A new poll shows a further erosion of public confidence in higher education as faculty and administrators reduce colleges and universities to mere academic echo chambers. The poll from Gallup and the Lumina Foundation found only 36% of adults have a great deal or a lot of confidence in higher education, a drop from 57% in 2015.
In my new book, “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage,” I have a long chapter on the erosion of free speech and viewpoint diversity in higher education.
We previously discussed how surveys at universities show a virtual purging of conservative and Republican faculty members. For example, last year, the Harvard Crimson noted that the university had virtually eliminated Republicans from most departments but that the lack of diversity was not a problem. Now, a new survey conducted by the Harvard Crimson shows that more than three-quarters of Harvard Arts and Sciences and School of Engineering and Applied Sciences faculty respondents identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Only 2.5% identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
Likewise, a study by Georgetown University’s Kevin Tobia and MIT’s Eric Martinez found that only nine percent of law school professors identify as conservative at the top 50 law schools. Notably, a 2017 study found 15 percent of faculties were conservative. Another study found that 33 out of 65 departments lacked a single conservative faculty member.
Compare that to a recent Gallup poll stating, “roughly equal proportions of U.S. adults identified as conservative (36%) and moderate (35%) in Gallup polling throughout 2022, while about a quarter identified as liberal (26%).”
Universities have effectively purged faculty with values that reflect roughly half of this country. Students and taxpayers (for public universities) are treated as virtual captive audiences to a culture that runs from the left to the far left. In some cases, classes have moved from education to indoctrination, including universities which now employ “resident activists” or offer degrees in activism.
I have watched the steady erosion of intellectual diversity for 30 years and a rising intolerance for opposing viewpoints. Many students and their families are not keen on spending huge amounts on tuition to attend schools with little tolerance or exposure to conservative or libertarian or even dissenting views on major public issues.
While schools profess a desire for diversity, they continue to replicate their own views and values while excluding opposing views. Some openly support such exclusion. Sites like Above the Law have spent years ridiculing objections over the exclusion of conservative faculty. Senior Editor Joe Patrice defended “predominantly liberal faculties” by arguing that hiring a conservative professor is akin to allowing a believer in geocentrism to teach at a university. So the views of roughly half of the judiciary and half of the country are treated as legitimately excluded as intellectually invalid.
Much like the media, which has sacrificed readership and viewership to advocacy journalism, academics continue this trend despite alienating much of the country and radically narrowing the range of thought on campuses.
Roughly one-third of respondents said that they have very little or no faith in such institutions at all.
There was a time when higher education enjoyed some of the highest levels of respect. Today’s faculty and administrators have destroyed that trust and their institutions by yielding to the impulse to exclude opposing viewpoints.
Some 68% said that higher education is going in the wrong direction. There are obviously a myriad of different factors at play from rising tuition costs to falling populations of college-aged students. However, polls are also registering opposition to the activism and extremism among faculty and administrators in our universities and colleges.
Not surprisingly, Republicans and independents are the most estranged from higher education. While trust of Democrats has also declined, a majority still have trust in higher education. That is hardly a shock when Democratic faculty now outnumber Republicans 10-1 and many departments reporting not a single conservative professor.
Now only 36% of respondents believe that a college education is worth the expense. If these were corporations, universities would be in a full panic and boards would be demanding a new organizational plan. However, these not-for-profits are more insulated from such market pressures and academics feel little pressure for reform.
Faculty members have shown that they will not voluntarily restore diversity of viewpoints. The only chance for any change will come from pressure by donors and, in the case of public universities, legislators. The alternative is to allow the academic echo chamber to continue to drown out opposing views and alienate prospective students.
Professor Turley fails to mention one of the most troubling polls about so-called academia. A poll of college law instructors and administrators from 20 leadng U.S. law schools established that 67% believe that the US Constitution is “outdated” needs to be replaced by a new set of laws written by Marxists.
The crisis in education starts with the Soviet Democrats’ supporters in the Teachers Unions that our children are under in our public schools. It isn’t just that Soviet Democrats give them hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars – and in response the Teachers Unions kick back millions of dollars to those Soviet Democrats as their cut to spend in election campaigns. That corruption is bad enough.
