/lit/ - Literature

>>6726907

we know it to be true because most of us have experienced university life.

>>6726913
This.

>>6726913
ditto

It's mostly confined to the Humanities, I think - which makes it pretty harmless because those people will never impact the world anyway.

as anon already said, going to university was enough to prove it.

but there's also a paper out from a prof at UBC I believe that shows that the overwhelming majority of academia is leftist, and has been since at least the 50s. If I find it I'll post.

>>6726913
>>6726917
>>6726932

THAT'S SO DEEP MAN

>>6726907
If anything, academia just isn't the place for right-wing ideology. Having to label yourself as right-wing is a poor strategy that may have worked back in the 1920s, but the best right-wing ideology of today rejacts any label at all.

>>6726907
I doubt you'll find anyone disagreeing. But then, you'd hardly expect any different since right-wing views are largely a product of ignorance. What are you going to do, insist that universities hire stupider lecturers?

There's plenty of right wing people in Med school. I'd call it a tie.

Bias? Nah. Reactionaries just aren't very smart.

>>6727023
>>6727068
>muh ideology makes me better than other people
Ahahaha

>>6727095
Are you saying that the thoughts somebody has or the beliefs they espouse are not a useful guide to their intelligence? If so, why?

>>6727129
Holding left-wing beliefs is usually a sign of low-intelligence.

>>6727068
> my opponents are dumb and therefore I am not biased
Really? I seriously hope for your sake that was a troll.

It's really bad at my university. I had a history professor complain about America being so bad that it's impossible to make it look good, all because of things that only radical leftists would take too much of an issue with. The attitude is common among my classmates, more so than among professors, but the professors encourage it. It goes beyond rational criticism (inb4 'reason isn't rational,' that isn't a good argument and the people who make this claim to justify a lack of rigor are exactly the problem) to the point of pure emotional appeals based in bias and hysteria, it interferes with actual transmission of knowledge.

I knew some right-wing academics while I was an undergraduate. One of them was instrumental in transforming my politics from partially leftist to consistently conservative during my time studying the history of political philosophy with her (most importantly, she enthusiastically introduced me to the writings of the would-be Nazi Carl Schmitt).

I think there are far more left-wingers in academia than right-wingers, but I think the main difference is that left-wingers will be very vocal about their politics in public and they will allow it to colour their published work (while giving academic credibility to non-subjects and topics of left-wing political concern like race and gender), whereas the conservative minority in academia stick to genuine scholarship and share their politics only with those who come to them with a private interest.

I've been involved in academia for the better part of the last 20 years, and my assessment is that:
1. there's definetely a bias in the humanities, but I wouldn't say it is overwhelming. There are always the right-leaning or center-leaning professors in Sociology, Anthropology, Psychology and Geography mostly. But most of all, Philosophy tends to be very conservative (except in depts where structuralism or post-structuralism are well represented).
2. in otherwise non-politically-charged areas (e.g. biology, engineering, physics, maths) conservative ideology seems to be pretty strong. There seems to be a cross-polynation effect between higher male population and strongest conservative bias.
3. in very religious areas there is usually a strong polarization in political discourse, usually ending in acts of agression or attempts at controlling speech and/or political action.

Intellectuals on the right just go straight to the state because they know they're electable or at least employable in the eyes of government thinktanks. Leftist intellectuals know that neither of those predicates apply to then so they just try to get tenure at a university that will ignore them while funding them a little bit.

>>6727207
>I let a professor influence my ideology

>>6727155
This is a constructive and quality post.

>>6727236
She wasn't 'my professor'. She was my supervisor. I engaged in a long open discussion with her while studying the history of thought from Plato to Rawls and she helped me find myself. I started with a kind of Blue Labour socially conservative leftism and ended up a consistent conservative in the end.

>mfw english professor claimed western culture was patriarchal without providing theoretical context, definition, or qualification
>also unironically used the term mansplaining in a prescriptive manner in an academic institution

>>6727239
Only if by left-wing is meant identity-politics. How does the right explain reality again? The joos? I'm sorry but that's woefully inadequate. Atleast the Left has an ideology that one can use to explain reality. The term Left and right were a simplification from the very start though and now, today, they carry absolutely no EXPLANATORY POWER WHATSOEVER!!!11 ARRGHHHHHH!

>>6727276
<blue labour
leftist<

>>6726907
its true in the sense that the left places values on compassion, science, learning and progress. of course universities will be left leaning.

the right on the other hand is mostly reactionary and backwards. it makes sense that the right would be mostly religious and uneducated, and interested in capitalist self interest. i don't believe right wingers know enough about the rest of the world to get any kind of big picture and end up just trying to increase their personal wealth at the expense of the environment, human rights and even themselves in the long run.

>>6727282
maybe don't go to shit unis anon :)
you'd have to get accepted first tho :(

>>6727239
It's as much of a constructive post as the ones claiming the same about people who hold right wing views.

>>6727294
>>6727336
These posts show massive ignorance of right wing belief. This willful ignorance and bias is exactly the type of crap they are teaching at universities.

