A new subordinate of American origin, whom we had over for dinner some time ago, expressed her concern that the US was on its way to a one-party state. (She blamed this on "lack of leadership" in the Democratic Party.)
I share her concern: unlike some partisan Republicans, I do not relish the prospect of the Democratic Party making itself irrelevant. But many would argue that there already is a one-party state in the US: it's called Academia.
As that [sarcasm] exponent of Yankee Know-Nothingism [/sarcasm], the British magazine The Economist, put it:
"Academia is simultaneously both the part of America that is most obsessed with diversity, and the least diverse part of the country."
Prof. Glenn Reynolds cites two prime recent examples: (1) some faculty at Harvard are seeking to undo a recent (manifestly qualified) faculty hire for no other reason than that the man (international law scholar jack Goldsmith) is too politically conservative/not LLL enough for their tastes; (2) an Arab student [!] at Foothill College (in Silicon Valley) was told by his Political Indoctrination Officer "Science" professor to seek psychiatric treatment after committing the Thought Crime of having written a pro-American essay. After the student went to the media, the "professor" in question filed a grievance against the student for having mentioned his name.
Prof. Stephen Bainbridge looks at some of the causes, and demolishes the fashionable explanations. He specifically looks at junior Law School faculty at top universities, and sees a "network effect": in effect, the system is built in such a way that candidates require some form of patronage to make it through the selection process at all. While I have detailed knowledge of several instances of scientists getting "sponsored" or "mentored" by senior faculty who held political views light-years removed from their own (both ways), this becomes intrinsically problematic if the academic field is not some abstruse scientific discipline light-years removed from political controversy, but the very stuff of controversy itself. So special "care and feeding" tends to be given to candidates whose (legal) worldview concide with one's own. Human, all too human...
Comments