Hi Professor Teles! Been awhile, hope all is well.
You note: "There are certainly conservatives who, as the sociologist Amy Binder and co-author have shown, have managed to make liberal universities their home. But they are disproportionately to be found among the NeverTrump and libertarian conservatives who are on the outs in the Republican Party, rather than the more populist Republicans who are likely to be its future."
This strongly aligns with my experience and observation, and I think it sheds light on the nature of the problem - unfortunately, in a way that makes it harder to solve. In short, populism is innately anti-elitist and anti-intellectual, so it is hard for universities to be welcoming to populist sentiments without betraying their purpose in the first place.
Yes, campus culture alienates conservatives; but those it alienates most are defined by more than just conservative ideology. You may recall I was fairly libertarian in your class; people like me do just fine in college, because libertarianism is an *actual ideology.* It is rooted in specific ideas, and its adherents care deeply about consistency. Similarly, Never Trumpers became Never Trumpers for principled (rather than tribal) reasons.
When libertarians and Never Trumpers encounter lefty professors or classmates, they may feel outnumbered and defensive - but they have the mental tools to fight back, because they got where they are on the spectrum (...political, I mean, but sometimes also that other one) by engaging at the ideological level. As importantly, they have the tools to change and improve their beliefs (and those of leftist classmates!) by addressing inconsistencies and coming out with something more nuanced. They feel like part of the club, even as a political minority, because the club is defined by intellectualism.
The problem, to be blunt, is conservative students who can't do that, or are too proud or indifferent to try. The ones who think we're nerds for trying, whose conservatism is rooted more in formative social pressures or tribal identity than those lofty "ideas" in the first place. Those people feel threatened not just by leftist bias, but by *the entire project of reasoning towards truth* in the first place. They may not go on to be J.D. Vance, but they are the voters that opportunists like Vance will pander to. Perhaps some of them could be won over to the project if we were only patient and friendly enough; but many will not be, because they're just not wired for what universities are all about.
Universities exist to a) to carefully reason towards empirical truth, through painstakingly formal institutions with methodical processes for knowledge creation; and b) to crown elites with credentials, intended to set them apart in the workplace and grant them authority on factual questions. Populism is innately hostile to both functions, and I'm skeptical that the people attracted to it could have been won over if only we nerds had been less alienating.
I really think you underestimate the degree to which the increasingly left tinge of the academy is driven by influences at the academy and not imposed on the academy from outside forces. When I speak with people who are very progressive (almost all of whom went to the elite universities, which are thought leaders for progressive doctrine, and come from upper middle class and above families) it is abundantly clear that the progressive ideas they hold near and dear are things they picked up at school, and not things they brought to school. The unique feature of progressivism is that it is deeply rooted in specific academic theories.
You don't have people talking about social structures unless they have heard lectures on Focault or his intellectual descendents. You don't have people talking about the lived experience as if it is a revered narrative that is above scrutiny unless those people have learned about standpoint epistemology and epistemic deference. The fundamentally academic nature of modern progressive thought doesn't just spontaneously enter the mind of incoming freshmen who just happen to be going to the schools that are hives of progressive thought.
You fundamentally ignore the unique academic roots that modern progressivism has; it is its defining feature. When I speak to progressives they consistently, nearly 100% of the time, talk about their ideas as if they are a truth that was learned. If you question them on those ideas, they consistently respond with an undertone of "You don't remember that day in class?? You didn't learn that?"; they respond as if I am questioning the laws of physics, and that is not hyperbole. They respond to scrutiny of these ideas in the way you respond to scrutiny of something you were taught to be a basic and factual description of the world.
Failing to understand the role of elite education in generating, not simply facilitating, and transfusing far left thinking into the minds of the privileged and soon-to-be elites is the surest indication that progressive thought, and god forbid the role of universities in society, goes the way of the dodo. I consistently see such obliviousness among progressives; and I think that obliviousnessness is what has led to what appears to be its pending downfall.
Higher education institutions should, at minimum, practice much greater tolerance for persons of faith, whether students, faculty, or administrators. These are the "conservatives" who will feel the deepest alienation from many colleges and universities. In particular, I am speaking of those institutions which adhere to a hardcore secular culture. Such institutions are too often the ones who are excessively credulous towards the expression of harebrained notions from the extreme left, that ultimately serve the ends of Trump, Desantis, and their ilk!