>>6726907
In the humanities, of course. You can't really analyze the relations between individual and society without a critical perspective on either, and people on the right have trouble with that.

The closer a field is to the interests of market and industry, the more its outlook will clnform to tjose interests, and that's where the actual money is in academics. So overall, the ones who have to worry about funding and tenures tend to be on the left, and the ones who don't, on the right. You know, pretty much like in the rest of society.

>>6727351
Enlighten us to what right wing beliefs are, then.

I agree that those posts mostly point out fundamentalist religious thought and Ayn Randian fedora capitalism, and that doesn't seem to actually represent conservative thought. But then again, what does?

>>6726907
Maybe in the humanities

As a chemistry major, most of my profs were slightly right wing. It's just left wingers tend to be more shrill and have to insert their politics loudly into every unrelated tangent like insolent children in their pseudoscience courses.

Of course most of /lit/ is liberal arts peasants who would go into convulsions if they had to do actual work, so they wouldn't know this.

>>6727372
>chemistry
>cuckscience of physics
>physics
> cuckscience of mathematics
>mathematicss
> cuckapplication of logic

You sure aren't showing your inferiority complex by overcompensating there, edgemaster

>>6726943
There is less room for political bias in the more empirical sciences.

Those Humanities graduates comprise a good proportion of the teachers in our schools. A generation of teachers educated by left leaning mentors, is likely to result in a generation of easily influenced children educated by left leaning teachers.

Do you still think they have no impact?

Some left-wing people are intelligent as are some right-wing people.

The average /pol/-tard who looks for the Jews to be behind every one of society's ills is just as whacky as the hippie nut-job who believes in numerology, man.

But if we look at right economics we can easily see how free-market capitalism and trickle-down economics, two concepts beloved by the right, are entirely retarded.

>>6727394
>But if we look at right economics we can easily see how free-market capitalism and trickle-down economics, two concepts beloved by the right, are entirely retarded.

It's absolutely true. Half of the Humanities departments at my university are 30-50% Jew, and 90% smug left wing. It was not an infrequent occurrence for smug left wingers to steer lectures in the direction of their ideology, even joking about how it's obviously correct and so on.

That doesn't mean some of them aren't smart guys, or that leftism has nothing to it, it just means that human beings as always are orthodoxy-hugging status quo cock-worshiping cowards who will circlejerk over a fallen "enemy," or create one to circlejerk onto if there isn't one available. The kind of leftist who is glad rightism isn't represented in academia is the kind of rightist who thinks banning the books of his opposition is a good idea, in slightly gayer clothes.

>>6727380
All that money spent on your degree to "make you a better thinker" and the best you can up with is cuckposting?

I'm LMAOing at your life

>>6727401
>implying right wingers are the ones getting books banned these days

http://columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2015/04/30/our-identities-matter-core-classrooms

>>6727394
numerology isn't real and has no basis, saying suspiciousness of jews has no basis is just furthering the narrative

Representing your ideology isn't bad. If you believe something to be true then you should be ready to withstand anything that is said against it. I'd like to be a faggot like Socrates and just fuck around with people and their ignorance.

The left should crate a new system that would compete with capitalism. The right, well, they don't have to do shit except get money and fuck all you bitches before the left breaks them. They could also turn to fascism just to get rid of all the gas that is left in the world.

>>6727394
>Marx, the Jew, was right about economics, 100%, and Marxist economics-the only Leftist form-is perfect
>EVERY CONSERVATIVE ECONOMIST IS WRONG EVEN THOUGH I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THEM

Why do Jews have such a superiority complex?

>>6727362
Conservative beliefs are less easily defined than left-wing beliefs because they are specific to different countries and cultures, but the belief that culture and tradition should be conserved is obviously central. For a society to function, the people need a strong moral authority that stems from tradition and a sense of loyalty to the country/community they live in. It is unrealistic to believe this can come from utopian abstract ideals that left-wing politics offers. Secular and left-wing beliefs have been key in the moral and cultural degradation of the west.

>>6727413
>Study literature
>Find out that most of the literature people have consistently appreciated over the years is about elbad experiences you've had
>Get mad at the writers for writing about your bad experiences
>Write off entire canons because they contain stories of exclusion and exploitation
>Continue studying these canons because of Stockholm syndrome
>Blame the writers for your inability to realize you were studying a subject you neither understood nor enjoyed studying, as well as your inability to contribute anything meaningful to discourse
Why not study something that triggers you less? I genuinely don't understand.

while studying in England, a guy that i grew to consider a very good friend told me race was nothing but skin color, he was studying pharmaceutical chemistry or something like that.

How do you buy that shit, not even arguing from a racist point of view, just how do you buy that shit.

>>6727445
They want to ruin it for everyone else as well

Academics are intelligent people.
Intelligent people are left-wing.
Of course there's going to be a left-wing bias in academia.

>>6727445
Women have no agency and their intuitive perspective is that they deserve to be comfortable at all times. The combination of these two things means that as soon as they get uncomfortable they cry for men to jettison the things that made them uncomfortable.

