https://x.com/drantbradley/status/1971726201963401563?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw
This is an excellent bit on conjecture. Much like the extreme positions (and bad candidates) adopted by the DFL and their national candidates which paved the way for Trump, the fact that the academy has virtually driven away any conservative voices on college/university campuses (campi?), sowed and fertilized the seeds that sprouted TPUSA. Then the demonization of TPUSA and Kirk, obviously led to Kirk's assassination.
6 comments:
I wonder how it got so skewed. Perhaps more lefties than conservatives see education as a way to earn without actually working. Now, it would appear especially difficult for conservatives to even become educators given who runs these shows now.
And it isn't new. Dennis Prager spoke of his college years and how his grades suffered if he gave conservative positions in his work. When he gave what the lefty professors wanted to hear, because it's what they believed and promoted, his grades improved. Imagine having to, basically, learn the truth and the preferred lies at the same time!
What is amazing to me is that this attitude is totally counter the the historic function of education as a forum to allow for ideas that disagree. It got skewed because the left realized that by controlling the academy, they'd eventually control almost everything else.
Yeah, the notion that conservative students have to lie because the liberal professors stack the deck against them sucks, and I'd argue that starting conservative schools that do the same thing isn't a solution.
It's ironic that so many of the practices of the ASPL are actually weakening them and potentially leading to their downfall.
It's funny that a conservative school would do the same, except what they would want to hear is truth, facts and intelligent reasoning.
Yeah, but stacking the deck with either ideological side can be a problem. Neither side has a monopoly on Truth, and if we claim to want ideological diversity and the ability to make our case in fair debate then it'd probably be helpful if we treated others the way we say we'd like to be treated.
I would suspect that a university faculty comprised of nothing but hard-core conservatives would still be far more open to diversity of thought and ideology than any typical leftist heavy university currently in operation.
As an aside, my daughter was praised by what she regarded as a very leftist teacher (English teacher, I believe it was) in high school. My daughter is almost more conservative than I due to her own perception of the world. They got along famously, even when they were debating issues. A rarity which didn't go unnoticed by her.
Then, when she was in college, she went to Furman U in Greenville, SC, she said that while the conservative professors were fewer than the lefties, the lefties there was not overbearing as we've heard too many can be. We really lucked out with that school.
(when she was still several years away from high school, she was the only kid in Sunday school who had a problem with forcing rich people to pay more taxes...the pastor thought I had indoctrinated her, but it was all her on her own. Very smart kid!)
That goes without saying. The problem with it is that because of that openness to ideological diversity, you won't have a university composed of nothing but hard core conservatives. You could make the argument that this openness is why we continue to see universities start to lean further and further left, when they've historically been conservative.
The question is whether or not it is appropriate for a student to have to choose between hiding their convictions or failing with no regard to the quality of their work. It's much more about the fact that schools controlled by left wing faculty and administration are much more militant about engaging in punitive grading for ideological reasons.
Post a Comment