Over 10% of children attending unionized public schools are sexually assaulted at least once during their school years. What’s worse is that the Teachers Unions are a massive cover that shields their members who are pedophiles and groomers that victimize public school students. Victimization at rates per capita that makes the Catholic church everybody complains about look like sandbox show and tell stuff in comparison. And while you have to choose to send your children to Catholic school – the alternative of a private school is our unionized public schools. And of course, fund them with your tax dollars – even if you’ve never had children.
After that abuse from unionized teachers in public schools, not hard for the teachers in these universities to tell those kids once they get to college that gender blending is wonderful, men can menstruate and give birth, etc.
Kinda suspicious that all those so eager to go after the Catholic church about their teachers abusing children just can’t bring themselves to utter the tiniest complaint about the Soviet Democrats funders and partners, the Teachers Unions, who are a nest of pedophiles and groomers. Apparently can’t multitask and go after both?
Just don’t believe their lyin’ eyes, apparently
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2024/07/10/forbidden_fruit_and_the_classroom_the_huge_american_sex-abuse_scandal_that_educators_scandalously_hush_up_1042969.html?mc_cid=0d79030f05&mc_eid=febb5a4d8f
Out of the Mouths of the Ignorant
Universities do not hire conservative professors because there is no market demand among students for those ideas.
In some 30 years of higher education, I never once saw (in the humanities and social sciences) a hiring committee use student demand as a criteria for hiring faculty. I never once saw: Students want X, so let’s hire an academic who specializes in X. I never once saw the opposite: Students do *not* want X, so let’s not hire an academic who specializes in X.
I have, though, seen plenty of times: Students want X. Then a dean, chair, hiring committee reply: Tough. We’re the anointed ones. We know what’s best for students.
And I have seen tons of times, especially at T-1 universities: What do others universities consider avant-garde? Let’s hire one of them. With “avant-garde” meaning a bizarre mix of the irrelevant, the incomprehensible, the perverse — with a strong dose of anti-Americanism.
Appears Mao was on the right track. He knew Academia was a rats nest. Granted, his solution was a little extreme, but just a little.
REGARDING BELOW
EGREGIOUS VIOLATION OF CIVILITY RULES
BAN FOR LIFE
Deep-Rooted Trolls..
Think They’re Indispensable
*****
The troll fancies himself as a ‘content provider’.
But his puppets are empty vessels cluttering the blog.
Puppet Watch knows how to reorganize.
PUPPET WATCH
A California-based non-profit
PUPPET WATCH
Pre-Dawn Edition,
Wednesday, July 10
We have conducted full audits of both comment threads for Tuesday and found the presence known as Floyd Estovir is still transforming.
For the column “Gallop: Higher Education–, Floyd Estovir used green anonymous at least 20 times. Yet he also used Upstate Farmer 20 times. Then curiously Floyd tapped Old Airborne Dog for 12 posts.
Until now, Old Airborne Dog has been a second tier puppet. But for this one column today, the dog played a bigger than usual role.
Floyd Estovir also posted 5 times as Estovir, though just once as Floyd. However Guy Ventner posted 3. Most of the other puppets were absent from this thread.
The Morning Greek Chorus Bots were fairly limited for both of Tuesday’s comment threads after wide use on Monday.
For the column “ANTIFA–, Floyd Estovir spread out amongst his well-established puppets. Still, green anonymous was used at least 15 times. Upstate Farmer posted 6, Edward Mahl 5, James 4, Old Man 3, then several 2 comment puppets including Estovir.
The now-downgraded Waters showed up late in the day for a single comment. But no Traveler on either comment thread. And no Floyd for “ANTIFA–
It appears that Floyd Estovir has no intention of loosening his grip on this blog. Yet his failure to launch Waters and Traveler, as a buddy team, was an obvious setback. Floyd Estovir needs a constant influx of new puppets to keep the show alive.
