Did You Know?

Monday's edition of the Washington Post carried an item with a curious title, given the Post's left-of-center leanings. Staff writer Howard Kurtz reports on a study that found that college faculties are overwhelmingly liberal.

By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

The disparity is even more pronounced at the most elite schools, where, according to the study, 87 percent of faculty are liberal and 13 percent are conservative.

Not that this is particularly surprising to the general public, of course. Especially when one considers the following:

Rothman, Lichter and Nevitte find a leftward shift on campus over the past two decades. In the last major survey of college faculty, by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 1984, 39 percent identified themselves as liberal.

In contrast with the finding that nearly three-quarters of college faculty are liberal, a Harris Poll of the general public last year found that 33 percent describe themselves as conservative and 18 percent as liberal.

Well and good, but what is it that, in the minds of these faculty members, makes one liberal? The Post points out a few things that it would consider as "liberal":

The liberal label that a majority of the faculty members attached to themselves is reflected on a variety of issues. The professors and instructors surveyed are, strongly or somewhat, in favor of abortion rights (84 percent); believe homosexuality is acceptable (67 percent); and want more environmental protection "even if it raises prices or costs jobs" (88 percent). What's more, the study found, 65 percent want the government to ensure full employment, a stance to the left of the Democratic Party.

It seems that this is a bit disingenuous, however, especially the first two points. Even James Taranto at the conservative OpinionJournal is on the record as being moderately pro-choice. And while there is controversy over gay marriage, most Americans tolerate, and even accept, homosexuals. In the sense that liberalism is about extending liberty, this is correct. But the last two examples, regarding environmental protection and guaranteed employment, show the traces of the Leftist seepage into modern liberalism.

Consider environmental protection. The attitude of wanting to force higher prices on everybody is anti-liberal (not to be confused with "conservative") and elitist: I've made enough money to buy my own hundred acre forest, and if you want to live in my neighborhood, you must spend as much as I do to keep thinigs "green".

What about guaranteed employment? If that doesn't scream nanny state, I don't know what does. It's true that it's important to enjoy quality of life; but people should have to work a little at life. After all, how would tomorrow's jobseekers appreciate their job, if they didn't have to earn it?

But the biggest surprise, of course, is that the Post decided to run it. As long as they're willing, even belatedly, to examine their own biases, they have a future. Not so sure the New York Times can manage to hold on to their large national circulation numbers.

(Hat-tip: Mike Jericho)

[Cross-posted at Between Worlds]