When it is pointed out that the media and academy are skewed to one type of idealogical persuasion, everyone shrugs. But as Mark Bauerlein of the Chronicle of Higher Education points out, the research shows liberal bias is of exactly the same kind, uses the same methods, and holds the same assumptions as the research that has shown racial and gender bias:
Along with the empirical research, the contributors also raise numerous points about the general ideological climate and commitment on campus. One of them throws the question of proof back upon people who say, “Show us the proof that conservatives are being discriminated against?”
As we know, one of the primary positions in discussions of discrimination today is “disparate outcomes.” The argument says that if a body such as a police force, an entering freshman class, country club members, etc. has a disproportionately low representation of any identity group, then discrimination is at work. It may not operate on the surface, and it may not happen through the actions of any particular individual, but the fact that, say, only 3 percent of the group is African American reveals bias.
What about the disparate-outcomes argument in ideological cases, then? If a college faculty has only an eight-percent conservatives make-up, doesn’t that call for an investigation, a committee, a task force? It certainly happens when other identity groups are under-represented.
Another defense says, “Well, sure, most profs lean to the left, but that doesn’t mean they bring their politics into the classroom.”
But this claim runs against thinking in the humanities that has dominated for 50 years. It says that political and ideological commitments run deep, that they are often unconscious, that the assumption that we are able to suspend them is an Enlightenment myth, that “the political” is everywhere, that buried ideological premises shape so many things we take for granted that we don’t realize their workings.
(Via: Gene Veith )
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