For now green anonymous and Upstate Farmer will be the main vehicles. And we can probably expect more second tier puppets like Old Airborne Dog to get bumped up for extra commentary. Perhaps on Wednesday Zzdoc1 will take center stage.
PUPPET WATCH
A California-based non-profit
Jeff, welcome back. Your writing style seemed familiar. Things got quiet here when you stopped posting on this blog a year or two ago.
REGARDING ABOVE
EGREGIOUS VIOLATION OF CIVILITY RULES
BAN FOR LIFE
This is absolutely shocking news….if you have lived under a rock for the past 10 years or you are a Democrat.
CALLING RALPH!! CALLING RALPH!!
Resin up your bow! There has been a “serious offense” committed on NBC.
Dr. Tom Pitts, a neurologist and self proclaimed democrat, said there is “no question” that Biden has Parkinsons and that he could diagnose him from “across the mall”.
After naming all of the same symptoms that I listed last night, as applies to Biden, he said if a med student were shown these on an exam and “didnt choose Parkinsons” as the diagnosis, that student “would be remediated”.
Call the lawyers! Call the courts! Call the medical boards!!!
There’s been a serious offense!!
Joe Manchin said today that Biden has until the weekend to bow out or else.
I suspect that a whistleblower inside the WH has contacted Congress and is willing to come forward on the years long coverup of Bidens illness.
The doctor needs to go to jail.
“Republicans buy sneakers, too”
It just occurred to me that the worldwide uniform 100% failure rate of Marxism in all it’s forms is now paralleled by the failure rate of the vast majority of the graduates from these university Marxist indoctrination centers’ schools of cultural Marxism studies: gender studies, womens’ studies, etc. Nothing says “preparation for future employment” than classes like “Lesbian Dance Theory 101”.
Where are their customers? Not referring to where universities get their customers who pay them to obtain a degree in these schools of cultural Marxist thought. But the customers who will pay students graduating with these degrees based in cultural Marxism by hiring and paying them a salary to work in their chosen fields where they obtained their degree?
A few like now thoroughly disgraced fraud and former Harvard president Claudine Gay can make a lucrative living – as long as they’re qualified by checking off boxes in the DEI spectrum and meritocracy is rejected as the basis for hiring. For the majority – it’s back to serving up coffee and hamburgers at a local franchise. Another individual case of the failure of cultural Marxism.
Clearly, they weren’t paying attention when Michael Jordon reminded Marxists and socialists of the world that not all the potential customers in the world have the same political and cultural values as you do.
Old Dog is Floyd Estovir who’s been using this handle quite a bit today.
Old Dog was previously just a bit player. But puppets are sometimes promoted out of necessity. For that reason Floyd Estovir likes to keep plenty of puppets on reserve.
Old Dog is Floyd Estovir who’s been using this handle quite a bit today.
The sophomoric “Anonymous Puppet Watch”… the disciple of Onanism – who sometimes has time on his hands instead of their usual occupation.
Proving to all that mental masturbation for some is equally self-gratifying as living your life as an Anonymous Puppet Watch member of the cult of Onanism
Cultural Marxism permeates universities.
What, me worry?
Many, if not most, here on Jonathan Turley’s misuse to word ‘liberal’.
liberal /lĭb′ər-əl, lĭb′rəl/
adjective
Favoring reform, open to new ideas, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; not bound by traditional thinking; broad-minded.
— American Heritage Dictionary, 5th edition
That would be people like Bill Maher, Elon Musk, the good professor, and even my own sister. They are traditional, JFK liberal Democrats.
What has taken over the Democrat party is illiberal, woke, leftists. By their own words and actions have shown they are not tolerant of other ideas and the behavior of others. The only reform they are in favor of is theirs, and they have no problem shouting down other ideas, and even using violence, even advocating it.
They are the ones traditional, JFK liberal Democrats soundly reject.
UpstateFarmer posted: That would be people like Bill Maher
I will suggest to you that Bill Maher is far from being liberal. Maher on a weekly basis for most of his entire career in the public eye has been regularly intolerant of the ideas of others – and he behaves as an intolerant totalitarian in opposition to those he disagrees with.