Doesn't matter whether it's banter in a predominately male social space, or competition in sports, or market forces, or Shakespeare. If it makes my cooter feel bad, it has to go, because I Am Woman.

They've just been taught to wrap these impulses in fancy and universal language.

>>6727493
>Intelligent people have my ideology and not any others

>>6727499
I don't think that's true of all women, you seem pretty resentful.

>>6727500
>my ideology
I'm a 70 IQ Neanderthal, DURR HOMOSEX BAD, FREE MARKET GOOD.

>>6727500
Just because he might be a leftist doesn't make it less true.

>>6727507
>not being a free market homosexual bootleger

>>6727507
>this is what lefties think all right wingers are like
>this is the face of intelligent left wing discourse when met with opposition

And this is what happens when you never leave your online circle jerk forums. What a sad sight.

>>6727493
>>6727509
Academics are those who have received the most lucky breaks in life and are the most privileged, not the most intelligent.

>>6726907
It is manifestly apparent if you have attended post-secondary school.

>>6726907
It seems to be institutional, not inherent to academia.
For example, up until the '60's most universities were very Conservative. While the current academic experience is largely Left-wing this is changing (CounterPunch has been speaking of this for some time) and swinging to be Conservative again.
Also, while *overall* contemporary academia is Leftist some departments (engineering and business, notably) are not and some schools are not. Ave Maria, for example.

Also, while people with Masters degrees and above are largely Leftist, this does not include medical professionals or MBAs and people with Bachelor's degree who are not in academe are mostly Conservative.

>>6727518
This is true to some degree, but a highly privileged upbringing can't turn a retard into an Oxford professor (though I'm not disputing it can't turn a naturally intelligent person into an Oxford professor). Given the general intelligence of academics they're more likely to recognise they've benefited from a privileged upbringing.

>>6727023
>implies people who disagree with him are less intelligent
>uses 'stupider' on a literature board

>>6727422
But it does have no basis.

Look! Some of those Frankfurters were Jews! And that Gloria Steinem has a Jew name! And some tv company has a Jewish owner! They must all be in on an organized plot. Let's call it "Cultural Marxism!"

If a Jewish person does something that /pol/ identifies as part of some conspiracy to undermine the west, then clearly it's because of that person's Jewishness. Even if it's a student who isn't Jewish, he or she was probably educated by a Jew or read a Jew book.

Though if a Jew doesn't act in a way that /pol/ perceives to be Jew-like then, of course, it's controlled opposition.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

>>6727437
I never said Marx was right. I never even mentioned Marx.

>>6727336
depends on what you mean by the left. it DOES make sense that intellectuals would be generally socially progressive, but the current PC left that dominants a lot of academia has no interest in truth or science.

>>6727536
Perhaps not an Oxford professor, but with enough money and time you can force your way into the administration of a state college

>>6727518
that pretty much applies to most successful people in general

>>6727541
Jews are dominant in right wing intellectual discourse as well. There's no conspiracy, Jews just have an average intelligence much superior to any other ethnicity/race.

>>6727450
>chemist thinks race is only skin deep
>makes some medicine with white test subjects
>reacts poorly with melanin
>other pacients start to die
>NOT RACE GUYS NUH UH

I don't think race changes intelligence or shit like that, but thinking there are no chemical differences between different ethnicities organisms is just...dumb

>>6727541
>They must all be in on an organized plot. Let's call it "Cultural Marxism!"
FFS.
This is /lit/
We've read Adorno, Habermas, Marcuse, Pollack, Fromme, Kracauer, and the rest. We're not some group of Fresmen yokels from rural Ohio that will cringe when someone says 'racist'

>>6727563
...that's the point

>>6727563
I know. I was ridiculing /pol/'s antisemitism.

>>6727563
>This is /lit/
>We've read Adorno, Habermas, Marcuse, Pollack, Fromme, Kracauer, and the rest.
why do I highly doubt this. and wikipedia/sep doesn't count as 'reading'

>>6727450
wishful thinking

>>6727563
Cultural Marxism is a label invented by the right because they were pushed out of academia. You don't get to dismiss the phenomena and it nomclature for being non present in academic circles when the same people pushing what the right calls cultural Marxism holds a monopoly on the field and uses it to silence those who don't march with them arm in arm, lockstep.

Perhaps it is not the best phrased terminology, but it is an observation that you can't just dismiss by claiming "well my professor never mentioned it, I swear he's not biased"

>>6727023
THIS

it's only true for the underpaid lecturers, teaching assistant and adjunct professors. They have every reason to rebel against the system as they have little stake in it.

it's not true if you've ever been taught by a senior or tenured professor and everyone from vice dean to principal holds a, let's say, more balanced forgiving assessment of the situation.

the greatest determining factor for your political believes is the wealth you accrue throughout your life.

>"Capital and academia isn't power and/or structural when it comes to Ashkenazim!"
>"They're just a more intelligent race"
>meanwhile salaryman John Smith only got his mediocre position through privilege and is oppressing everyone with his sheer existence

Sort it out, guys.

