Klein: Academia to Grow More Lopsided

By Alexander Z. Rogers | Friday, April 8, 2005

The Dartmouth Review: Your findings lend further credence to what has been decried for years as the extreme lopsidedness of modern academia, but even as the accumulation of more evidence makes this Democratic dominance undeniable, there continue to be critics who claim a professor's personal biases don't influence what happens in the classroom. Essentially, they seem to argue that the fact that there are more Democrats than Republicans in teaching posts is irrelevant, because a teacher's personal biases don't color how or what they teach. What is your response to such a claim?

Daniel Klein: That's a very naïve argument. A professor's ideology factors into everything he does, going into his studies, his learning, and the selection of subject matter, his treatment of the materials. It's all intimately bound up with one's ideology. At least as far as, let's say, ten important social sciences or humanities fields, such as economics, political science, and sociology are concerned. I believe, were I to drop myself into a classroom, I would realize after fifteen minutes the professor's ideological outlook just from the words and concepts he uses.

TDR: Although you were primarily interested in identifying the ratio of Democrats to Republicans among faculty, you also made note that the number of faculty with third-party or independent loyalties was practically negligible on the campuses you examined. Even if the ratio of Democrats to Republicans were more even, can the problem of a lack of diversity among academics really be solved as long as we only have the classic two-party divide to struggle over?

DK: I'm very sympathetic to this concern, speaking as a libertarian. It turns out that many Republicans are not terribly libertarian. By mathematical treatment, I was able to sort the survey respondents into different clusters, one of which was clearly distinguished as libertarian while another was a strictly conservative group. Republican, as a term, is not by itself very descriptive. Certainly, it tells you they are not progressives. However, I found that conservative and libertarian views differ significantly on many of the 18 policy issues covered in the survey. The Republican tent is a broader tent, whereas the Democratic tent is much narrower. The "Right" is something of a catch-all category. "If you're not us, then you're them," seems to be the Democrats' mentality. But there is no definitive "them." The reality is that the range of views and ideologies underneath the Republican tent is broad relative to the Democratic tent.

TDR: From what evidence you were able to gather, do you feel this lopsidedness in party affiliation, or to a greater extent, intellectual values, will worsen in academic departments over time?

DK: Evidence from Stanford and Berkeley, based upon voter registration, shows that it will become more extreme ten years from now. Currently, there are practically no assistant or associate-level Republicans. The Republicans at Full Professor are the ones nearing exit. The evidence seems to suggest departments will become more lopsided before it becomes less so.

TDR: You suggested that the schools you looked at for your survey, UC-Berkeley and Stanford, could be seen as representative of institutions across the country because you've found that academics and researchers "identify with their discipline," which has a much greater impact on their intellectual character than the facets of a specific institution or locale. What from your research or experience led you to this conclusion?

DK: Other than the Stanford-Berkeley investigation, which looked at voter registration, I conducted a survey of six national associations. These associations came up with similar ratios of Democrats to Republicans. It is quite clear that nationwide, certain departments are just dominated by Democrats. It remains a reflection of the fact that these disciplines now function as de facto clubs that cut laterally across geography and institutions. As well as just being an academic, I know damn well that's how people in academia really think. They are economists first, Dartmouth professors second, just as an example.

TDR: Then if certain studies are more conducive to producing academics and researchers with principles that favor the Democratic Party, does that not point to a paucity of educators out there with Republican or third-party loyalties for administrators and departments to choose from?

DK: There's some truth to that, but that itself is as much an effect of the current environment as a cause. This is a progression that has gone on through time without a simple linear cause and effect structure. Departments and administrators don't want to hire Republican or conservative professors, and Republican or conservative seniors do not want to march into machine gun fire. It is a self-reinforcing cycle.

TDR: You leave much of the implications of your findings for the reader to discern, but from your own experience, what has this era of virtual one-party rule garnered for us in academic institutions?

DK: A much-impoverished intellectual experience. There is no way not to take sides on this question. In my judgment, it is just a tremendous foregoing of enlightenment, as well as allowing a lot of bad ideas to be introduced virtually uncontested. While a lot of students do not buy into any of it, it is a real shame that most of them are missing what I consider the good stuff. Some of them are even pushed along with much of the bad stuff as well. What is going on is simply terrible.

TDR: Given that it remains unlikely that departments will institute reforms themselves to change the current trend, what can be done, from your viewpoint, to help alleviate the current dilemma?

DK: It really depends upon who the agent is. The short answer is that I don't think much can be done. At this point, students can, at least, become more aware of the bias. They can benefit from learning that the faculty is preponderantly progressive or establishment left. As far as donors and parents are concerned, they should what they are paying for, and they might decide they do not want to pay for it. I think it is crazy to think that a conservative or libertarian alum should feel obligated to write a $1,000 check to the university. I also believe taxpayers should know what they're paying for. Taxpayer funding should be dramatically reduced.

Klein: Academia to Grow More Lopsided

Article Tools

Related Articles