Hi Professor Teles! Been awhile, hope all is well.
You note: "There are certainly conservatives who, as the sociologist Amy Binder and co-author have shown, have managed to make liberal universities their home. But they are disproportionately to be found among the NeverTrump and libertarian conservatives who are on the outs in the Republican Party, rather than the more populist Republicans who are likely to be its future."
This strongly aligns with my experience and observation, and I think it sheds light on the nature of the problem - unfortunately, in a way that makes it harder to solve. In short, populism is innately anti-elitist and anti-intellectual, so it is hard for universities to be welcoming to populist sentiments without betraying their purpose in the first place.
Yes, campus culture alienates conservatives; but those it alienates most are defined by more than just conservative ideology. You may recall I was fairly libertarian in your class; people like me do just fine in college, because libertarianism is an *actual ideology.* It is rooted in specific ideas, and its adherents care deeply about consistency. Similarly, Never Trumpers became Never Trumpers for principled (rather than tribal) reasons.
When libertarians and Never Trumpers encounter lefty professors or classmates, they may feel outnumbered and defensive - but they have the mental tools to fight back, because they got where they are on the spectrum (...political, I mean, but sometimes also that other one) by engaging at the ideological level. As importantly, they have the tools to change and improve their beliefs (and those of leftist classmates!) by addressing inconsistencies and coming out with something more nuanced. They feel like part of the club, even as a political minority, because the club is defined by intellectualism.
The problem, to be blunt, is conservative students who can't do that, or are too proud or indifferent to try. The ones who think we're nerds for trying, whose conservatism is rooted more in formative social pressures or tribal identity than those lofty "ideas" in the first place. Those people feel threatened not just by leftist bias, but by *the entire project of reasoning towards truth* in the first place. They may not go on to be J.D. Vance, but they are the voters that opportunists like Vance will pander to. Perhaps some of them could be won over to the project if we were only patient and friendly enough; but many will not be, because they're just not wired for what universities are all about.
Universities exist to a) to carefully reason towards empirical truth, through painstakingly formal institutions with methodical processes for knowledge creation; and b) to crown elites with credentials, intended to set them apart in the workplace and grant them authority on factual questions. Populism is innately hostile to both functions, and I'm skeptical that the people attracted to it could have been won over if only we nerds had been less alienating.
I really think you underestimate the degree to which the increasingly left tinge of the academy is driven by influences at the academy and not imposed on the academy from outside forces. When I speak with people who are very progressive (almost all of whom went to the elite universities, which are thought leaders for progressive doctrine, and come from upper middle class and above families) it is abundantly clear that the progressive ideas they hold near and dear are things they picked up at school, and not things they brought to school. The unique feature of progressivism is that it is deeply rooted in specific academic theories.
You don't have people talking about social structures unless they have heard lectures on Focault or his intellectual descendents. You don't have people talking about the lived experience as if it is a revered narrative that is above scrutiny unless those people have learned about standpoint epistemology and epistemic deference. The fundamentally academic nature of modern progressive thought doesn't just spontaneously enter the mind of incoming freshmen who just happen to be going to the schools that are hives of progressive thought.
You fundamentally ignore the unique academic roots that modern progressivism has; it is its defining feature. When I speak to progressives they consistently, nearly 100% of the time, talk about their ideas as if they are a truth that was learned. If you question them on those ideas, they consistently respond with an undertone of "You don't remember that day in class?? You didn't learn that?"; they respond as if I am questioning the laws of physics, and that is not hyperbole. They respond to scrutiny of these ideas in the way you respond to scrutiny of something you were taught to be a basic and factual description of the world.
Failing to understand the role of elite education in generating, not simply facilitating, and transfusing far left thinking into the minds of the privileged and soon-to-be elites is the surest indication that progressive thought, and god forbid the role of universities in society, goes the way of the dodo. I consistently see such obliviousness among progressives; and I think that obliviousnessness is what has led to what appears to be its pending downfall.
Higher education institutions should, at minimum, practice much greater tolerance for persons of faith, whether students, faculty, or administrators. These are the "conservatives" who will feel the deepest alienation from many colleges and universities. In particular, I am speaking of those institutions which adhere to a hardcore secular culture. Such institutions are too often the ones who are excessively credulous towards the expression of harebrained notions from the extreme left, that ultimately serve the ends of Trump, Desantis, and their ilk!