In fact, Maher has made a career up to this point of being intolerant of both traditional and new ideas that don’t conform with his beliefs.
Because he pops up once in a while to admit he doesn’t believe his lying eyes on a few issues doesn’t mean he’s suddenly become a liberal in the historic sense.
This illustrates the danger of supporting somebody because they seem to have become a neo-con in the traditional Reagan sense – former socialist leanings that then saw the errors of socialist/collectivist ideas and became a new conservative.
Old Airborne Dog, agree about Maher.
Would say Jimmy Dore fits much better.
Musk is questionable, as well.
David B. Benson attempted this sophomoric deflection:
Many, if not most, here on Jonathan Turley’s misuse to word ‘liberal’.
What definition of ‘liberal’ do you demand we use to avoid your claims of misuse?
That of the time of the Framers (when many of these Ivy League now Soviet Democrat indoctrination factories were founded) and the philosophers before them that influenced their thinking and the Constitution they created?
Or a more modern day version as Marxists and communists have worked their way through a 100 year long history of labels: communist, Marxist, socialist, liberal, and lately “progressive”.
Or let’s try this instead: name Soviet Democrats in the administration of either Obama and now Obama’s Third Term that you would classify as ‘liberal’. Or name the presidents of these universities that you would classify as ‘liberal’.
Once you’ve done that, their career history will speak for itself. And by extension, speak for you as well.
Black donor budgets allow for all manner of evils. Hidden motives, union busting, giant building funds, bloated mid level management administering no one, and high fees, while crying poverty when begging for more public funds. The CA university where I worked sidelined and demonized science and English faculty especially, who didn’t fall into place centering everything around postmodern DEI ideology. The results were victimized and fragile students who took six years to graduate, couldn’t construct a clear paragraph or make a comprehensible argument, whose art projects looked like smears of kindergartners, and would cry when criticized.
A system of value to society would be turning out medical professionals, engineers, and creative and critical thinkers by the thousands.
I wonder if restating Professor Turley’s essential proposition might be useful.
Proposition as stated:
“Universities have effectively purged faculty with values that reflect roughly half of this country.”
Proposition restated:
Universities have mostly recruited and retained faculty with values that reflect a mere 26% of this country.
Just a thought.
Is it really though?
The abortion issue is a pretty good benchmark to use for determining values.
A few red states are facing citizen referendums on abortion rights that are likely to succeed. Meaning the majority want less stringent restrictions than what a clear minority wants.
Kansas proved that point quite well. Now the minority is trying to undermine what the majority wants by arbitrarily changing the rules in their favor.
Universities and colleges will recruit faculty that best reflects what the students want. Not because of how they view conservative faculty.
Conservatives need to make a better case for their ideals than just complaining about being “persecuted” or “discriminated”.
After all conservatives are all about getting a leg-up based on merit. They need to show why their ideas have merit and why they deserve equal relevance. But all they offer are excuses and gripes about being “purged”.
Communism has no individual autonomy.
Constitutionally racist Confederate thinker Kluxxer George said something accurate and correct for once (inadvertently, of course):
The abortion issue is a pretty good benchmark to use for determining values.
Indeed. Particularly in how abortion is treated in comparison to how exercise of Second Amendment rights is treated. So let’s find out:
Do you believe that SCOTUS (legislating from the bench) and/or the Soviet Democrats in Washington DC can create law federal law forcing all states to allow after the fact elective birth control abortions right up to the moment of birth for those Tinder dates gone wrong? Just as the devout Catholics Bribery Biden and Commissar Pelosi claim is actually a right? (Invariably funded by the taxpayers – not the TWO parents involved in the pregnancy)?
Or alternately, as SCOTUS just ruled (after throwing out the “emanations and penumbras” five out of nine SCOTUS justices once saw), the issue of elective abortions is up to the voters of each state to decide for their state. Without federal government interference from Soviet Democrat politicians like Bribery Biden and Commissar Pelosi and their fiends like the racist Wise Latina Woman Justice Sotomayor on SCOTUS?
What’s your values George? Are they consistent versus hypocritical?
