ACADEMIC BRAINWASHING THREATENS RULE OF LAW: Leftist Ideologues Dominate Training of Future Lawyers and Journalists, Says New Horowitz Study
|
by Richard Poe Tuesday, October 11, 2005 1:47 pm Eastern Time |
Archives 38 Comments |
Leftwing professors are systematically brainwashing young lawyers and journalists, encouraging them to ply their trade in the fashion of a Hillary Clinton or a Dan Rather instead of a John Adams or a Benjamin Franklin. This is the sad conclusion of a new study by David Horowitz’s Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC). The survey confirms what most of us long suspected – that leftist ideologues dominate the faculties of American law schools and journalism schools by an overwhelming margin.
The study found that most law and journalism professors at elite schools identify themselves as Democrats. This finding has special significance in today’s polarized environment, in which Democrats have evolved into a full-fledged party of the left in the European mode.
Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean recently told NBC’s Tim Russert that he sees little substantive difference between a “liberal Democrat” and a “Democratic socialist.” In such times as these, registering with the Democratic Party (as opposed to just voting Democrat) likely implies a willful opposition to mainstream American culture, values and tradition.
“[P]arty registration is probably the single best indicator of a subject’s disposition on a range of social, political and philosophical issues that are crucial to the fields under scrutiny,” write the study’s authors, David Horowitz and Joseph Light.
The Survey Results
In all but one of the 18 schools surveyed (including nine law schools and nine journalism schools), the study found that registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by huge margins.
Among law schools, Democrat faculty outnumbers Republican faculty by more than 10 to 1, on average. Among journalism schools, the ratio is about 7 to 1, on average.
Of course, the ratio varied greatly from school to school. Yet, of all departments surveyed, Republicans dominated only one, the University of Kansas journalism school, by 10 to 8. Among law school professors, the ratio of registered Democrats to Republicans varies from 28:1 to 3:1 (at Stanford University and at the University of Pennsylvania respectively). Democrats outnumber Republicans at the University of Southern California journalism school by a factor of 13:1.
Given the role that attorneys play in shaping laws, whether as legislators, judges, prosecutors, presidents, criminal defenders or litigators, and given the equally influential role which journalists play in society, through shaping public opinion, the degree of leftist penetration of law schools and journalism schools uncovered in this study arguably threatens the very fabric of our society. The ideas these leftist professors promote seriously undermine the respect for limited government, property rights and judicial restraint which heretofore have preserved and defined our American way of life.
To download a pdf file of the study, go here: “Representation of Political Perspectives in Law and Journalism Faculties” by David Horowitz and Joseph Light
Go here for the timeline of David Horowitz’s academic freedom movement. |
by Richard Poe
October 11, 2005 01:47 PM ET
Cross-posted from MoonbatCentral.com 10.11.05
Comments
38 Responses to “ACADEMIC BRAINWASHING THREATENS RULE OF LAW: Leftist Ideologues Dominate Training of Future Lawyers and Journalists, Says New Horowitz Study”Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying about this post...Is this supposed to be a surprise to anyone?
“Party registration is probably the single best indicator of a subject’s disposition on a range of social, political and philosophical issues that are crucial to the fields under scrutiny…”
If there were a number of political parties in question that statement might be true, but with only two I don’t believe you can accurately judge someone’s range of opinions based on party affiliation alone.
There are Republicans who favor abortion, Democrats who are opposed to gun control etc etc.
You have Southern “Union” Democrats (who tend to be very conservative on every social issue), and “Libertarian” Republicans (who tend to be liberal on social issues).
It would have been better if CSPC had focused their survey on responses to social issues rather than party affiliation.
Defector asks: “Is this supposed to be a surprise to anyone?”
Of course it’s no surprise. However, if we didn’t document the bias, the leftists would deny that any bias exists. They would say it was a figment of our imaginations.
Now that we’ve done the study, the left will have to change tactics. They will shift to plan B, which is to question the study’s methodology.
HOW YOUNG DO THEY START THEIR INDOCTRINATION?
