It is currently Fri Jun 23, 2017 8:09 am


Jewish Academics & The Maintenance of Academic Liberalism

  • Author
  • Message
Offline

John Flynn

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 2:16 am

Jewish Academics & The Maintenance of Academic Liberalism

PostSun Mar 16, 2014 7:35 am

Kevin MacDonald

A study to be published in September in Current Directions in Psychological Science, prominent peer-reviewed academic journal, goes beyond the well-known fact that the vast majority of social psychologists are on the left (“Survey shocker: Liberal profs admit they’d discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement“).

    Psychologists Yoel Inbar and Joris Lammers, based at Tilburg University in the Netherlands, surveyed a roughly representative sample of academics and scholars in social psychology and found that “In decisions ranging from paper reviews to hiring, many social and personality psychologists admit that they would discriminate against openly conservative colleagues.” …

    More than a third of the respondents said they would discriminate against the conservative candidate. One respondent wrote in that if department members “could figure out who was a conservative, they would be sure not to hire them.” …

    Generally speaking, the more liberal the respondent, the more willingness to discriminate and, paradoxically, the higher the assumption that conservatives do not face a hostile climate in the academy. …

    A 2007 report by sociologists Neil Gross and Solon Simmons found that 80 percent of psychology professors at elite and non-elite universities are Democrats. Other studies reveal that 5 percent to 7 percent of faculty openly identify as Republicans. By contrast, about 20 percent of the general population are liberal and 40 percent are conservative. …

    [While much larger percentages of faculty are economic conservatives,] the widest divide occurs on social issues, the contested terrain in the culture wars shaking the academy. On these contentious issues, 90 percent identified as liberal and only 4 percent as conservative.

Of course, social psychologists by definition perform research on social issues—precisely the areas where they are overwhelmingly liberal. Don’t expect any race realist research on criminality or ethnic differences in aggressiveness to come out of mainstream social psychology.

The authors originally questioned Jonathan Haidt’s finding that such a large percentage of social psychologists were liberal, but in the end they extended Haidt’s findings (see here and here). Haidt emphasizes that social psychology has become a tribal moral community in which those who publicly eschew liberal attitudes are seen as morally defective and therefore appropriate targets of shunning. As a result and as noted by Inbar and Lammers, because they are necessarily a silent minority, the very small numbers of conservative social psychologists cannot possibly act as a check on the liberal attitudes of their colleagues.

I have an article arguing that the liberal bent of the social sciences is the result of displacement of previously dominant WASP elite by Jews with a decidedly left of center perspective (Why are Professors Liberals? — A Corroboration of The Culture of Critique. The Occidental Quarterly, 10(2), Summer 2010). The article is essentially a commentary on a paper by two academic sociologists, Neil Gross and Ethan Fosse. It emphasizes Jewish issues and my own experience as a heretic from the liberal attitudes that are mainstream among academics. The main points are:

*Because of the prestige of science in general, the social sciences are a critical force in shaping how we view ourselves. Social psychology, which deals with issues like discrimination and attitudes between races, is right at the center of forming elite opinion on critical issues related to race, ethnicity, immigration, etc.

*Because leftist world views are entrenched in academia, liberals self-select to become professors, while conservatives come to realize that they will have to hide their opinions to remain a viable academic. IQ is not important.

*Universities were relatively liberal even before the 1930s, but there was a pronounced shift to the left with the ascendancy of Jewish academics. This was particularly pronounced in the 1960s, although, e.g., Boasian anthropology, prepared the way by dominating anthropology by the 1920s.

*The academic world is hierarchical, with top-down influence. Elite institutions are able to dominate the image of ideal professors (political liberalism is a criterion of being ideal), and they are able to police the academic world to ensure that non-liberal attitudes are excluded or at least marginalized. The work of Inbar and Lammers on discrimination by liberals clearly supports the latter proposition. As a result, elite academics are of particular concern to the liberal establishment. Hence the outrage over figures like E. O. Wilson, John Mearsheimer and Stephan Walt, and John Watson).

*Jews are strongly overrepresented among academics, especially in the social sciences and especially at elite institutions. As a result they have wielded disproportionate power in creating the image of ideal academic attitudes and behavior.

*The attitudes of Jewish academics are well to the left of Americans in general but are entirely in line with the mainstream Jewish community. As Inbar and Lammers note, around 40% of Americans label themselves conservative compared to well under 10% of academics. In the 2008 election, 80% of Jews voted for Obama, compared to around 40% of European-Americans. The Jewish identification with the left originated in the early 19th century and has remained consistent in the Western diaspora. At least through the formative decade of the 1960s, political radicalism was entirely mainstream within the Jewish community and had a strong effect on the intellectual climate of elite college campuses at that time (see here). The Jewish community, including professors, continues to be well left of White Americans on social issues.

