Quoted: Quoted: Don't blame liberals - blame conservatives who don't CHOOSE to go into academia.  Academia is not full of liberals because of some conspiracy to keep out conservatives, it's full of liberals because far fewer conservatives seem to be interested in being academics. I actually disagree.  I have a PhD and have worked on a university campus for different departments for about 13 years.

I'm not saying that discrimination against conservatives cannot happen - I'm jsut saying I've NEVER seen it or heard of it.  I have however seen MANY examples of conservatives choosing to not "waste" their time in academia.  I've also seen conservatives who couldn't cut it - and leave, and I'm sure blaming it on an evil liberal conspiracy was easier than admitting that they couldn't cut it.

I guess both processes could be occuring at the same time.

I had a bunch of conservative friends who were in the PhD program with me and none ended up with a tenured position.

So what? I know lots of liberals who didn't get tenure either.  It's not clear to me that either of those facts mean anything other than they didn't get tenure.  I know many women who didn't get tenure when they went up.  Are they allowed to claim it was because they are women?

I also had two class-mates in my doctoral program who were quite conservative - they BOTH dropped out after the first year.  Not because of any liberal pressure, but because they decided they'd rather make $300K+ in consulting, than continue to be impovrished graduate students.

One failed tenure simply because he was a white male.

That's totally going to be my excuse when I don't get tenure!  

Seriously - was he TOLD this?  What did the committee report give as a reason for denying him tenure?  What did his letters say?  Since it is primarily based on external review, the tenure system is generally pretty unbiased.  Obviously, schools and departments can influence this - so I'm willing to believe that it CAN happen, but is rare.

So this guy you're talking about has tenure somewhere else now?   After all, if he deserved it, and was turned down in one department for a freakish reason - then it should have been no problem for him to get tenure at a different school, right?

All of the other academic jobs went to women (and every single one of them were less-qualified with worse grades and dissertations).  Funny thing is that all the guys who wanted but didn't get academic jobs have excellent jobs now in the government and other big organizations where they make excellent salaries.

Grades?  I have NEVER seen anyones "grades" ever have the slightest bearing on a hiring decision at the tenure-track level.  All we look at are the dissertation, publications, working papers, letters and possibly teaching ratings (if applicable).  Maybe things work differently in your field, but I'm not sure people put grades from their doctoral program on their vitas in mine.

Funny thing is, the last EIGHT people my department has hired have been tall white males - we haven't hired a woman in almost 10 years, even though we get lots of applications from women every year.  The only "diversity" we've got is that we hired a short guy a few years back.

... that said, I will agree that I have occasionally seen women and minorities get hired for jobs that they are perhaps slightly underqualified for - since Universities are notoriously shameless about abusing Affirmative Action when it comes to women and minorities.  I admit that universities sometimes do SUCK when it comes to that.  However, the system is usually efficient in that - while some people who are underqualified DO get jobs, the really qualified people ALSO end up with jobs, and ultimately succeed.

As a general rule - if someone cannot get a job, it's because they're not qualified, not because they are white, or conservative, or whatever.

My own advisor is a lefty kook who is an active member of MoveOn.org these days.  Once he found out that I was a conservative he stopped helping me find a job.  I was told more than once when I searched for an academic job that "we have to hire a woman".   My wife is now working as a university professor and she has been advised by conservative professor friends to "stay in the closet" until she has tenure.  She has even had to write her CV to leave off conservative publications and places she has worked.   GunLvr

I guess there may always be examples of some things that go wrong.  Since our fields are obviously different, I have no idea what a "conservative publication" is.  In my field, empirical research is empirical research - and it's either published in a quality journal, or it is not.  That's all that matter - your ability to publish your research in quality outlets.

I have my military experience on my vita, on the front page.  Doesn't seem to have prevented me from getting a job.  Everyone in my department knows of my large gun collection.  I don't see ANY way that it will have any bearing on my tenure decisions.  

However - the whole "I didn't get a job because I was discriminated against" story is essentially a non-falsifiable theory.  Lots of people don't get jobs because they are simply not qualified - but of course they BELIEVE they are, and then convince themselves they've been wronged somehow.

As a case in point, a few years back, we were trying to decide between four job canditates for a tenure-track position, and one of them was Korean.  He also had the strongest-looking vita, with more publications that the others.  However, when we looked closer at his research, we all found it to be very incremental, devoid of theory, and not very impressive.  So we didn't make him an offer.  Now that could coudl EASILY be telling all of his friends how racist we are, and how we didn't hire him because he is Korean - after all, his record is so much better than the other candidates, right?  See what I mean?  Unless you are actually sitting in on the hiring decisions, you really have no idea WHY someone was not offered a job - and to say that it was because of this or that, is often just a GUESS.


I have been involved in MANY hiring decisions (and have sat in on multiple senior tenure decisions), and I have NEVER ever heard any discussion of a candidates political views, or EVER heard any questions raised about someone's political positions.  Nobody cares.

Perhaps there are super-liberal sociology departments in some shitty liberal-arts schools somewhere, where small-minded assholes care about this stuff, but when we are hiring and making tenure decisions, ALL the decisions I've been involved in and have observed, are all about the research qualifications and performance.   Hopefully, my department will continue it's awesome record.


So while I agree that sometimes there is preferential treatment against women and minorities, which sometimes results in unqualified people getting jobs and getting promoted - I've never seen any evidence that conservatives and white males are actively discriminated against, or are not promoted or given jobs because of their status.


Sorry if I'm prattling on - but when I hear about the "powerful vast left-wing conspiracy" in academia, I feel compelled to point out the flaws in the argument.  Obviously, it all depends on perspective, and perhaps it's out there, but just less pervasive in business schools.

The politics vary from department to department. In the sciences it doesn't really come up. The humanities are pretty notorious cess pits, though, and there have been plenty of stories of excellent PhDs either not getting hired or being denied tenure for political reasons. Often this is the result of a few radicals on the faculty who make a stink, and the rest of the faculty just keep their heads down.

The think tanks in DC are filled with qualified conservative PhDs that didn't catch on in academia. They'd probably be chairing departments in a "fair" world. But, as they saying goes, instead of being a prof at Faber College they were forced to go to Washington and settle for running the world.

Quoted: One failed tenure simply because he was a white male.   That's totally going to be my excuse when I don't get tenure!   Seriously - was he TOLD this?  What did the committee report give as a reason for denying him tenure?  What did his letters say?  Since it is primarily based on external review, the tenure system is generally pretty unbiased.  Obviously, schools and departments can influence this - so I'm willing to believe that it CAN happen, but is rare. So this guy you're talking about has tenure somewhere else now?   After all, if he deserved it, and was turned down in one department for a freakish reason - then it should have been no problem for him to get tenure at a different school, right?

The short story is that yes, he was essentially told that.  He had the best publication and grants record of anyone in his college.  His department supported him for tenure but the very liberal college dean didn't.  That sank him.  They hired a replacement for his slot--a woman with poorer publications, and gave her automatic tenure.  

He went to a labor attorney who told him this looks like a sex discrimination case but this is the District of Columbia--your jury is going to consist of 12 black women--you won't win.

He now works at a research-oriented NGO and publishes like crazy.  You may have even read some of his stuff.  Universities try to recruit him now but he is happy where he is living and making 40 percent more than most universities will pay.  

Remember that there are lots of different types of universities.  Some universities put a huge effort into "diversity".  You work for a good one which doesn't.  That's why your university is so highly thought of.  

GunLvr

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Just rememeber.  Most people become college professors because they cannot make it in the business world.  Some of them can actually teach you something.  Lots of what they teach you may be interesting, but useless.  Some of it is extremely useful and important.  I thank God every day that I got an engineering degree. I don't think it is at all fair to say that people are in education because they "couldn't make it" elsewhere, they largly have different priorities. most of them are afraid of the competition of their peers in the real world, which is why they choose academia. tenure is their holy grail because it means they can come in, not do shit and still get paid.

The part of me that just left academia to do actual policy analysis wanted to be pissed off at you for writing this.  Then, I realized I used to work around some of the people you describe.  For many people in academia this isn't true, but the people who behave this way in front of the classroom are motivated largely by the reasons you describe.

shooter