Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a noble chance)
    It seems to me that the Left is represented disproportionately in academic circles and I do not know why this is. There are of course exceptions to this, but so many of them only serve to reinforce this view because of how they have been treated by their peers - think of Roger Scruton's Salisbury Review and the leper status it gave him.

    Why do you think this is? Do you even believe it is?
    If you look at the prime ministers of the UK for example many went to oxford and Cambridge and many other prestigious universities and we have had many Labour and Conservative leaders, as such I believe that neither are more educated
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    They have captured academia.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    i'm not very good with the whole political compass thing. people here are obsessed with it.
    Yes, but TSR is all left wing labour voters, which personally I am not, make a post about how much the left wing is bad and it will be deleted straight away
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sw651)
    Yes, but TSR is all left wing labour voters, which personally I am not, make a post about how much the left wing is bad and it will be deleted straight away
    why/how is an entire set of ideologies/policy bad? And how is TSR all labour?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    why/how is an entire set of ideologies bad?
    Sorry I should be more clear, if you criticise the left wing at all on TSR your post/thread will be deleted.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alexion)
    Usually because the left keep promising free education and the like.

    We all know they wouldn't hold up to that if they got into power.
    Maybe it is because angry people who think they are right wing don't actually know what left and right wing mean?

    People keep talking about practical experience... Well maybe academics actually have practical experience of the importance of public funded research and the like since they see it first hand and have a knowledge of the importance it plays. Then stupid people equate this as being left wing and shout about it on their computer full of transistors.
    • Community Assistant
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Very Important Poster
    Isn't this more the case in humanities?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Maybe it is because angry people who think they are right wing don't actually know what left and right wing mean?

    People keep talking about practical experience... Well maybe academics actually have practical experience of the importance of public funded research and the like since they see it first hand and have a knowledge of the importance it plays. Then stupid people equate this as being left wing and shout about it on their computer full of transistors.
    Last week during my brother's anthropology class at a US college, the professor asked who the new Canadian prime minister was, and began to discuss this in class - something which was completely unrelated to the course content which they were studying.

    Call me a nutcase, but this very much looks very much like left-wing bias.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I think it is probably because academics are expected to deal with facts. It is fairly factual that the average citizen would be better off with a left leaning government. Not just financially but as being part of a society that would hopefully grow positively and flourish. As much as people think that by voting for a right wing party it means they are saving money and not dishing out cash to poor people and benefit claimants it is fairly clearly short sighted. For the small amounts of money that the "middle classes" save by having a right wing government people at the higher end of the wealth scale are saving millions that are not going into the economy and corporations are saving billions that could be going into the economy. By middling income families paying a bit more, it means top wealth owners would have to pay their way more substantially, allowing for more money to be reinvested into a progressive society, that in theory would be better off for nearly all. I think academics are more likely to stand back and view facts and trends objectively and most will find it harder to deny this information.

    Another point to consider is that compared to the private sector academia pays relatively low, particularly when compared to the length of training, time until permanent job, length of working week. It is therefore reasonable to assume that academics are maybe less money oriented that someone who is in a position they do not enjoy, but are happy with the high pay packet they take home. Right wing voters often tend to be more financially orientated as opposed to bettering society orientated.

    I realise I have made fairly general assumptions here, but I think the general gist holds true. Obviously you get right wing academics and I'm sure there are some city bankers that may consider themselves left wing.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bupdeeboowah)
    Last week during my brother's anthropology class at a US college, the professor asked who the new Canadian prime minister was, and began to discuss this in class - something which was completely unrelated to the course content which they were studying.

    Call me a nutcase, but this very much looks very much like left-wing bias.
    Would you prefer we had some Stalinist system where academics must only teach state approved topics and bias and stick to a rigid ?