*The role of Jews in changing academic culture is consistent with other scholars. For example, intellectual historian David Hollinger
    calls attention to “a secular, increasingly Jewish, decidedly left-of-center intelligentsia based largely but not exclusively in the disciplinary communities of philosophy and the social sciences.” He notes “the transformation of the ethnoreligious demography of American academic life by Jews” (p. 4) in the period from the 1930s to the 1960s, as well as the Jewish influence on trends toward the secularization of American society and in advancing an ideal of cosmopolitanism.

*Gross and Fosse subscribe to a conflict theory of cultural change (as do I; see Evolution, Psychology, and a Conflict Theory of Culture. Evolutionary Psychology, 7(2). 208–233 (2009)); They provide three characteristics of successful intellectual movements: (1) Those involved in the movement have a complaint. (2) They are able to form cohesive, effective networks; (3) They have access to the most prestigious academic institutions.

*The body of the paper then shows that all of these themes are prominent in The Culture of Critique . Jews indeed had complaints (the long history of anti-Jewish attitudes and a sense of exclusion in homogeneously White, Christian America). They were able to form cohesive, effective networks, typically by citing and promoting each other. Reflecting the importance of elite institutions for successful intellectual movements, Jews had access to the most prestigious academic institutions.

*Finally, the paper points to a parallel development in the academic world and beyond where Jews have made alliances with non-Whites and with Whites who also have complaints against the system (homosexuals, radical feminists). In the wider world, the Jewish alliance with non-Whites has meant that Jewish organizations were the predominant force in creating a White minority America and their involvement in promoting Blacks and other minorities. In the academic world, the rise of the new Jewish elite was quickly followed by the establishment of departments and scholarly disciplines focused on minority and sexual grievance (e.g.., Black Studies; queer studies). Collectively, these departments now wield a great deal of power within universities; they are reliable proponents of the leftist, multicultural world view.

*The ability of the left to discriminate in hiring and promotion means that there is a very great inertia in the system.

A further point that is not in my paper is that the academic world is international. Because of the vastly greater numbers of researchers and resources committed to research, American social science has had a leadership role throughout the world. Open any textbook in the social sciences, whether in America or elsewhere in the West, and you will find that the great majority of the research cited is by American professors, with British professors a distant second.

Attitudes at elite academic institutions in the U.S. therefore become the ideal for the social sciences throughout the West. Liberal academics from other countries are welcomed in academic societies. But if, for example, a Norwegian academic society began to promote research and teaching with strong overtones of ethnonationalism, it would be expelled from international academic societies and excluded from having a presence at academic societies in the U.S. The hierarchical structure and international scope of academic societies make them particularly valuable resources in ethnic competition. Jews understood this and have made the most of it.

The result is that the university as a very prestigious, elite institution has become a central manifestation of the hostile elite that is now dominant in the U.S. and throughout the West.

http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/20 ... ral-profs/
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1390
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Jewish Academics & The Maintenance of Academic Liberalis

PostFri Nov 04, 2016 4:41 pm

Top 60 Schools Jews Choose (A breakdown by percentage)
The following are the top 60 schools with the largest percentage of Jewish students to the total undergraduate student population:

Yeshiva University: 3,076 Jewish students, 100%
Jewish Theological Seminary of America: 200 Jewish students, 100%
American Jewish University: 110 Jewish students, 100%
Brandeis University: 1,750 Jewish students, 48%
Barnard College: 1,000 Jewish students, 40%
University of Hartford: 1,500 Jewish students, 32%
Muhlenberg College: 750 Jewish students, 31%
Goucher College: 450 Jewish students, 31%
George Washington University: 3,000 Jewish students, 29%
Oberlin College: 850 Jewish students, 29%
CUNY, Brooklyn College: 4,000 Jewish students, 29%
Yale University: 1,500 Jewish students, 28%
New York University: 6,000 Jewish students, 27%
Columbia University: 2,400 Jewish students, 27%
Tulane University: 2,250 Jewish students, 27%
Emory University: 2,100 Jewish students, 27%
Sarah Lawrence College: 350 Jewish students, 27%
Binghamton University: 3,500 Jewish students, 27%
University at Albany: 3,500 Jewish students, 27%
University of Pennsylvania: 2,500 Jewish students, 26%
Queens College: 4,000 Jewish students, 26%
Harvard University: 1,675 Jewish students, 25%
Haverford College: 300 Jewish students, 25%
Tufts University: 1,250 Jewish students, 24%
Long Island University, Brooklyn Campus: 1,200 Jewish students, 24%
Hampshire College: 325 Jewish students, 24%
American University: 1,600 Jewish students, 23%
Wesleyan University: 680 Jewish students, 23%
University of Maryland: 5,800 Jewish students, 22%
Boston University: 3,500 Jewish students, 21%
Cornell University: 3,000 Jewish students, 21%
Vassar College: 500 Jewish students, 21%
Washington University: 1,500 Jewish students, 20%
Hofstra University: 1,350 Jewish students, 20%
Skidmore College: 500 Jewish students, 19%
Rutgers University: 6,400 Jewish students, 19%
University of Miami: 2,000 Jewish students, 18%
University of Vermont: 2,000 Jewish students, 18%
Syracuse University: 2,500 Jewish students, 17%
Lehigh University: 800 Jewish students, 17%
Clark University: 400 Jewish students, 17%
Kenyon College: 275 Jewish students, 17%
Bryn Mawr College: 200 Jewish students, 17%
Union College: 350 Jewish students, 16%
University of Michigan: 4,500 Jewish students, 16%
SUNY College at Oswego: 1,050 Jewish students, 16%
Northwestern University: 1,400 Jewish students, 15%
Vanderbilt University: 1,050 Jewish students, 15%
Brown University: 1,000 Jewish students, 15%
University of Rochester: 900 Jewish students, 15%
Franklin & Marshall College: 370 Jewish students, 15%
Middlebury College: 350 Jewish students, 15%
University of Florida: 5,000 Jewish students, 15%
University of Chicago: 800 Jewish students, 14%
McMaster University: 3,500 Jewish students, 14%
University of California, Santa Barbara: 2,750 Jewish students, 14%
Queensborough Community College: 2,000 Jewish students, 14%
Trinity College: 300 Jewish students, 13%
Amherst College: 225 Jewish students, 13%
University of Wisconsin: 4,200 Jewish students, 13%