IT'S HAPPENING
WE ARE MOVING AWAY FROM 4CHAN AND ITS UNBEARABLE MOD CENSORSHIP THAT SUCKED THE FUN OUT OF THIS PLACE

Pic related, tl;dr why it's so superior:

1) Each board has an on topic/off topic area. All mods can do is move threads between on topic/off topic, they can't delete your posts nor ban you. This was made to ensure freedom of speech on all boards. You can even choose to post something as on topic or off topic yourself

2) Privacy. When you post, your IP is remove of the last two numbers, and then encrypted on the database. In case your IP has been banned due to abuse/illegal content, you can make an "anonymous account", with no email required, and then your IP doesn't matter anymore. You can post through TOR or any proxy, which is great for privacy if you ever want to speak your mind on a controversial opinion. 4chan blocks TOR and most proxies, for example, and stores your IP full on the database for at least more than a year, as it has been confirmed

3) Only the chan creator has the power to delete posts, and he only deletes content that is truly illegal by government standards, or the site would be taken down. There is a LOT of things that are legal to be posted but 4chan does not allow, going there feels like a completely different place

4) There are official boards like /tv/, /pol/, /b/, but anyone can make their own niche boards as well.

5) If you decide to use an anon account, you can bypass captcha. It's like a free 4chan pass.

Link is in the image
By using this chan, we are in full control of everything, and not mods that will delete anything they dislike.

I hope you give this a serious shot anon, a lot of work was put into this place to make a truly free place on the internet.

[hack bypass: 1

>>6727609
you can't have political incorrectness and pedophilia because marxists only like one of those things

>>6726907
Maybe it's true because academics are smart :^)

>>6727507
>Everyone who isn't a radical leftist loves the free market and has knee-jerk reactions to homosexuality
>I'm incapable of holding nuanced opinions, let alone considering the possibility that others are so capable

5/10 because I'm replying.

>>6727336
fuck off back to the TYT comment sections on youtube, faggot

>>6727600
This.

There are people who think antisemitism makes a socioeconomic system fascist, and not the actual policies and structure of the system. They're allowed to believe this, too. Most of these people probably only exist on this board but there put there.

>>6727023
Marxist Professor Detected.

>>6727584
The closest you can get to a legitimate "cultural marxism" is critical theory, but the (alleged) leftist bias in critical theory is mostly due to the right wing theorists refusing to use it.

As a interpretational tool, it doesn't have any bias of it's own.

>>6727677
Most idiots in academia don't know what an actual fascist system consists lf

Economics taught in American university is almost entirely Keynesian, and you'll be hard pressed to find a class or professor which at all teaches or has a solid understanding of Marxian economics.

Identity politics and other bullshit isn't something purely leftist and usually holds liberal, authortarian, or capitalist sympathies underneath. It wouldn't be difficult to find a "leftist" complaining about a lack of black female CEOs in America or some other bullshit.

>>6727691
But the very point of this thread is discussing left wing bias in academia.

There are some who would call this bias the "cultural Marxism" itself.

I personally disagree with the name they chose, because most of the leftists at unis these days are more concerned with identity politics than class consiousness.

>>6727023

>>6727539
>>6727095
Yes, but the thing is conservatism is actually just the product of ignorance and stubborn immaturity. Just as a small child is stubborn and hates change, or someone with aspergers cannot stand a change in their life routine, a conservative cannot comprehend progress or much of anything at all. It's not necessarily a matter of stupidity, just a lack of education and knowledge.

>>6727715
>objective progress

The left is a regression into failure

Mixed capitalist systems blowing you the fuck out since the 50s

Stay mad you ignorant dogmaticist :^)

>>6727707
The thing is: Cultural marxism doesn't exist, what your typical /pol/tard lumps as "cultural marxism" is a mix of Frankfurt theories, Gramscism and sometimes postmodernism.

These things have nothing in common, besides a materialist (or sometimes, genealogical) analysis of society. These methods are methods, who aren't restricted to the left wing. It's no one's fault if the right is too butthurt to try to apply them to any narratives they seem fit.

>>6727715
Your posts are fucking pure ideology. No intelligent leftists would say this shit.

Just stop while your ahead, and maybe read a right wing book, not to agree but to have a better understanding of rightism beyond your shitty projection.

>>6727504
It is, generally. Individual outliers aren't relevant to general observations (most mushrooms should not be eaten, but some can!).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBgcjtE0xrE

>>6727715
You've perfectly illustrated the issue you have with leftists. It seems to me you wish to change everything, even the stuff that actually works, solely so you can say: "I am better than these simpletons who don't understand anything." It's an intellectual masturbation.

And no, I am not right-wing. At least not completely. I do accept some aspects of it just like I accept some accepts of leftism, but too much of either is obviously an overkill.

>>6727780
* I have with leftists, obviously.

>>6726907
left-wing is too vague.

true is
> if you don't express yourself in a PC way, you'll get flak
> mandatory gender and women's studies classes even for STEM majors (here in mid-EU)
> ethnicity, culture, religion are very touchy subjects and you better not offend anyone

at the same time
> everything is highly structured, rigid, and over-regulated; hence
> the individual isn't really worth shit, conform or fuck off
> for every rampant feminazi lesbo prof that treats male students like crap you'll have a macho chauvinist wanker that treats female students like second rate human beings

generally imo it's just symptomatic of a society that doesn't know what it really is/wants; that clings to simple dogmatic ideals and shits on the young, while you have a turbocapitalist system applying pressure from above.

the "right wing" reaction is just a hysterical overreaction to a decline in shared values that blames the left; the "left wing" moral panics come from a group of people rejecting the old values and dogmatically clinging to new ones; what we'd really need is some balance, a dialog between the groups, reason, wholesomeness, but that doesn't sell well so i don't think it'll happen.

keep in mind that's my experience as a STEM student in mid-EU; people with other majors from other areas of the world may have entirely different experiences

>>6727786
The right is trying to help you hold on to a shred of decency

Largely true. I have a question though, why is that conservatives make the best English teachers? I've noticed that conservative English and History teachers tend to be really good compared to their liberal counterparts.

>>6727793
i have a right wing guy in my study group. he's a prime example of those guys; in a fraternity, active for our right wing party, posts reactionary stuff all day every day on facebook. last week he posted an offer for carpooling in our fb study group; destination was a brothel outside of town that offered free sex for the first 200 clients to arrive. think of brothels what you will but that sort of walmartisation of human beings has nothing to do with decency.

so "shred of decency" my ass, it's just a cover, they're no better than the lefties

>>6727811
They're not ideological and focus on aesthetics and philosophy that is actually relevant to the work.

>>6727793

That's what he said, but sans hysteria.

>>6727811
because they value what has already happened. the flipside being that liberals are usually the better artists: because they value what can happen now or in a potential future

>>6727546
being PC originated as a leftist phenomenon, and it comes from a good place. it sounds like your just whining because you dont like being called a bigot when you call black people niggers or women chicks at uni. the overemphasis on PC terms to a silly degree as in this black white woman isn't really a serious political issue. unless you are in womens studies degree, these identity politics don't really come up. at least it didnt when i was in college. its been a few years though.
>>6727668
TYT sucks and so do you
>>6727351
ok then explain what the right wing is about to me, the dumb college graduate

>>6727826
anyone who thinks the PC ethos hasn't gone totally out of control either isn't paying attention or is part of the insanity himself

>>6727813
Lefties would argue that proud liberated womyn can be sex workers if they want to

Right wingers would argue that a woman trading sex for money is a fair deal in a capitalist system

What's to hate?

>>6727845
>What's to hate?
the deep, deep spiritual decline it's symptomatic of

>>6727849
That's just a spook anon

>>6727845
I mean, there's also you leaving out the rather large and loud segment of lefties who believe that capitalism and/or the business systems that might allow womyn to sell sex are inherently misogynistic and thus you can't be proud and liberated if you want to participate in those systems.

>>6727839
This. I'm Eastern European and the shit that's happening in West is mind-boggling to me. It's basically dictatorship lite.

>>6726913

I'm not sure what other answer was expected.

>>6727849

Now this is intellectual wankery at its finest.

As though people haven't been selling sex since time immemorial.

Why is the left wing bias of the universities so bad while the right wing bias of other sections of society like the military or clergy not a big deal

>>6727845
they would still be angry at men for using them though.

feminists will be angry at men for everything no matter how it fits with their ideology. these days feminists are angry at men for supporting feminism.

>>6727857
g2bed spookmaster

>>6727859
i think misogynistic ist the wrong word here; but it's true that modern capitalism puts a price tag on everything, including human intimacy, and i don't see that as a positive development.

also, more than the mere fact of prostitution, the condition under which it happens are bad and getting worse. you have the illegality / half-legality in the US, and then you have the flatrate brothels in europe. historically there used to be some human interaction, some acknowledgement of each others individual existence involved, now it's go in, fuck as many meatsacks as you can before your noodle goes sore, pay the check, leave. and let's not get started on prostitution outside the first world

>>6727894
see above.

>>6727901
Because university is supposed to challenge your views, not attempt to indoctrinate you.

>>6727908
Any person who is "indoctrinated" by another simply has a weak mind.

>>6727908
I think you got that wrong, anon. The university's primary job is to indoctrinate you.

>>6727786
This

>>6727911
That I can agree with, but it's still wrong in principle. University should be a place where people are confronted with new ideas rather than one biased version of reality.

>>6727920
just as an anecdote, (i agree), and i just read a biography of a guy who went to uni around 1900, he wrote the same thing about it; indoctrination, little discourse, etc. i always assumed it's a recent development but i guess uni has always been that way, to a degree

>>6727901
>clergy
>right wing
>not living in Scandinavia

>>6727920
But those are your mythical "new ideas". There is no magical realm of incredible and amazing ideas in university. Just energetic attempts at defending ideas, rigour and sometimes systematic thought.

>>6727023
>says the university student

>>6727023
>right-wing views are largely a product of ignorance
You deserve to be ridiculed if only because you consider anyone not sharing your viewpoint as stupid.