The Albuquerque Peace and Justice Center and their “Peace Education Project” is now allowed to enter our local public schools “to counter the military recruiters. There are other ways to see the world and to pay for college.” This is now a controversy here in Albuquerque and each individual principal makes the decision to let them in or not.
Their favorite tactic up to now is to have their members sign up a substitute teachers “to talk to as many different kids as possible.” Allen Cooper, a member of Veterans for Peace and the host of local IndyMedia program on our public access channel, proclaimed to students at La Cueva HS, that the United States “is under Marshall Law.”
Elizabeth Everitt, the Superintendent of Albuquerque Public Schools, has allowed a Communist front organization access to our students. We all know that they are the “hate America” crowd and will denounce the President and the “murderers in Iraq” and will praise in the same breathe the virtues of Castro, Hamas, and their “freedom fighters” in Iraq.
HELP! THE COMMUNISTS ARE TAKING OVER OUR SCHOOLS!
“Now that we’ve done the study, the left will have to change tactics. They will shift to plan B, which is to question the study’s methodology.”
…ok point made, i’ll be quiet then. 🙂
Well, methodology of a study is kind of a big deal. It determines whether or not your study can support any of the claims.
I’m a Ph.d. student and the methodological problems with this study, all the way from sample selection and sampling error to data management issues, would earn this “study” an F in an intro research methods course. I’m not even quantitative in my orientation and I can see the problems with it. But that’s no surprise. Whenever I e-mail Davey-poo about his “studies,” he shrieks and call me names. He’s a bully and a coward.
What’s bad is that reporters don’t know how to critique research. I’m sure the right-wing noise machine will be trumpeting this study and then it will be picked up by the mainstream press like CSPC’s other “research” has in the past. I’m sure Scaife’s newspapers will probably run these “studies” almost verbatim.
Midwest~ Let’s see one of those emails.
I’ve always deleted them-but they are funny “brave, brave Sir Horowitz” always shreiks and storms off in a huff. He is a bully and a coward and were I ever to meet him I would say so ti his face.
Wow, an “F” in methodology! But certainly an “A” in fact. One really doesn’t need much METHODOLOGY to discover, and verify, by the way, that left-wingers, socialists, and yes, even communists, over-populate the teaching structure of our schools. Although I’m duly impressed by your PhD credentials (NOT!), even you should be able to make that determination without much of a study, no matter the METHODOLOGY.
Well again, (oh how I hate having to explain this) whether one’s methodology is valid or not determines whether the claims made by that study stand up.
A cursory examination of CSPC’s “research” shows that they can’t make any of their claims. They have no evidence. I know righties aren’t too impressed with the whole idea of “evidence” and “proof” since they beleive that they are the recipients of received truth, but my critique stands, this study, like all of CSPC’s studies is garbage. The sad fact is, that it will be reported in the news, because reporters largely don’t know anythign about research.
Sir or madam, you are not impressing anyone here. However, I will not resort to name-calling (as you’re apparently not averse to), but why don’t you peddle your wares in a place more suited to your ideology, a place where you’ll perhaps find friends? I’m not real sure of the METHODOLOGY you’ve employed in order to come to some of your opinions anyhow. Perhaps when you grow up you can become a college professor and teach METHODOLOGY to your heart’s content. But we here are not a captive audience and have simply become bored with your ranting. I apologize, though, in that I used very little METHODOLOGY in coming to my conclusion!
It would have been better if CSPC had focused their survey on responses to social issues rather than party affiliation.
TexasTom: Agreed. Party affiliation in this country is not a guarantee of anything.
And, hey, this is America. It’s a free market. You can choose your brand of brainwashing. College and universities, specific departments within these institutions, and specific professors within departments are usually known as being or leaning one way or another.
And what does it say about American students if they’re so susceptible to all this brainwashing? Aren’t we teaching kids how to rigorously question and analyze?
Miss Nearing writes: “And, hey, this is America. It’s a free market. You can choose your brand of brainwashing. College and universities, specific departments within these institutions, and specific professors within departments are usually known as being or leaning one way or another.”
Can you please tell us at which universities and in which specific departments conservative professors are known to congregate?