California and others can now pass legislation allowing elective birth control abortions of unborn, viable but unwanted children right up to the moment of birth. While Montana’s citizens vote instead to put time limits beyond which you cannot demand an elective birth control abortion.
Which value choice is not only just and fair but constitutional as well?
Let’s remember that abortion is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution nor Bill of Rights (despite five now dead White Patriarchy men in black robes who once claimed they saw “emanations and penumbras” of such an elective abortion right in those documents). Nor is it mentioned in Madison’s Notes that you have never in your life read a single page from.
The Right To Bear Arms, on the other hand, is specifically enumerated in the Bill Of Rights. Accompanied by the words “shall not be infringed” – the only amendment to have those words included.
So… determining values and whether they have any consistency, here we go:
Elective birth control abortions up to the moment of birth are supposedly a national right – even for Illegal Aliens who don’t meat George’s version of ‘natural born citizen. That’s a Soviet Democrat value shared by Kluxxer George.
Meanwhile, despite the 2nd Amendment and it’s wording, Soviet Democrat states like Hawaii have every right to make the Second Amendment a dead letter. Versus states like Montana with gun laws that comply with the 2nd Amendment.
AND… while all states must recognize marriage licenses issued by other states to homosexuals, concealed carry permits recognizing the exercise of the Second Amendment do not have to be recognized in many of those states issuing marriage licenses to homosexuals.
That’s another Soviet Democrat value shared by Kluxxer George, the constitutional racist.
Doesn’t seem to be much consistency there when you test Kluxxer George’s values on abortion versus his values tested against the exercise of the Second Amendment rather than exercising permission for elective birth control abortions.
George, you can get an elective birth control abortion in Montana, Wyoming, etc – just not up to the moment of birth as the Soviet Democrats demand become a legislated permission under federal law. Now try getting a concealed carry permit based on the Second Amendment in Hawaii – while your tinder date schedules her elective birth control abortion.
Old Airborne, you ask Slow and Stupid George, “What’s your values George?” He has none unless one believes ripping the legs and arms off of a child shortly to be born is what one considers values. Of course, that is expected because he supports the policies that lead to the rape of children and women along with murder and other crimes. Maybe he overdosed on some of the drugs imported by the cartels he likes. That would explain his inability to understand what value is.
George the constitutional Confederate racist tried this one out using elective birth control abortion butchery as his platform:
Conservatives need to make a better case for their ideals than just complaining about being “persecuted” or “discriminated”.
George, your Soviet Democrat values are that the federal government must force all states to allow elective birth control abortions right up to the moment of birth. Both devout Catholics, Bribery Biden and Commissar Pelosi push that.
So rather than ongoing complaining that women are being persecuted and discriminated against in states that do not agree with elective birth control abortions… why don’t you Soviet Democrats campaign on a promise that when elected you will pass a federal law forcing all states to allow elective birth control abortions up to the moment of birth?
After all, the majority of voters are women, versus the minority who are those Birthing Persons who have none of those “reproductive rights”. What could possibly go wrong if you put your elective birth control abortion values to the test of the will of the people? Shouldn’t it be a landslide victory if you do so?
So why all the whining about being persecuted and discriminated against by the White Patriarchy, George?
Just make it your election platform and let the voters decide on the federal level just as they now can on the state level.