>>6727933
I don't want to convert to Islam though

>>6727957
>le islamization is ruining Europe meme
Christianity is by far the biggest religion in Sweden. Sadly, most Swedish Christians are protestant, but there are also quite a few catholics and oriental orthodox christians.

Still, Swedish protestantism is pretty decent, and far more tolerant than most protestants.

Also, while I'm more reclined towards Christianity, I don't harbor any bad feelings towards Islam; at least they're Abrahamites.

>>6727214
You're fucking retarded

"The right" in America is literally evangelical Christianity, gun ownership, and Reaganomics. They claim cosmologists are wrong about the Big Bang, biologists and anthropologists are wrong about evolution, climatologists are wrong about global warming.

How could any institution of higher learning accommodate those views?

>>6727982
I'm not talking about what most Swedes are now, I meant for easy immigration to Sweden I'd have to be Muslim

I mean I'm already brownish i guess I could grow a beard and then come there for the sweet sweet government assistance. Plus all the SJWs would defend every little thing I do.

>>6728000
This. Many also treat the constitution as a sacred, infallible text.

>>6728000
The same universities that teach race and gender are social constructs, GMOs and nuclear power are bad?

I don't know man

>>6728019
>for easy immigration to Sweden I'd have to be Muslim
Where did you read/hear this?

>Plus all the SJWs would defend every little thing I do
Trust me, they wont.

>>6728024
Interesting view of academia. I was never taught that GMOs and nuclear power were bad. We were encouraged to research such topics and arrive at our own conclusions. I never learned race was a social construct, and though many students argued gender was a social construct, I never once heard a professor make that claim.

>>6728040
It all really depends on your concept of gender. Gender is definitevely not sex, gender is usually thought of as the social recognition of a presumed sex (a la Joan Scott). It that is the definition then you would be hard pressed to find an anthropologist, sociologist or even psychologist who would discredit the idea.

That does no equate to say that biology is socially constructed (even if the argumetn could be made about biology being affected by psychossocial elements; such as in psychossomatic disorders).

The GMO and anti-nuclear stances are really just stupidity and ignorance.

>>6726907
The notion of the left/right divide is just a stupid reimagining of the oedipus myth into politics, and right now we're all clawing our eyes out. The left chose mommy and suffered communism and SJW bullshit and the right chose daddy who's been fucking with the poor or unimportant for all of human history.

The humanities are at this point the stronghold of left-wing academics, so it's no surprise with their popularity they'd have a fairly strong influence over political opinion in young people passing through university.

>>6728069
>The GMO and anti-nuclear stances are really just stupidity and ignorance.
>>>/sci/ is over there, autist

At my university, the social sciences are faaar more left-wing than the humanities

>have American history professor
>2nd lecture
>"as a feminist, I'm disappointed by the lack of girls answer or asking questions"
>class is half to a third female

That was as leftist as it got
She even pointed out that Abigail Adams, while a smart strong womyn, was guilty of post-revolution speculation

>>6727738
You're part of the fucking issue, buddy. It is a school if thought, it's a social phenomenon. You'd have to have your head up its ass to respond to this like you are.

Everyone who defends critical theory is like this. Fucking hacks. I blame Jewish philosophy's immanence in the school of thought s much as those of Marxism and the modern students who can't handle anything slightly sophisticated.

>>6727845
Regurgitate more PC narratives

>>6728000
By giving students tools to assess their arguments and giving them opportunities to assess their best ones

>>6728158
>insulting people for caring about science

This really is a left wing board

>>6728266
b-but u shld read popper, kuhn, feyeraband. u scientism!

>>6727441
a lot of talk without substance.

>>6728266
Seriously, what a bunch of pussies. We should cut NASA's funding anyways and just put it to the military so they can make better shit.

>>6727819
>the flipside being that liberals are usually the better artists
False, do you even know what you are talking about?

Liberalism is an ideology that sets out to grant each and every individual equal rights, it is not inherently progressive.

Modern liberals are basically democratic socialists, formally referring to them as liberals is beyond incorrect.

Conservatives are the actual Liberals, modern liberals are moderate Utopian Socialists with a free market.
>>6728000
>treating science as fact
That's as unacademic as it gets.

>>6726907
The left has never genuinely biased on anything because facts and evidence have always been on the side.

I recall there being quite a few leftist teachers in my high school as well. Entirely consistent of the new wave of younger females.

>>6728307
>False, do you even know what you are talking about?
maybe my terminology was weak but my point still stands. backwards looking people won't bring the future. that's not to say there's anything wrong with looking backwards.

It really depends on what part of the academic spectrum you fall.

If you're on the silly side of things, majoring in psychology, sociology, history, gender/ethnic studies or education, the liberal bias will be blatant and overpowering. The majority of PhD's awarded to Americans is highest in this area.

As you move to the opposite end of the spectrum however, and start getting into the serious majors like chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc, the leftist ideology largely disappears. In this part of the academic spectrum, more PhDs go to foreigners than Americans.

>>6728318
That's not true either, Wagner is credited for developing modern tonality, amongst many other things.

The entirety of historiosophy is based on looking to the past.

