Conservative Hatred for Academia

Great Debates
61

Just one more thing, it’s both political parties that are detroying the US and implementing anti-Constitutional laws and policies.

Both extremes think they “fix” things with new laws. It’s all a matter of States’ rights. Government = tyranny.

For example, the Cold War was won by Conservatives. The Liberals were wrong on that and many other things. We should be in Iraq, but not without a Congressional act of war. Being anti- socialism does not a Conservative make. Both parties are finding common ground on the Patriot Act. Liberals are hated for their lies; their gross and intentional misinterpretation of the Constitution.

Cya in a few days. I need to fire a few rounds off and then come down with some Thomas Jefferson writings.

I’ll leave (some of) you to your WWF and Turner TV.

MFitz

62

Oooh, Thomas Jefferson! Well, that certainly should be edifying to those of us whose parents potty-trained us by spreading out yesterday’s Pravda on the kitchen floor. I look forward to your lectures.

Ad Naudseum.

63

To expand on this, it’s amusing that people say on one hand “Why aren’t professors teaching more courses” and complain about class sizes, and then say that professors aren’t in touch with the real world. It’s as bad as the boss that says “Everything is top priority.”

This person says it better than I could: http://chronicle.com/jobs/2003/11/2003112601c.htm

64

Funny, all I see here is the usual SDMB bullshit where anyone who doesn’t agree with you is evil.

(Yes, that’s aimed at the both of you.)

65

Libertarians and conservatives are two very different creatures. Libertarians believe in freedom on both social and economic matters. Conservatives hate social freedom, though they’re all for letting corporations rape the country.

I only mentioned it because nowadays the left considers libertarians to be far-right maniacs.

The battles in this country over civil liberties has mostly been won, and what few battles remain conservatives are pretty much toast and they know it. The battleground over the next century is going to be over economic right and property rights. Since libertarians disagree strongly with the left on these issues, and these rights are more in question than civil liberties, they get lumped in with the right wing, and the far right at that.

66

Not evil. Simply ignorant and misinformed. I see a lot of generalities here regarding conservatives, liberals, academics and other groups that makes any meaningful discussion of the OP impossible:

“Why do conservatives hate academia so much?”

Which conservatives? What aspect of academia? My college was a extremely conservative North East university. Mostly white, rich fraternity and sorority kids in Abercromie clothes and baseball hats studying to be engineers and businesspeople. Hardly a bastion of socialist thinking. Are you refering to some meathead anchor on Fox News? Real educated conservative leaders?
“Referring to someone as an Ivy League Scholar is considered an insult.”

By who? Some uneducated redneck? Are there educated conservatives who think there is no value in an Ivy League education? G W Bush was a Yale grad after all and last time I checked, Yale was in the Ivy League.
“People who have excelled in an academic position are referred to as elites living in an ivory tower who are not in touch with America.”

Yes, but this is a trait shared by liberals and conservatives alike. Academia allows a certait flexibilty in thinking that may not work when practiced in the real world. You can see that here in the SDMB. Ideas are easy. Implementing ideas that work without making millions miserable is hard. If conservatives feel an idea is “ivory tower” it may be because their practical experience tells them that such an idea would cause more harm then good.
“Why is it conservatives have such a hatred of the best and brightest at America’s premier universities??”

Again…is it hatred or is it simply disagreement?

67

Oh, msmith537, I wasn’t aiming that at you- just the two “gentlemen” that were trying to hijack this thread.

68

As a gay male living in George Bush’s America, with the Federal Marriage Amendment (the We-Hate-Gay-People Amendment, it should be called) now before Congress, I find that statement to be painfully simplistic and inaccurate.

69

Adaher, excellent post. I agree with you on much of what you said, but I disagree when you wrote, “The battles in this country over civil liberties has mostly been won, and what few battles remain conservatives are pretty much toast and they know it.”.

In regards to the original post,

  • Why do Conservatives hate academia?*

Academia are generally Liberals and think themselves some kind of self-appointed aristocracy.

The First Amendment clearly means freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution suggests seperation of Church and State. It is, however, in the Russian Constitution, and a lie created by the left-wing academia.

All over the Nation, 2nd Amendment cases are being won by gun-right advocates. Many cities have had to drop their suits against gun manufacturers, conceal-carry permits are becoming more available, sales of pistols (mostly by women) has tripled since 9-11, statistics on gun-control demonstrate that crime increases (like in England… 300%) and the Federal Assault Weapons Ban is going to sunset this year. The academia have been anti-gun forever.

The (Communist-formed… that is fact) ACLU’s agenda is becoming widely publicized for being radically left-wing, etc. The academia are running scared , having their political candidates losing elections, and their favorite organizations becoming exposed for what they are.

The academia in CA that created Affirmative Action admitted last year that it doesn’t work and the S.C. ruled it is as Unconstitutional. The list goes on.

The Constitutionalists are, in fact, winning ground, and the academia are frightened, and they should be. And the rift between the Left and Right is becoming a Grand Canyon.

