Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 107
  1.    #1  
    Seven to one? Where do all the republicans come from?

    From a NYT story (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/18/ed...partner=rssnyt)

    One of the studies, a national survey of more than 1,000 academics, shows that Democratic professors outnumber Republicans by at least seven to one in the humanities and social sciences. That ratio is more than twice as lopsided as it was three decades ago, and it seems quite likely to keep increasing, because the younger faculty members are more consistently Democratic than the ones nearing retirement, said Daniel Klein, an associate professor of economics at Santa Clara University and a co-author of the study.

    In a separate study of voter registration records, Professor Klein found a nine-to-one ratio of Democrats to Republicans on the faculties of Berkeley and Stanford. That study, which included professors from the hard sciences, engineering and professional schools as well as the humanities and social sciences, also found the ratio especially lopsided among the younger professors of assistant or associate rank: 183 Democrats versus 6 Republicans.
  2. #2  
    University professors tend to be bright people who are used to observe and judge the world around them in a scientific, unbiased way. I think it is not surprising that most of them turn out to be Democrats.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  3.    #3  
    Amazingly, I think it plays into the hands of Republicans to have such an imbalance. A large portion of their appeal is a collective resentment against high profile people (celebrities, academia, etc.) telling others how they should think/feel/act.
  4. #4  
    I agree with what you are saying... There is that mentality out there about "they can't tell me what to think, I'll do the opposite". One of the best examples of that was how CNN 'leaked' that, in most mosques, Muslims where being encouraged to vote for Kerry. The same mentality came into play for some people. Muslims voting for Kerry? I must vote for Bush. Republicans play on that. "dont let those liberals tell you how to think. Don't let the media tell you how to think. Don't let those Hippie teachers tell you how to think. Do the opposite".
    People ignore the fact that scientists, who are the experts in their fields, may know what they are talking about.
    The funniest thing I remember is how, as a collective, seismologist have proven, using their science, how certain nuclear tests were being done by different countries, including the US, that were in direct violation of Nuclear agreements made in Geneva. Then the US administration dismissed them as being 'liberal minded'. Then the information came out that the 'experts' of the US Administration had barely passed the same classes tought by the same scientists.
    Remember: You are an unique, individual person...just like everyone else
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by KRamsauer
    Amazingly, I think it plays into the hands of Republicans to have such an imbalance. A large portion of their appeal is a collective resentment against high profile people.
    Hmmm.... this could indeed explain why Bush won.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  6. #6  
    Not sure what siesmology and political beliefs have in common. However, I agree with KRamsauer somewhat, it more from people like clulup who paint everyone with whom they disagree as being ignorant, brainwashed and uneducated. Alot of celebrities/hollywood/liberal elite fall into this category. I thought Clulups sig was satirical but it seems to be a truly held belief.


    Here is some actual research and first hand experiences to explain the current "diversity" in U.S. colleges.


    http://www.townhall.com/columnists/m...20040602.shtml

    http://www.jewishworldreview.com/col...witz090402.asp
  7. #7  
    The problem comes from both Republicans and Democrats. Democrats feel that people that aren't democratic are ignorant and uneducated. Republicans feel that people that aren't republican are liberal, non-religious and anti-military. Democrats have conspiracy theorists and anti-esbalishment people on their side. Republicans have post-confederates, klan members and gun lovers on theirs. Neither of these sub-groups make more than 5% of the total political view, but get associated with them. (I pulled that 5% out of my ***...but I think its about right).
    Professors and Scientists tend to point out things that the goverment is trying to get away or are trying to cover up (Human Rights, Mercury poisoning, Nuclear testing, etc.). This leads them to become democratic, since republicans are usually for de-regulation of industry and tax brakes for citizens, not increasing taxes to regulate yet another industry. People that don't research this should not be considered un-educated Maybe oblivious or ignorant, but not un-educated.
    Last edited by KypDurron; 11/19/2004 at 11:59 AM.
    Remember: You are an unique, individual person...just like everyone else
  8. #8  
    It's pretty obvious that none of you attand an American University today. If you did, you would learn things like "The US was responsible for the attacks on 9/11", or that "Israel is a terrorist state trying to ethnically cleanse Palestinian Arabs."