Academia has fallen and so have their promulgations. To wit, Biden’s White House physician, Dr Kevin O’Connor, commented on his patient’s health, and the White House personnel are bringing our attention to it given that a neuro specialist from Walter Reed has visited Biden 10 times since 2022. Presumably Biden has the beginnings of Parkinson’s Disease (PD)
The White House promulgations (by medical academicians) on Biden’s health are lies. This is based on 2 objective, measurable, observable facts:
1. lack of information on non-motor symptoms in Dr O’Connor’s medical letter (see clinical features below)
2. long and documented history of lying by Democrats, by Joseph Biden and particularly his handlers
Most of what was written in the medical letter is irrelevant (portions with HTML strike out). The rest are lies:
“Letter from Dr. Kevin O’Connor, Physician to the President”
“The results of this year’s exam were detailed in my February 28th letter: “An extremely detailed neurologic exam was again reassuring in that there were no findings which would be consistent with any cerebellar or other central neurological disorder, such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s or ascending lateral sclerosis,
nor are there any signs of cervical myelopathy. This exam did again support a finding of peripheral neuropathy in both feet.No motor weakness was detected. He exhibits no tremor, either at rest or with activity. He demonstrates excellent fine motor dexterity.But a subtle difference in heat/cold sensation could be elicited as it was last year. This heat/cold sensation deficit was detected a couple of inches higher on his ankle/calf this year, which is not unexpected. There may; in fact, be day to day subjective variation of these findings, as during last year’s exam, this area of sensation deficit was actually found to be smaller than the year before.”Seeing patients at the White House is something that Dr. Cannard has been doing for a dozen years. Dr. Cannard was chosen for this responsibility not because he is a movement disorder specialist, but because he is a highly trained and highly regarded neurologist here at Walter Reed and across the Military Health System, with a very wide expertise which makes him flexible to see a variety of patients and problems.Respectfully submitted,
Kevin C. O’Connor, D.O., FAAFP
Physician to the President
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Letter7.8.24.pdf
NB: Parkinson’s Disease has 2 subtypes: tremor dominant PD and a non-tremor dominant PD. I bolded the “Motor symptoms” in Dr O’Connor’s medical letter to highlight the lack of mentioning non-tremor symptoms. The “extremely detailed neurologic exam” medical letter fails to rule out PD given non-motor symptoms precede motor symptoms. Motor symptoms are not required for a PD diagnosis
Parkinson’s Disease: Etiology, Neuropathology, and Pathogenesis
CLINICAL FEATURES
The clinical features historically associated with PD are the triad of motor symptoms, namely, tremor, rigidity, and bradykinesia, with postural instability often appearing as the disease progresses. However, PD is also associated with many non-motor symptoms, and these often precede the motor symptoms by years or even decades.
PD is a very heterogeneous disease and there have been attempts to subclassify the disease further. Although a consensus has yet to be met, one subclassification primarily based on clinical characteristics suggests two subtypes: a tremor dominant PD and a non-tremor dominant PD. A patient with tremor dominant PD predominantly lacks other motor symptoms and in general responds better to dopamine replacement therapy. On the other hand, a patient with a non-tremor dominant PD may have an akinetic-rigid syndrome and a postural instability disorder, as well as an increased incidence of non-motor features. The course of the disease and prognosis differs (10), and it has been postulated that the various subtypes have distinct pathogenesis and etiologies (11).
[…]
Non-motor symptoms are common in early PD but also progress and become more challenging to manage. Early non-motor symptoms include impaired olfactory ability, autonomic dysfunction, pain, fatigue, sleep disorders, and cognitive and psychiatric disturbances. They have a significant impact on the patient’s quality of life (12). Autonomic symptoms can be difficult to treat with orthostatic hypotension causing significant problems for patients. Urinary incontinence and constipation are common, and dementia occurs in 83% of patients with PD after 20 years of diagnosis (13). These non-motor symptoms contribute significantly to disability and poor quality of life and also strongly predict admission to care homes (14).
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK536722/
Estovir, Parkinson’s dementia should be a significant concern. This type of dementia can express itself with hallucinations, delusions, and paranoia, not something one wants in a President with his thumb on the nuclear weapons launch buttons.
One requires a strong mind in a crisis. All one has to recall is the post-Cuba invasion, where the Captain of the Russian submarine ordered the launch of its nuclear weapons that was stopped by the political attache who had a higher rank.
Biden’s Handlers want Biden to remain as the DNC nominee because they can retain power. That Biden is suffering is inconsequential to them. That is what Democrats do: use people do advance their evil agendas all stealth.
And money given to the Biden campaign. Biden has the delegates, so I think he will be persuaded off the ballot at the convention. Can they get rid of Kamala Harris? I don’t know, but my bet is they want to.