Miss Nearing also writes: “Aren’t we teaching kids how to rigorously question and analyze?”
To whom are you referring when you say “we”?
Midwest: Concerning email replies to you from DH.
“I’ve always deleted them” YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING. YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO USE HIS EMAILS AS AMMUNITION FOR YOUR ARGUMENTS. “They’re funny” you say? I’m dying to hear of one. Hell, you could have even sold one on Ebay.
I know the form emails that I have recieved from DH asking for funds ARE PRINTED AND FRAMED IN GOLD PLATED, DIAMOND STUDDED FRAMES.
Next time you get a personal email from DH, save it so you can prove it!
What’s “funny” are your replies. The problem is that I hardly laugh at leftists but I cry that you are another lost brainwashed soul.
Midwest Leftie,
I see you chimed in right on cue, as predicted by Mr. Poe.
You claim there are problems with the sample selection, sampling error and data management of this study. Identify them.
So far, the only commentator to identify a valid shortcoming in this study is a conservative, TexasTom. You’ve done nothing but rant.
The idea of a leftie lecturing on the merits of evidence and proof is like Pigpen from the Peanuts comic strip lecturing on the merits of personal hygiene.
Midwest Leftie writes: “Whenever I e-mail Davey-poo about his `studies,’ he shrieks and call me names. He’s a bully and a coward.”
Gary requests: “Let’s see one of those emails.”
To which Midwest Leftie replies: “I’ve always deleted them…”
_________________________________
Midwest Leftie, we don’t allow liars to post on this blog.
If indeed Mr. Horowitz responded defensively to your e-mails, and inasmuch as you obviously consider his alleged remarks important enough to announce on this blog, then surely you would have considered the incriminating e-mails themselves important enough to save.
Why didn’t you save them?
Never mind. Perhaps we can get them back for you. What e-mail program do you use? Our technicians may be able to help you retrieve the deleted files.
If not, I will have to assume that you are a liar, in which case your posting privileges will be revoked.
Dear Midwest Leftie;
As a scientist with some experience in statistics, I would appreciate it if you would please tell me where the methodology is in error?
This is shaping up to be a very bad day for Midwest Leftie.
Lefties still dominate academic law and journalism
David Horowitz and Joseph Light present research (in PDF format) on how leftists are still dominating academic law and journalism, trying to train students of the professions solely to adhere to their ideologies.
If you want to see how “scientific” and “unbiased” leftist studies are, take a look at their “studies” on firearms over the last 25 years. Or you could examine their “scientific” environmental and global warming “studies.”
Damn Publius, now you went and done it! Every wacko leftie gun hater and psuedo environmentalist in the world will be flooding this site with BS! Don’t we have plenty of lefties already?
BTW, I wonder why these morons keep showing up just to keep arguing senslessly? Don’t they have anything better to do, such as take their Prozac?
I think they come here for information and education, Professor tazzmax. It’s our job to enlighten them.
“Party registration is probably the single best indicator of a subject’s disposition on a range of social, political and philosophical issues that are crucial to the fields under scrutiny…”?
Based on my personal experience, this statement is spot on.—I have met very few Democrats I could stomach for very long.
Mr. Poe: There must be a conservative professor on some college campus somewhere! Wouldn’t the laws of chance and randomness apply?
As to the “we” in “Aren’t we teaching kids how to rigorously question and analyze?”: “We” would include parents, siblings, other relatives, and of course teachers.
I don’t mean to sound glib, but asking questions and analyzing the responses makes for informed car buyers, house buyers, purchasers of insurance, stock investors, etc, as well as for intelligent consumers of general news and political information.
If so many students are so susceptible to “brainwashing” at college, what does it say about their pre-college preparation? And what does it say for their post-college prospects?
Miss Nearing argues: “There must be a conservative professor on some college campus somewhere! Wouldn’t the laws of chance and randomness apply?”
Random chance would apply only if the hiring of professors were random with regard to political ideology. This present study and others we have conducted at CSPC strongly suggest that the hiring of university faculty is not random, but rather highly discriminatory in favor of leftists.