>>6728307
>it is not inherently progressive.
The idea of progress IS inherent to liberalism.

>Conservatives are the actual Liberals
Too broad of a statement. Some strands of conservatism object to the entire legacy of the Enlightenment.

>>6728340
>The idea of progress IS inherent to liberalism.
Not social.
>Too broad of a statement. Some strands of conservatism object to the entire legacy of the Enlightenment.
Modern conservatism is liberal, you're confusing conservatives with reactionaries.

>>6728266
>If you don't want nuclear power plants, you're anti-science!
top kek

Are we being raided by /pol/?

>>6728382
/pol/ often posts here. The idiots are in denial.

>>6728351
>Not social.

Especially social. The predominant view before the Enlightenment was that humans had a fixed human nature endowed by God. Enlightenment philosophers (such as Locke) believed that human beings were not born with any fixed nature, but learned it. From this, they believed, it was possible for human beings to change society and their way of life, for the better.

>Modern conservatism is liberal

Even mainstream conservativism in the United States reject some ideas of the Enlightenment (appeals to traditional values, distrust in science/rationalism, etc).

>>6728382

God I hope so. Maybe we'll have an actual debate for once instead of a circlejerk sponsored by the moderators

>>6728403
Inherent changes aren't progressive

>>6728416
>Maybe we'll have an actual debate
m8 we're talking about /pol/ here

>>6728437

on /pol/ they feel exactly the same way about /lit/

pompous ignorant idiots vs bigoted ignorant idiots doesn't make for much debate

>>6728382
Why would you say that?

>>6728366
Explain to me how nuclear power plants are harmful you dumb hippie

>>6728446
When people disagree people in lit claim that pol is raiding just like pol people claim tumblr is constantly raiding them

It's the circle of shitposting

>>6728335
Look at the plebs trying to define what is liberal, left, right, conservative so that they can have an /Identity/. How cute.

>>6727441
>the belief that culture and tradition should be conserved is obviously central
>the people need a strong moral authority that stems from tradition and a sense of loyalty to the country/community they live in

So where's the role for academics in this? Thinking up new ideas and debating old ones seems at best unhelpful, at worst downright subversive of the central values of 'moral authority', 'tradition' and 'loyalty'. Would you want an academia minus critical thought, just repeating the loyalty-inspiring dogmas?

Also, I wouldn't be so sure about
>Conservative beliefs... are specific to different countries and cultures
What you've described is an instrumentalist -use- of 'culture and tradition'- these things are necessary 'for a society to function' or for the good of the 'country/community'. The actual cultural content of tradition seems essentially irrelevant- it could be a belief in Jesus, a conviction that thieves should have their hands cut off, or an insistence on wearing trilbies every Tuesday, but what really matters is that inspires loyalty/cohesion. In that sense it's not very specific at all.

Also also, if conservatism is about resisting change and conserving tradition (as the name indeed implies), why do conservatives by and large seem to support capitalism? Nothing on earth has ripped up traditions and values like capitalism has- just look at the history of the last few centuries.

>>6728422
I don't understand what you are trying to say. The Liberalism developed from the Enlightenment believed that human beings could change society, and that the use of reason and science could make a better society.

>>6728470
I'm none of that though, why are you making assumptions?

>>6728470
Thanx God

>>6728470
Projecting?

>>6728486
How is this exclusive to the left wing?

>>6728496
No problem.

>>6728504
When did I say this?

>>6726907
There is actually an anti-left wing bias

>>6728571
Kek

>>6728466
>Explain to me how nuclear power plants are harmful you dumb hippie
I dunno, maybe you just ask the folks who were sent to clean up Chernob- oh, wait.

>>6727023
the epitome of modern leftism

>i'm tolerant of everyone, just not those with different beliefs than me

>educated people lean liberal
> MUST BE A CONSPIRACY

>cannot in any way indicate that, with greater learning and understanding of the world, liberal policies are generally supported by logic, number and fact, and therefore that academic are simply more likely to accept ideas based on their logical, mathematical and factual bases?

People here seem to confuse the terms reactionary and conservative. Conservatives don't try to go back to old ways, they want progression but also want to conserve what they believe works or is good. Reactionaries are the ones that wish to go back to the "old days".

>>6728603
Liberals believe this.

>>6728571
The fact that this is true is what makes the righties crying about "leftwing bias" so infuriating.

>>6728603

>academic are simply more likely to accept ideas based on their logical, mathematical and factual bases

They don't want to accept ideas that go against left-wing ideology even if they are based on logical, mathematical and factual bases. If they did people like Lawrence Summers wouldn't find themselves in a shitstorm just for discussing ideas about differences between the sexes that are based on scientific facts.

The man had to fucking resign as the president of Harvard just because he had the audacity to discuss the notion that there are innate differences between men and women that result in women being underrepresented in certain positions.

>>6728595
What does that have to do with tolerance? There's no suggestion that right-wing views should be suppressed, just that those who hold them tend to be less intelligent.

>>6728593
HAHAHAHA using Cheonobyl as an excuse

That was an ancient reactor that was running at triple capacity due to ignorant Soviet officials.