You recognize the important thing. Democrats have an evil agenda, so we cannot be sure massive cheating will not occur, another war will break out, or another virus will suddenly spring to life. The left is Stalinist by nature, and Stalin could let millions die to advance his ambitions.
S. Meyer,
Well said and spot on.
Evil succeeds when good men do nothing.
Evil succeeds when
sane and normal men
are on comment boards all day.
“Reality has a liberal bias.”
Congratulations! You win the Vapid Aphorism of the Day Award!
Said no one, ever.
Reality has no bias. It just is.
Difference between a conservative and a progressive in reality:
Conservative: Parents saved money in a 529 college plan for their child. Child studies hard, grows up, goes to college. Gets a degree in some STEM major. Gets an entry level job at a good company. Works hard. Gets promoted. Is a productive member of society, living a good life.
Progressive: Parents think money is a “construct.” Grades are irrelevant and arbitrary. Child goes to college. Has to take remedial classes. Racks up huge debt. Gets a degree in Underwater Basketweaving. Cannot find a job other than Starbucks. Gets mad at the world for his/her poor life choices. Everyone else owes them something. Lives at home with their parents, working at Starbucks with their purple hair and multiple face piercings.
Nothing you said is supported by reality.
Then why are so many progressives posting exactly that on Tic Tok? They have a mountain of debt, cannot get a job for that useless degree, are living at home with their parents, work at Starbucks, have purple hair and multiple face piercings.
They are the ones who posted it.
They are the ones at pro-student debt forgiveness rallies.
You’re going to base your rationale off of tik toks? Really? You must be feeling special. Conservatives post stupid sh!T on tik tok all the time too. Does that mean all conservatives are a bunch of uneducated idiots and clueless saps? No. But if you’re going to rely on tik toks for information of substance then we can comfortably assume conservatives are all a bunch of uneducated idiots and clueless saps….right?
George,
Well Said and Spot On!
There is definitely BS on both sides.
If you live in a $hithole US urban area run by democrats (redundant, I know), you reality is completely liberally biased, unfortunately for you and the outsiders forced to pay for it.
“Reality has a liberal bias.”
Apparently you failed Chemistry in your CalTech PhD program. Had you listened to your professors….. oh, never mind. You listen only to David.
Reality tends towards homeostasis / equilibrium. Once a change is introduced into a system, the system pushes against the change so as to return to equilibrium. Le Chatelier’s Principle was articulated by Dr Le Chatelier, a politically conservative scientist, in the 19th Century
Le Chatelier’s Principle
In 1884 the French chemist and engineer Henry-Louis Le Chatelier proposed one of the central concepts of chemical equilibria. Le Chatelier’s principle can be stated as follows: A change in one of the variables that describe a system at equilibrium produces a shift in the position of the equilibrium that counteracts the effect of this change.
https://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/ch16/lechat.php
Estovir,
Great response!
And thank you for posting that, very interesting.
👍🏽
I did fine in my year of chemistry, Estovir.
Then why did you post something so dumb?
Estovir said, “Reality tends towards homeostasis / equilibrium.”
While chemistry is part of it, homeostasis implies biology. Not chemistry.
Reality is a balance, or equilibrium.
When there is a good year, deer have more to forage on, produce more offspring. In order to prevent an over population of deer, nature provides predators to feed on the very young deer, the weak or the old to maintain that balance.
This is why the Stephen Colbert quote is so simplistic and moronic. It assumes reality is based on a political POV. It is not. All around us, nature proves it everyday. Hurricane Beryl is not the result of conservative or progressive bias.
Reality has no bias. It just is.
“I did fine in my year of chemistry, Estovir.”
David, age takes its toll.
David B. Benson in a blinding moment of inspiration sagely posted: “Reality has a liberal bias.”
Our current Soviet Democrat enforced reality is neither liberal nor merely bias.
It is the modern political version of a Potemkin village; a Potemkin village the fraudulent academics living in their ivory towers worked hand in glove with the Soviet Democrats to build.
With the election close at hand, have the Soviet Democrats and the self-appointed elites in thoroughly disgraced academia stopped telling normal Americans “The border is secure”?
