<p>As I read through some of the affirmative action threads, one of the common arguments is that providing affirmative action fosters different opinions and perspectives which benefit the campus community as a whole. I think it can be argued that having conservatives on campus can better foster a more balanced community (even more than skin color). Yet, many top privates are 90/10 in liberal to conservative ratio do you think these schools should actively recruit more conservative students.</p>
<p>I’d be interested in where you got that 90/10 stat…because while the current generation of ivy (or close) students may consider themselves liberal in their politics…there’s a whole lots of good ole conservative republican values in the families trees of these young people if you just scratch past the surface.</p>
<p>As a mechanism whose intention is to craft a class whose political representation more closely matches that of the nation – on the belief that disproportionate allocation establishes a disconnect between the university and society at large or reflects unintentional inequitable selection policies in admissions – ideological affirmative action is of course not well-advised: None of the selection criteria ostensibly disfavor conservatives or fail to neutralize systemic biases, and the standards mentioned likewise suggest that all sorts of other groups that don’t pass a reasonable analysis be actively incorporated more fairly into campus life.</p>
<p>But would university discourse be bettered by a less unequal political balance? Insofar as it’s possible, I nonetheless expect that there are better tools to mollify what is probably already a merely minor problem. If the reverse were the case – if conservatism were to predominate – I imagine better objections could be raised. But the nature of liberalism cannot be discounted here: Much more than in the reverse case, liberalism encompasses its putative rival because it is more circumspect in its analysis of issues. Conservative espousal often rejects liberalism on its face, which opinion is fairly a view that is worth consideration; liberalism is willing to respect the values underlying that perspective but weigh them against more pragmatic and modern social calculus. </p>
<p>Additionally, I would point out that, if anything is to come of the shift, a greater share of conservatives may risk diminished political dialogue of all sorts at many colleges. As in other sectors of society, political argumentation risks alienation when it is not tactful, and the only reason politics is safely broached at liberal institutions is that some base of unanimity can be assumed. If there are quibbles to be made with the matters that have garnered that consensus, I would not expect casual debate among peers to be an effective forum to question such fundamental thinking, because of students’ sensitivity to offend.</p>
<p>On a final, practical point: There seems no way to institute such an affirmative action policy without exposing the admissions process to additional exploitative dishonesty when students realize the incentive to portray themselves as conservative, the evidentiary standards for the label of which would surely be superficial.</p>
<p>And what would be the “acid test” of a conservative outlook? One can be conservative about some things and liberal about others. This seems pretty silly to me.</p>
<p>Young people have shifting political opinions that change with time and life experience. Allotting slots in college based on what 18-year-olds think about politics would be foolish. </p>
<p>I suspect any college campus is always going to be more radical politically than the general society because youth is a time of idealism and experimentation. It doesn’t always have to be left-wing; it seems that many college students love Ron Paul.</p>
<p>What is a conservative litmus test? We know if someone is part of a certain race or ethnic group, gender, region of the country, and the like. One cannot change those things. Until I die, I will be the same race, gender, etc. Ideology is something different, it’s fluid. One can start as a conservative/liberal/moderate and end with a different ideology. Reagan started as a Democrat, for example. Ideology is fluid, and morphs. Furthermore, there are different definitions of conservative: I consider myself a conservative in economic issues, but liberal in social issues. Am I a conservative? Am I a liberal?</p>
<p>Wow, just…wow. Really? Actually, this pretty much showcases the problem some of us see in the non-equal distribution of thought on campuses. The superior attitude of ‘oh dear child, let us set you correct in your ways. We will assist with speech codes, attitude adjustment sessions and sensitivity awareness, because we have evolved so far past your limited critical thinking abilities that we have assigned ourselves this task in the name of humanity’.</p>
<p>I think the left likes to believe they are more open-minded to opinions, but in my experience they are only open-minded if you are agreeing with them. </p>
<p>In HS, I wrote an anti-affirmative action paper which enraged my teacher to the point where she ripped it up. I wouldn’t describe that as “respecting my values”.</p>
<p>I think the question here is if they should get a boost because they have been disadvantaged or to create diversity on campus. </p>
<p>If it is because they have been disadvantaged then colleges would need to look at applicant’s parents, maybe even grandparents, and it should be verified by their party registration card. </p>
<p>If it is to create diversity on campus, then colleges would need to verify that applicant indeed has been a conservative for more than a year (member of NRA, junior member of Republican party), and one stipulations would be not to change his/her political view.</p>
<p>…and many students lie about their race for admissions purposes as well. </p>
<p>Affirmative action unethical and unconstitutional as it exists today - allowing it to benefit more people would only worsen the problem.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But “fostering different opinions” was the justification the supreme court used for not striking down affirmative action programs. If there’s no “diversity” benefit, they are illegal.</p>
<p>How do you suppose one would prove to be a conservative!? I also think a conservative can easily keep his/her mouth quiet when applying for a job, housing, loan, etc. Minorities don’t have that benefit…</p>
<p>Similar to the way universities spend money on recruitment of minorities, they could allocate resources to conservative areas of the country to encourage enrollment (Deep South, Midwest, etc.). Also, scholarship offers/essays could be created.</p>
<p>How would they be able to do this without it being gamed as people can easily change their political affiliations at the drop of a hat…or even register as a member of political parties without sharing any of their beliefs?? </p>
<p>For instance, I’ve known dozens of people in the 2008 elections who registered as Democrats despite being actual conservative Republicans or even far-right libertarians in order to mess with the Democratic Primary race. </p>
<p>On the flipside, I’ve heard of many actual Democrats/Radical-left Progressives/Anarchists registering as Republicans to mess around with the current Republican Primary race. </p>
<p>I also know dozens of folks who radically changed their political beliefs from the time they were in high school compared with college graduation or even afterwards. And it is not necessarily always from conservative to liberal as certain prominent conservative media pundits like Breibart have shown.</p>
<p>"DIVERISTY’ is the nirvana which a large social force has been seeking for several decades. Its definition has been expanded over time…this is just another such expansion. What possible objection can there be to increased diversity… in this case…diversity of thought. And, since all diversity is self reported (this in and of itself is a deeply held an cherished belief by those currently defining diversity)…it is as always…up to the individual to define themselves, . Again, completely fits into today’s structure.</p>
<p>There are scholarships for lesbian/gay students – but I doubt the colleges go around “confirming” this.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, top investment banks and consulting companies bend over backwards to get minorities. Many will recruit at Historically Black Colleges, have “diversity days”, etc.</p>