3 ms·
Do you not see the irony in your statement? What is conservatism if not an ideology? All you're saying is universities that align with the prevalent ideology
by saubeidl 1y ago
Do you not see the irony in your statement?
What is conservatism if not an ideology?
All you're saying is universities that align with the prevalent ideology of the authoritarian regime will be fine. Congrats, you're now the Soviet Union.
- travisgriggs 1y agoI think the OP was posting somewhat tongue in cheek. Sardonic even.
- hollywood_court 1y agoAlso, "thought diversity" and conservatives aren't things that typically go together.
- like_any_other 1y agoEmpirically false - see figure 2: https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12665 https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso....
- ap99 1y agoYour response reveals the way you're thinking about this. i.e. If I accept and employ a conservative person then I'm aligning with conservative values and betraying liberal values. What the GP is proposing is abandoning this black and white thinking, or in other words: accepting diversity of thought. (Waiting for downvotes from the HN echo chamber that abhors diversity of thought.)
- saubeidl 1y agoThat is straight up not what's happening though and the "diversity of thought" framing is a way conservatives like to gaslight people into accepting their censorship. Climate change research is being threatened. Universities are being bullied for supporting trans athletes. There's a reason these folks are fleeing. It's not because they can't stand to have colleagues with opposing views, it's because they are threatened. To reframe it as "diversity of thought" is disingenuous and dishonest.
- ap99 1y agoYou're implying there was an abundance of diversity of thought before 2024 or 2016. Was there? Academia has been this way for decades.
- saubeidl 1y agoSo which is it now? Is it newly found diversity of thought or has it always been this way? I don't remember the last time the president bullied universities the way this one is doing, fwiw.
- kentm 1y agoI would argue there was. You’re using “Accepts conservative thoughts uncritically” as the barometer here. Conservative thought just tends to lose out when examined critically, so the right seeks to compensate by authoritarian measures. See heavy handed, top down efforts to suppress climate science, gender and trans science, research into effects of diversity, etc.
- jklinger410 1y ago> Climate change research is being threatened. Universities are being bullied for supporting trans athletes. These two things are not equivalent.
- saubeidl 1y agoWhy not? Both are "diversity of thought", aren't they?
- 762236 1y agoIf a university has thought diversity, their demographics will match America's: they'll employ around 50% conservatives. If they have like 3% conservatives, as many do, that is a good sign that they are captured by an ideology, and then the question becomes, why should conservatives support institutions with federal money that actively spread an ideology that excludes conservatives? If the universities want to continue this way, they should pursue First Amendment religious protection.
- saubeidl 1y agoYour core assumption is false. Education is not evenly distributed alongside ideologies. Education is negatively correlated with conservatism, thus a sample of a job requiring higher education will not be representative of the general public.
- 762236 1y agoHistorical employment rates of conservatives at universities were much higher than now.
- verdverm 1y agoThe definition and constituents of "conservatives" has changed over that same time
- saubeidl 1y agoThat was in a time when conservatism wasn't openly anti-science and anti-scientific process.
- 762236 1y agoI started voting for Republicans because I watched Democrats become anti-science, e.g., gender-affirming care. Anyone with ideology rejects science, which includes people from both parties, but currently my life is impacted in a negative way by liberal ideology, not conservative ideology (conservatives actually talk with me, while liberals shun me if I ask for evidence).
- tjs8rj 1y agoThe problem is our public institutions (universities) are using public dollars on things that are not desired by the public. Institutions have accountability to the people. Nobody except a fringe wants universities to be maga centers, most people just want them to reflect “common sense” and forward the will of the American people
- kentm 1y agoPublic universities should not be beholden to the public in what they research. It’s important that institutions are able to make conclusions that are true and expand human knowledge despite certain portions of the population not liking those conclusions. I would also dispute your assertion that “no one wants universities to be maga centers.” Leaders on the right have said that they do want that, or at least the right wing American mythos to be uncritically taught and not challenged.
- tjs8rj 1y agoThis isn’t about research topics, this is about money being spent on activism I said “nobody except a fringe”, which is correct
- epistasis 1y agoThis is simply untrue and backforming extreme right-wing ideology as a reason for why people voted for a ln entire candidate. One things that fascists do when voted into power is assume that any random strange ideology as part of the platform is now so popular that it must override existing law and procedure, and that is exactly what Trump is doing here. Which is why these researchers are leaving. Not because they are doing something the public dislikes. The public looooves scientific research.
- maeln 1y ago> The problem is our public institutions (universities) are using public dollars on things that are not desired by the public. That are not desired by the public until it is. A lot of people might find research in advance and quite esoteric math useless, as it does not produce any benefit to them. That is until those research yield something that can be used in a way, or in another field, where it does impact their lives. The issue is that you cannot easily tell what is useful or not. Some research have a clear goal, who, if achieved, will yield very tangible benefit, but they might never reach it. On the other hand, something that seems impenetrable to the average man might yield incredible benefit. Without the freedom to explore, nothing would ever be found.