    The Rocky Mountain News wrote that registered Democrats on the faculty of the University of Colorado at Boulder outnumbered registered Republicans 31-1.

    “Diversity” means the availability of different viewpoints and respect for intellectual differences, but 31-1 would suggest that there is political bias in the hiring process which is certainly illegal.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by KypDurron
    People that don't research this should not be considered un-educated Maybe oblivious or ignorant, but not un-educated.
    This is the same kind of nonsense that caused your boy kerry to lose the election. If you cant figure a way to move more to the center, the dems will be out of national politics for a while.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by carter437
    Not sure what siesmology and political beliefs have in common. However, I agree with KRamsauer somewhat, it more from people like clulup who paint everyone with whom they disagree as being ignorant, brainwashed and uneducated. Alot of celebrities/hollywood/liberal elite fall into this category. I thought Clulups sig was satirical but it seems to be a truly held belief.
    I am one of those university professor "liberal elite" and from my perspective, this is an ongoing effort to promote hate at my group, in a generalized way, not looking at us as individuals but as some type of immoral group.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 11/19/2004 at 01:01 PM.
  11. #11  
    It is a KNOWN fact that a person that doesn't know about something is ignorant. (definition of ignorant: Unaware or Uninformed).
    Is is a KNOWN fact that a person that doesn't see something is oblivious to it. (definition of oblivious: Lacking conscious awareness; unmindful)
    It's kind of like using 'layman'. You shouldn't take offense when someone says you are 'ignorant' or 'oblivious' or a 'layman'. We are all that
    I didn't want Kerry to win. I just wanted Bush to lose.
    I will only take offense when someone calls you un-educated.
    Remember: You are an unique, individual person...just like everyone else
  12. #12  
    As for moving more to the center, I consider myself pretty conservative. It angers me when fellow "christians" don't even follow what is taught in the bible. I believe that we should have stricter laws about many things. I also believe people should take responsibilities for their actions. I guess I take things too personal sometimes...I will go to the gym now and come back. I'll write more later...
    Remember: You are an unique, individual person...just like everyone else
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by KypDurron
    It is a KNOWN fact that a person that doesn't know about something is ignorant. (definition of ignorant: Unaware or Uninformed).
    Is is a KNOWN fact that a person that doesn't see something is oblivious to it. (definition of oblivious: Lacking conscious awareness; unmindful)
    It's kind of like using 'layman'. You shouldn't take offense when someone says you are 'ignorant' or 'oblivious' or a 'layman'. We are all that
    I didn't want Kerry to win. I just wanted Bush to lose.
    I will only take offense when someone calls you un-educated.
    If you only wanted Bush to lose, who did you think would win? I mean since you didnt want Kerry to win. I guess you must be in that group of uninformed and unaware citizens since Nader wasnt really an alternative.
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    If you only wanted Bush to lose, who did you think would win? I mean since you didnt want Kerry to win. I guess you must be in that group of uninformed and unaware citizens since Nader wasnt really an alternative.
    I apologize for not clarifying more into that (I was trying to run to the Gym, but it is closed.). I really do not agree with things that Bush and Cheney have done in the last 4 years. I have personally have been affected by the Bush Administration. Because of this, anyone but Bush would have been better, IMHO. I was more anti-Bush than pro-Kerry. I hope that you can see that these stances are mutually exclusive. Anything that I say after this can (and probably will) be dismissed as more Liberal disinformation. So let's start with what I stated:
    If you have two choices in something, let's say cars. You can hate one type of car so much (Let's say that one of you close family members died in the same car), that you would buy/rent/get into the other car JUST because you hate that car so much?
    Keep in mind that I AM NOT COMPARING BUSH TO A CAR (hopefully, that would stop at least one flame war from starting). I am merely stating that you can be more anti-choice1 than pro-choice2.
    Agree?
    Remember: You are an unique, individual person...just like everyone else
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    Two things about this subject: One is fact while the other is fiction.
    Fact: Numbers don’t lie. Hence, more “liberals” are in the collegial academic staff.
    Fiction: It has any relevancy to ignorance, un-educated or hibernation among men.
    Any subject can be turned and cultivated into something for the sake of political arguments, but why? A more relevant question, in my opinion, would be: How many people of color are in the collegial academia? What are the social implications that our society is heavily white and wealthy in the academia? How can we narrow the gap? Should we narrow the gap?
    Very good point. I may have incorrectly assumed WHY the numbers are what they are. I asked myself many of the questions you have asked. I have my own views on those questions, but also, these answers are based on how I see the world, in a nutshell:

    My life has been directly impacted by decisions made by the Bush Administration.
    I have lived outside the US and have seen corruption in the Goverment at its worst (Believe me when I say that the U.S. IS the best country to live in the world)
    I work at one of the top Institutes in the world when it comes to solving world problems. (Energy, Climate & Society, Health, Ecosystems, Poverty, Nutrition, etc..).
    etc... etc...

    Because of this things, I constantly try to figure out why our goverment makes any decision (on a side note, how many people actually read the 9/11 commission report?), and who is affected by that decision?
    I assumed that professors and scientists do this as well and that is why they are mostly Democratic. While that is still my view, I do realize that I may have jumped to conclusions based on personal beliefs.

    thoughts?
    Remember: You are an unique, individual person...just like everyone else
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    A buggy?
    Not sure...I would say one like this one:

    http://www.angelfire.com/poetry/buck...nghorn_car.JPG

    check out the horns by the car.
    Remember: You are an unique, individual person...just like everyone else
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    Two things about this subject: One is fact while the other is fiction.
    Fact: Numbers don’t lie. Hence, more “liberals” are in the collegial academic staff.
    Fiction: It has any relevancy to ignorance, un-educated or hibernation among men.
    Any subject can be turned and cultivated into something for the sake of political arguments, but why? A more relevant question, in my opinion, would be: How many people of color are in the collegial academia? What are the social implications that our society is heavily white and wealthy in the academia?
    Well, in that respect they seem to reflect the white wealthy private sector which is heavily republican and somehow not part of "the elite".
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    How can we narrow the gap? Should we narrow the gap?
    Yes we should. I work towards this goal in my own involvement in university admissions. But, on the other side of this, unfortunately, many of those who cry about quotas seem to have nothing else to offer for this problem.
    Last edited by cellmatrix; 11/19/2004 at 02:04 PM.
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by KypDurron
    It angers me when fellow "christians" don't even follow what is taught in the bible. I believe that we should have stricter laws about many things.
    There are a lot of different interpretations by fellow "christians" about what is taught in the bible. Perhaps your anger comes from seeing people intepret biblical teachings different than your own views.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    A more relevant question, in my opinion, would be: How many people of color are in the collegial academia? What are the social implications that our society is heavily white and wealthy in the academia?
    Assuming diversity is a good thing, diversity should mean more than "people of color". Just because I may have different skin color from my neighbor does not mean we are diverse, or even different from each other. Is Berkely a "diverse" university because people with different skin color attend college there? No way. The sheep there just follow a different shepherd.

    True diversity should encompass different backgrounds, values, and life experiences.
    Palm V-->Visor Deluxe-->Visor Prism-->Visorphone-->Treo 180-->Treo 600-->Treo 650 on Sprint-->Treo 700p-->Centro-->Diamond-->Pre-->HTC EVO 4g???!
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by Chick-Dance
    What are the social implications that our society is heavily white and wealthy in the academia? How can we narrow the gap? Should we narrow the gap?
    We are a long way from true equity in our society, and not just skin color, but in many ways. To give an example of economics, there is an increasing division of the wealthy and the poor in this country and educational empowerment is the way to overcome these differences. There are many ways to overcome these differences besides quotas, and I will continue to contribute in my individual way, but I am afraid that the current administration holds this goal at a very low priority.
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions