Quote:

Table 12
Radical Activist Marxist
Phys/bio sciences 6.3 2.6 0.0
Social sciences 24.0 20.6 17.6
Humanities 19.0 26.2 5.0
Comp sci/engineering 2.0 0.6 0.7
Health sciences 0.0 1.2 0.0
Business 5.3 3.2 1.9
Other 7.2 11.1 1.1
Total 11.2 13.5 3.0

---

JHOVA said:

when did i say that people dont need school? my argument isnt that people dont need school. my point is schools are overwhelmingly progressive. i havent been imaging "current year" events. everyday theres worse and worse laws and actions taken by progressives in academia and the government.

Here's a survey that found. this was from 2006 long before bret weinstein & evergreen, jordan peterson and bill c16's compelled speech laws, and the 3 Berkeley riots.

Theres a graph included of the % of each self identifiers. the amount of self-identifying "radial, activist, and out right marxist" in the humanities is no shocker (at the time around 50%). i guess we could play semantics about marxist not being communist technically. id like to see a modern study on professors that identify as or sympathize with cultural marxism and inter-sectional feminism.

Quote:

Table 12
Radical Activist Marxist
Phys/bio sciences 6.3 2.6 0.0
Social sciences 24.0 20.6 17.6
Humanities 19.0 26.2 5.0
Comp sci/engineering 2.0 0.6 0.7
Health sciences 0.0 1.2 0.0
Business 5.3 3.2 1.9
Other 7.2 11.1 1.1
Total 11.2 13.5 3.0

---

61% of social sciences. 50% of humanities.

---

koods said:

Of course highly educated people tend to be liberal. Conservatives are anti-intellectual. The single most reliable predictor of trump support is low educational attainment.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/%3famp=1

Quote:

in the 2016 election, a wide gap in presidential preferences emerged between those with and without a college degree. College graduates backed Clinton by a 9-point margin (52%-43%), while those without a college degree backed Trump 52%-44%. This is by far the widest gap in support among college graduates and non-college graduates in exit polls dating back to 1980. For example, in 2012, there was hardly any difference between the two groups: College graduates backed Obama over Romney by 50%-48%, and those without a college degree also supported Obama 51%-47%.
Among whites, Trump won an overwhelming share of those without a college degree; and among white college graduates – a group that many identified as key for a potential Clinton victory – Trump outperformed Clinton by a narrow 4-point margin.

---

---

JHOVA said:

thats a goal post shift man you are all over the place changing your argument almost every post. slippery little sucker you are

its not illegal to hire liberal and progressive teachers exclusively in the humanities. conservatives are over represented in the hard sciences. which makes a lot of sense considering the personality type predisposition associated with conservative and liberal ideology.

i dont think anybody wants a liberal or conservative school. its not a schools job to tell you what to think but how to best judge information and come to your own conclusions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindsay_Shepherd
they (inter sectional feminists) dont believe in truth or presenting both sides. people are getting fired for LACK OF BIAS. presenting jordan petersons viewpoint is deemed immoral in a classroom setting when talking about preferred pronouns for fucks sake. how can you learn about history or the present while being afraid of talking about the key figures in history or current events?

---

Mycolorado said:

LOL Funny, these statements about the all out orgy liberalism on US campuses are posited by folks whom likely have't spent a whole lot of time, if any, in a college classroom.

---

So you know the educational backgrounds of everyone posting in this thread?  No prejudgment here, very open minded attitude.

qman said:

The Ivy League universities try to go over board with their new "liberal" policies because there's so much "conservative" history and behavior in the schools. 

They have to put a "liberal" spin into their universities to keep up with the times, it's just to counteract the extreme conservative history of the universities.

Most of the parents of these students are very conservative in nature, they might even consider themselves "liberal",  but they're not. It's hip to live a wealthy conservative lifestyle and call yourself and free thinking openminded "liberal".

---

XUL said:

A school based in truth, rigorous peer questioning, free speech, and the scientific method is a good school.

---

christopera said:

qman said:

The Ivy League universities try to go over board with their new "liberal" policies because there's so much "conservative" history and behavior in the schools. 

They have to put a "liberal" spin into their universities to keep up with the times, it's just to counteract the extreme conservative history of the universities.

Most of the parents of these students are very conservative in nature, they might even consider themselves "liberal",  but they're not. It's hip to live a wealthy conservative lifestyle and call yourself and free thinking openminded "liberal".

---

Says you.

You can type words all day long, that doesn't mean that they are true.

Let's pretend for a minute that your story is true, it still only has any bearing on like .0000001% of the population. So who cares?

---

Quote:

Don't tell me that going to Berkeley would be the same as IUP. Berkeley's administration is liberal to the core. That has been demonstrated. IUP is a fact driven school, but humanities will bring about social justice warriors.

A school based in truth, rigorous peer questioning, free speech, and the scientific method is a good school.

---

christopera said:

It's such a piss poor critique on liberal arts schools that it's only believed by people who flunked out or by snowflakes that got butt hurt the first time somebody told them mycelium is older than Jesus.

---