Miss Nearing asks: “If so many students are so susceptible to `brainwashing’ at college, what does it say about their pre-college preparation?”
I don’t think it’s fair to place the burden of responsibility for poor education on the students. That said, I would agree that today’s students are probably less prepared than those of previous generations to withstand professorial propaganda and classroom coercion.
The Democrat political machine which has long exercised a monopoly over public schools in this country has plainly had a deleterious effect on the quality of education.
Likewise, the fashionably permissive notions of childrearing pushed by leftist social scientists over the last 60 years have weakened the character of the younger generation.
Finally, the disintegration of the family, the epidemic of divorce, the growing number of births out of wedlock, and the delegation of parental responsibility to daycare centers has engendered a multitude of new pathologies in children which surely detracts from their ability to excel at school.
Grace, I tend to agree with you. I have returned to college after twenty-four years and I can tell you the student body is MUCH more suspicious, one could even say cynical, of their professors than back when I was in college the first time.
Actually, Kyle, I think Miss Nearing was making the opposite argument from yours.
If I understood her rightly, she suggests that there would be nothing wrong with allowing Marxist ideologues to run hogwild over our universities, as long as the students are trained to “rigorously question” the Marxist teachings being forced down their throats.
Miss Nearing did not explain, however, what a student ought to do when a Marxist professor responds to such rigorous questioning by flunking said student.
At the risk of being accused of punching Midwest Leftie while he’s down, it’s worth noting that his self-serving references to his advanced academic “career” are meaningless. As someone intimately familiar with the bogus advanced education industry, I know that PhD all too often stands for Piled Higher and Deeper.
Reality Check: Imagine for a moment you are a blogger that is a dedicated idiologue, so much so that you actually include your ideological bent into your blog ID, like “Midwest Leftie”.
Then imagine you send e-mails to a respected (or reviled, depending) and FAMOUS personality on the opposition side of the political spectrum. Then – Eureka! – they respond to you in a totally defensive and asinine fashion, proving that they are totally full of crap and you are right about everything.
Would you:
a) post the e-mails that so completely embarrass your opponent to every liberal blog you can find, and then save them for future ‘ammunition’ in arguments?
b) save the e-mails and then only show them at the right moments when challenged by opponents?
c) just delete the e-mails without showing them to anyone, because…????
Yeah, answer “C” makes as much sense as the rest of the BS Widwest Leftie is babbling about.
orangeducks
RedBeard, unfortunately any self-defense can be taken as just plain defensiveness… There is a Christianophobic on Jihad Watch who is always labelling me as being some kind of Fundamentalist nut, no matter what I say in my defense. These Leftists have answers for everything… even if most of those answers are just a psychological fugue from reality.
Communist sympathizers from the heartland aside, I think the key to this study would be to make a comparative analysis of today’s ratio of moonbat to conservative vs. previous eras moonbat to conservative ratios. Are things getting more out of whack? Less?? Same as ever??
My guess is that the moonbat indoctination ratios go back as far as the University system itself.
-MZ
Speaking from a strictly anecdotal angle, I’d say it’s much, much worse now. When I began college in 1964 (yes, we had invented fire by that point in history), I didn’t feel any agenda pushing at me. Teachers were just teachers, some better than others.
One guy stands out. He taught sociology and anthropology, where you might expect left-wingers to congregate. But a couple of times each autumn he would announce no class for a certain Friday, because he was going hunting. He also invited any interested students to go with him. Not a wimpy leftie, for sure.
The biggest scandal I can recall was the case of the dirty old professor who was censured for his habit of seating attractive girls with short skirts in the front row of his class. 😉
Better back then. Absolutely.
Richard Poe I salute you!
You can cut right to the bottom line and skip all the leftwing subterfuge.
Sara Dogan, “New Study on Law and Journalism Faculties Analyzed in NY Times“, StudentsforAcademicFreedom.org, October 20, 2005
[…] Cross-posted from MoonbatCentral.com of 10/11/05. […]
[…] Cross-posted from MoonbatCentral.com 10.11.05 […]