    What do you people want? My maths for electronics lecturer would end up showing us nothing but irelavent Feynman videos for entire lectures on youtube :lol:

    This is what I am talking about. You don;t understand what academia is. Unless we are talking about something like the projectile motion of a cannon ball bias is unavoidable. What is important it that students are taught how to argue. Disusing the Canadian election does not even allude to any particular bias. It's just discussing what people think of the Canadian liberal party. We have a problem if only one set of ideas are aloud to be discussed, which is what you seem to want. You want your beliefs to be the doctrine or some kind of "State Doctrine" in the form of rigid syllabus that lecturers must not deviate from. Teach the facts and teach how to think. Most of life requires the teaching how to think. So much is outside the sphere of science.

    I can give actual examples of "left wing" shutting down debate if you like?

    Anthology gets brought into politics as it is the study of humans. You can bring it into political questions of gender relations for example. We can compare our ancestors to both Chimpanzees and Bonobos, both of which have radically different gender roles in their societies. Maybe women being housewives is "natural" maybe it isn't. Anthropology can help answer that.


    An exmaple of "left wing"
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Because most young people don't understand consequences, quite frankly.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlecRobertson)
    Because most young people don't understand consequences, quite frankly.
    What has age got to do with anything? An academic is not someone who attends university in my eyes, it is someone who takes up a career in one. A lot of academics are REALLY old!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nightwing_)
    I think it is probably because academics are expected to deal with facts. It is fairly factual that the average citizen would be better off with a left leaning government.
    The evidence would point to the opposite.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nightwing_)
    What has age got to do with anything? An academic is not someone who attends university in my eyes, it is someone who takes up a career in one. A lot of academics are REALLY old!
    I was only considering university students in this case, the majority of whom are young people.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    Would you prefer we had some Stalinist system where academics must only teach state approved topics and bias and stick to a rigid ?

    What do you people want? My maths for electronics lecturer would end up showing us nothing but Feynman videos for an entire lectures on youtube :lol:

    This is what I am talking about. You don;t understand what academia is. Unless we are talking about something like the projectile motion of a cannon ball bias is unavoidable. What is important it that students are taught how to argue. Disusing the Canadian election does not even allude to any particular bias. It's just discussing what people think of the Canadian liberal party. We have a problem if only one set of ideas are aloud to be discussed, which is what you seem to want. You want your beliefs to be the doctrine or some kind of "State Doctrine" in the form of rigid syllabus that lecturers must not deviate from.

    Anthology gets brought into politics as it is the study of humans. You can bring it into political questions of gender relations for example. We can compare our ancestors to both Chimpanzees and Bonobos, both of which have radically different gender roles in their societies. Maybe women being housewives is "natural" maybe it isn't. Anthropology can help answer that.
    No, I want to be taught what was mentioned in the course details and what I paid for, not have some lecturer sneak in unrelated left-leaning snippets throughout my course. What the professor was talking about was biased, because it had no relevance to the topic he was teaching, and imparted no special skills to his students; in essence, it was him feeding his students left-wing propaganda (amusing side note: my brother's US classmates did not know the answer, or really care for what he was saying).

    As for the Stalinist system you are proposing, you're confusing the right/left with authoritarianism.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Despite the education system supposedly being objective, I have several times had teachers talk about the "destruction" of our country by Margaret Thatcher and all Tories for the matter.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlecRobertson)
    The evidence would point to the opposite.
    erm....care to share that evidence?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nightwing_)
    erm....care to share that evidence?
    How successful was the Soviet Union?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlecRobertson)
    How successful was the Soviet Union?
    Oh my god! Seriously??? What do you hope to achieve by playing that card? Communism is an extreme example, I specifically said left leaning, not as far left as you can go!! I do not think that communism is the way forward for Britain and I think very few academics would also.

    Saying that it could also be argued that the main problems facing the Soviet Union were not communism per se, but the exploitation of the regime by those at the top and the impracticalities of enforcing communism on a region the size of the USSR.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nightwing_)
    Oh my god! Seriously??? What do you hope to achieve by playing that card? Communism is an extreme example, I specifically said left leaning, not as far left as you can go!! I do not think that communism is the way forward for Britain and I think very few academics would also.

    Saying that it could also be argued that the main problems facing the Soviet Union were not communism per se, but the exploitation of the regime by those at the top and the impracticalities of enforcing communism on a region the size of the USSR.
    How successful was the Labour party between 1997 and 2005?
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.