That the economy is great – normal Americans just don’t realize that it is?
That nobody (presumably including the Bidens, Fauci, Obama’s Attorney Generals and FBI directors who perjured themselves under oath to FISA judges) is above the law, and there is equal justice for all?
Potemkin village.
From Stephen Colbert:
https://www.socratic-method.com/quote-meanings/stephen-colbert-reality-has-a-well-known-liberal-bias
If you are using that as support for the “”Reality has a well-known liberal bias,” then you are dumber than I thought.
I was taught that the Scottish Enlightenment was a triumph of liberal thought over conservatism:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Enlightenment
Note that Benjamin Franklin is considered one of the personages of the Scottish Enliightenment.
“It ain’t necessarily so,
it ain’t necessarily so,
the things that you’re liable
to read in the Bible,
it ain’t necessarily so.”
I believe we should Drastically REDUCE federal Funding of Higher Education! Like END Federal Aid to colleges, cities, states and non-profits
If you want to go to college or locals want to fund it…fine! I say this as a college graduate with kids in college. Plenty of generous people fund college education for ACTUAL BRIGHT students. I want Black, Gender, etc studies DEFUNDED!
On the other hand, and I think I am the creator of this quip, people do believe in “hire” education – education that prepares them for a real job in the real world. Whether college or technical school or apprenticeship, or just learning by being taught on the job.
Floyd,
I would only say that college used to prepare people for the real world.
As of late, it just coddles them to be spoiled children.
Balderdash
^^^And this is what passes for debate on campus now
Was talking to a neighbor who taught at the local community college. He quit. Said the students were impossible. They were constantly staring into their phones, could not communicate, expected to be spoon fed all the information and shocked when they failed a test.
I have good friend who teaches high schoolers. She says the same. They are totally coddled.
Yup. Smartphones are an impediment to the usual modes of education.
Yeah, and several conservative schools have banned them from their use in school.
Their students are doing much better.
“ Was talking to a neighbor who taught at the local community college. He quit. Said the students were impossible. They were constantly staring into their phones, could not communicate, expected to be spoon fed all the information and shocked when they failed a test.”
He was probably a terrible educator. If he quit because of their phones he wasn’t innovative enough to figure out a way to make it work to his advantage. A good teacher would have done better than just quit.
It’s true, college has become much like HS used to be 30-40 years ago, if you have some brains you can simply coast through without much effort.
Again, 25%+ of ALL 4-year US college courses are remedial.
David B. Benson’s carefully crafted Soviet Democrat reaction: Balderdash
Telling response from a Soviet Democrat endorsing the academics running Ivy League universities that were hired on DEI criteria rather than meritocracy. (sidebar: if they actually hire on DEI theories… what percentage of their tenured professors are conservatives and Constitutionalists?)
Where Soviet Democrat Birthing Persons like David B. Benson see nothing wrong with the rampant anti-Semitism allowed to try driving Jewish students out of the universities.
Where the finest academic minds this Birthing Person supports have concluded that men can in fact menstruate and give birth, and gender blending men who suddenly cosplay as women have the right to demand women allow them to compete in womens’ sports.
Where universities allow tenured professors to “dis-invite” or shut down conservatives who are guest speakers at their institutions – while terrorists, anti-Semitics, and hate fomenting radicals from Antifa and Black Liars & Marxists are pretty much welcome to say whatever they want.
What’s the difference between Harvard University’s former president, birthing person Claudine Gay, and fellow birthing person David B. Benson when viewed by normal Americans and the real world?
Unless they have different skin color… nothing.
“Accreditation is the independent, third-party evaluation of a conformity assessment body (such as certification body, inspection body or laboratory) against recognised standards, conveying formal demonstration of its impartiality and competence to carry out specific conformity assessment tasks (such as certification, inspection and testing).” Any institution that engages in indoctrination, DEI, or any such agenda driven nonsense should have its accreditation pulled – simple as that.
There is an aphorism that may provide an alternative explanation for the leftward bent in academia: “Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach. Those who can do neither, administrate”.