If you want to talk about deaths look at how many people die mining coal and oil. Look at how much land is displaced by hydroelectricity. Nuclear energy these days is clean and safe.

Absolutely. I believe in gay marriage, am an atheist, support transgender identity, believe in the equality of all races, genders, and creeds, want to end the war on drugs, want to change our electoral system, think income inequality is a problem, support socialized Healthcare (at the state level), etc... And I'm pretty sure I'm considered wildly conservative by my college attending contemporaries

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ewU33EdNnM

>trigger warnings
>safe spaces
>therapy dog to comfort people who "feels unsafe" as a result of hearing disagreeing opinions
>"rape culture"
>armed guards assigned to a speaker for simply disagreeing with majority opinion

How anyone could argue these universities aren't run by radical leftists is beyond me. These people are insane.

>>6728666
What about child love.

People you need to watch sense8 so you can effectively pinpoint what is wrong with our young people

>>6728645
exactly. a lot of leftists haven't caught up with the fact that these days their as hysterical, ideological and biased as right wingers. leftists are used to being the smart ones laughing at george bush, evangelical christians, trickle-down economics and the rest. they don't yet realize, or deny, that their own PC social dogmas are becoming just as laughable both in their basis and in the way people express them.

>>6728666
you would probably get a less violent reaction by going to a tea party rally and talking about your support for communism than you would get telling feminist college students that you dont think the idea of "rape culture" makes any sense.

>>6728680
People are just objects. I do what I want and you're all my puppets.

>>6728603

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rabble-rouser/201310/liberal-bias-in-social-psychology-personal-experience-ii

>In our study, people read either an article reporting research showing that affirmative action harmed African-Americans and an article reporting research showing that same sex relationships were just as healthy as heterosexual relationships OR they read an article reporting research showing that affirmative action was beneficial to African-Americans and an article reporting research showing that same sex relationships were not as healthy as heterosexual relationships. So, everyone read one “liberal” and one “conservative” article. Furthermore, everything about the articles was held constant, except the result, so there were no objective differences in the quality of research supporting the liberal or conservative conclusions.

>The main question was: Who would be more biased in their judgments of the article, liberals or conservatives? People were asked to indicate how true they considered the article to be, and how biased they considered the author to be.

>And the resounding answer was: Liberals were far more biased. Liberals viewed the articles reporting “liberal” results (affirmative action and same sex relationships are good) as truer and reflecting less author bias than the articles reporting “conservative” results. Conservatives, in contrast, viewed the truthfulness and bias in the articles as nearly identical, regardless of their results.

>Americans still think liberal means lefitst
>Americans are still in charge of the world

>>6726943
Oh hell yes they have an impact. Do you know how many young, open minds flow through the humanities classes? more than hard science classes for sure. Those people are being influenced by far-left wacko's who are entirely misrepresenting entire subjects with their baseless opinions, and it's scary.

Don't get me wrong, I lean left, but when I hear shit like

>GMOs are bad for the environment
>Gender is a social construct that has no basis in science
>sexual dimorphism doesn't exist in humans

being passed off as fact, I rage internally.

>>6728706
Words mean whatever people agree they mean. So if Americans think liberals are leftists, then liberals are leftists. We make up language as we go along. That's how it's always worked. You some sorta idiot or somethin'?

>>6728705
...so 'liberals' are more likely to be critical of what they read, then?

>>6728720
>This nigga doesn't know what discourse is

>>6728724

No. I'm afraid you didn't understand what you just read.

>>6726907
I study pol sci and IR and in my discipline anyone who describes themselves 'left' or 'right' wing is regarded as a mental incompetent. Nevertheless there's obviously a 'left' underpinning of the some disciplines, ie: Sociology. Other than that university students and lecturors/tutors/etc. are likely to have read wider than most so they'll tend to find ideas that support their naive moralisms and whatever else they beleive. That's unfair, lots of university people read to challenge their own ideas rather than bolster them.

>>6728776
Well, the blog doesn't actually mention which group overall was more sceptical of the made-up report. But since it refers to the 'liberals' being sceptical of one version, I'm assuming it was them.

What annoys me about the left is that it forces everyone to believe what they believe and shoves it down everyone's throat

>>6728818
this is precisely why it is such a successful social movement.

If you don't accept their beliefs, you are socially rejected, which hurts.

So marxism isn't considerated as leftism anymore?

>>6728706
It's called a colloquialism you stupid fuck

Read a book

>>6728790

>I'm assuming it was them.

You have no reason to assume that.

>>6728840
the terms are no longer synonymous, and haven't been for a long-ass time, gramps

>>6728676
Who is this reactionary bitch?

>>6728724
You misinterpreted that post badly

>>6728857
I do, but it's not a very good reason. Would be interesting to see.

>>6726907
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPJWwiKnYGs

>>6728874
Nah, I got the idea, but I'd be interested in seeing the actual results of the study.

>>6728869

Why do you characterize her as a "reactionary bitch"? She is a former philosophy professor, Christina Hoff Sommers.