.</p>
<p>But, the (slim) majority of college grads vote Republican. Common myth that Republicans are less educated - mostly see that because most college professors have Ph.D.s, and most college professors are liberal.</p>
<p>...and hey - there is presenting your side of an argument, and then there is, well, saying that we have no need of tort reform and that the malpractice crisis is made up. As I said - not paying to be indoctrinated.</p>
<br>
<p>The exact analogy was to methods of survival, NOT to the effects of not using said methods. </p>
<br>
<p>And MY point was that the analogy was preposterously self-pitying and grandiose. To compare hiding one's political beliefs in order to avoid B's to hiding one's very humanity in order to avoid a violent death shows an astounding lack of perspective.</p>
<br>
<p>There are certainly people who, on the finals, write not what they think to be a rational interpretation of the law, but rather what their (overtly political) professors believe the law to be. </p>
<br>
<p>Do you have data -- or even anecdote -- showing that this approach brings them higher grades? Needless to say, many students try to suck up to their professors in various ways (I sure did), but that doesn't mean the professors actually punish students with bad grades for writing a well-reasoned rebuttal, or that they reward philosophical clones with A's. I experimented with parroting the ideas of my most conservative professor on the exam in his class and was rewarded with my lowest exam grade in my law school career. Demonstrating an understanding of a professor's outlandish feminist theory on an exam is not the same as accepting it as truth, and in my experience, that's all most professors are asking for.</p>
<br>
<p>Of course they do, although I find that at a good school, it's usually impossible to ignore the tension, because opposing viewpoints always emerge in the Socratic exchange and class discussion. But in your first post, you claimed that it made sense to seek a school that "teaches the law" rather than a "skewed version of what it should be." If by teaching "law" you meant "normative legal theory from across the political spectrum," and you didn't mean "black-letter law," then I misunderstood you, but that's usually what people mean when they urge law schools to get back to teaching "law" rather than "what law ought to be."</p>
<br> [QUOTE=""]
<p>Dear, I'm a law student. </p>
<br>
<p>Really? I'm a practicing attorney and bar member about to start my second federal clerkship and a former teaching fellow in Constitutional Law at Harvard. But I'm sure that you can teach me a great deal about the difference between bar prep and law school. Want to talk down to me some more? You seem to be having fun with that.</p>