“Aristocrats… fear the people, and wish to transfer all power to the higher classes of society.” --Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 1825.

MFitz

70

U.S. Constitution, Amendment I
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

What I read is that the government won’t will not recognize any religeon, however it will not prevent you from following whatever religeon you choose to practice. This is important because people who believe in a religeon very strongly tend to view anyone who does not follow their religeon as a misguided outsider at best and a dangerous infidel at worse.

What people also seem to forget that you are allowed to disagree strongly with what far right or left wing nut-jobs are saying but you can’t, infringe on their rights to say it. Hey, I think communism is as ridiculous as the next capitalist oppressor does, but as long as I don’t have to support their social experiment and they don’t break any laws, they can commie it up all they want.

Since we are making sweeping generalizations here, conservatives don’t seem to like anyone questioning their beliefs and liberals question those beliefs by posing stupid questions.

71

True, but the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law…”. Congress is not the individual States’ Governments. The First Amendment applies ONLY to the Federal Government. The Aetheist agenda was never intended by the First Amendment. (I can back that up with scores of quotations from almost all of the Founding Fathers)

This simple fact is often denied and simply lied about by the academia, or they take the recent (>1950) radical left-wing view that the Unconstitutional 14th Amendment (No, it was not passed Constitutionally) over rides the 10th Amendment. Incidentally, they are attempting to apply this lie to gay marriage; that if Mass allows it, ALL states must. It is wrong, and damn right threat to the Constitution and our Bill of Rights.

MFitz

72

Well that’s what they wrote so too bad for them. Most of it didn’t apply to blacks or women either but times change.

I don’t know what you mean by “Aethiest agenda” (IMHO, people who refer to large demographic groups (ie Jewish, Black, Aethiest) with “agendas” or “conspiracies” tend to be kinda nuts). But it is not unreasonible for someone who does not believe in God or even believes in many gods to be free from persecution. So I don’t know what special rights and privlidges you believe Aethiests feel they are entitled to.

Amendment X
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
Amendment XIV
“Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

I don’t know anyone feels that one States law must apply to all. Certainly many an ultra-conservative Southern state has kept backward laws.

My interpretation of the relevant parts of X and XIV is that the state cannot make any law to override Federal laws (what’s the point of having Federal laws then?). What that has to do with gay marriage (which I assume you are against and I am ambivalent towards) I don’t know.

Regardless of your OPINION that the 14th Amendment is unconstitutional, it is on the books and is therefore the law of the land until the Supreme Court decides otherwise.

73

How was its passing Unconstitional?

74

That question is actually worthy of its own thread. Here’s an excellent writing on its inception:

THE “INFAMOUS” 14TH AMENDMENT!

Please confirm these facts for yourself. You WILL be amazed.

MFitz

75

Regrettably for your position, the Constitution also appoints the Supreme Court as the arbiter of Constitutional metters, does it not? That is in Article III, is it not?

And their opinion is at variance with yours. So, sad to say, the absolute fact of the matter is that the legal and legitimate interpretation of the Constitution isn’t what you say it is.

As to the general issue, it seems brutally obvious to me that the Bill of Rights would be worthless if it DIDN’T apply to state governments. Of what value are freedoms if state governments don’t have to respect them?

76

As a gay male living in George Bush’s America, with the Federal Marriage Amendment (the We-Hate-Gay-People Amendment, it should be called) now before Congress, I find that statement to be painfully simplistic and inaccurate.

You will win. FMA stands no chance. And every year, more and more people recognize that gays are just like everybody else.

77

Only more fabulous.

78

Sampiro, sampiro. . . Hmm. . . Is that Japanese for Simpleton?

Hey, Professor, is it my imagination, or have you spent an inordinate amount of time here defending your dubious means of employment?

And who was the lamebrain who listed all those people, foolishly attempting to insinuate that those people were teachers and not doers? The citizens of Hiroshima in 1945 would be interested to learn that Einstein never made it out of the classroom.

Rene

79

[Moderator Hat ON]

Rene, do not call your fellow posters a “simpleton” or “lamebrain” while in this forum. This forum is for debates, not flaming.

[Moderator Hat OFF]

80

While it’s only anecdotal evidence, in the university I graduated from in California, it was ok for liberal professors to fly their colors, but not conservatives. Walking through the halls of the professors’ offices, there were a plenty of left and far-left political cartoons on the corkboards on the walls, but none for right or far-right.

If you wanted to express your fondness for smaller government, free trade, or anti-abortion sentiments, you didn’t. :frowning: I was on the University Diversity Committee too, and I tried to introduce the idea that diversity includes political ideas, but I was shut down. Oh well… I suppose socialist ideas were treated the same way 50 or 60 years ago, so the pendulum has swung the other way now that the hippies are tenured.

I’m also annoyed when people say that the liberal point of view in universities acts as a new, alternative point of view for the students. Most students are coming from having their whole lives focused on television, movies, and other general popular entertainment so they are a blank slate when it comes to politics.

-k