http://www.hillel.org/about/news-views/ ... population
Offline
User avatar

Will Williams

  • Posts: 1390
  • Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 9:22 am

Re: Jewish Academics & The Maintenance of Academic Liberalis

PostSat Jun 17, 2017 10:14 am

What self-respecting parent would send his child off to such anti-White brainwashing factories for four years and be made to pay for it?
---

A Campus Argument Goes Viral. Now the College Is Under Siege.
By ANEMONA HARTOCOLLISJUNE 16, 2017

OLYMPIA, Wash. — It started with a suggestion that white students and professors leave campus for a day, a twist on a tradition of black students voluntarily doing the same.

A professor objected, and his argument with a loud and profane group of protesters outside his classroom soon rocketed across the internet.

On Friday, more than three weeks later, Evergreen State College had to hold its commencement 30 miles from campus, at a rented baseball stadium where everyone had to pass through metal detectors.

In between, Evergreen, a small public college in Olympia along the Puget Sound, found itself on the front line of the national discontent over race, speech and political disagreement, becoming a magnet for extremes on the left and the right.
After the dispute gained national exposure — amplified by the professor’s appearance on Fox News, his op-ed in The Wall Street Journal, and right-leaning websites’ heaping derision on their newest college target — the professor, Bret Weinstein, said he had to stay away from campus for his own safety and move his family into hiding.

Student protesters briefly occupied the president’s office to press their complaints of racism on campus. In one encounter, the president, George Bridges, was recorded meekly complying with a demand not to use hand gestures when he spoke because they were threatening.

The campus has received threats of violence via social media and calls to the county sheriff and 911 that forced administrators to lock down the campus for three weekdays in a row. The college had another lockdown on Thursday, as dozens of professed free-speech defenders tangled with anarchists who were waiting for them at Red Square, the campus plaza named for its red-brick walkways.

“I thought I’d be speaking from Red Square where graduation is traditionally held, and then as the alt-right backlash hit us, [ :roll: ] I wondered if we’d have graduation at all,” (((Anne Fischel)) [Fischel, (Yiddish: פֿישל‎) for "little fish" ], a documentary filmmaker and Evergreen professor, said in her commencement speech on Friday. “No one should see this graduation as a return to normalcy, to the way things were before. For one thing, the lives of some of our community members have been threatened, and they can’t be here today.”

Since the presidential election in November, colleges from Middlebury to Auburn to the University of California, Berkeley have become swept up in a running battle over free speech and politics.

But the conflict at Evergreen has been deeply distressing to many students and faculty members who see their college as a little utopia that has produced such creative alumni as Matt Groening, the creator of “The Simpsons,” and Macklemore, the hip-hop artist...
---
More here: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/16/us/e ... share&_r=0
Offline

Jim Mathias

  • Posts: 161
  • Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: Jewish Academics & The Maintenance of Academic Liberalis

PostSun Jun 18, 2017 12:56 am

Jews that can and do discriminate against the White, heterosexual, "without grievance" population in academia and elsewhere while preaching the opposite over decades risk a backlash. Or is it a "whitelash" as a certain agitprop broadcast news commentator mentioned not long ago? <shaking my head> Jews, whether consciously or otherwise create their enemies.

From my point of view, these Jews and their destructive natures are our greatest challenge. They lead astray into genocide many otherwise good healthy Whites with their incessant messages of miscegenation, promotion of life-negating practices (such as homosexuality and other ills) with all their phony virtue signaling. It has had the effect of weeding out the defectives of various types from our gene pool. I believe as time goes by, the only Whites left in the middle to latter part of this century and beyond will be more intelligent, more racially loyal, tougher, and most importantly, very receptive to our Cosmotheist ethics, values, and high morals. The Jews won't get their intended genocide of our ethnos.

Return to "Higher Education"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest