Karl Marx made a bet that workers of all (industrialized) nations were going to find that they had more in common with each other than they did with the ruling classes of their own countries, and that they would band together across languages and cultures to bring down a system that (he believed) was systematically stacked against their interests. He was wrong about that. It turned out that it was much easier to seduce workers with the siren song of nationalism and, in the process, turn them against workers of other countries than it was to persuade them to take up an international proletarian cause. The result, among other things, was a series of nationalistic wars, great and small, throughout the 20th century (which, sadly, show little sign of abating in the 21st).
Where Marx might have gotten it right, however, is with academics. Though small in number and mostly politically inept, academics, as a group, probably communicate internationally more frequently than any occupational class in the world. Even most politicians and business people (think state and city level, and your local corner store and restaurant) probably don't have as much regular international contact. As a result (I hypothesize) American academics more closely resemble their academic counterparts in other countries (of similar economic status) than they do Americans as a whole. Because the American political spectrum is skewed so far to the right compared to that of other similar countries (England, France, Germany, Austria, Italy, Netherlands, Scandinavia, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.), American academics tend to look "liberal" in the American political context, but they are actually quite centrist in the "advanced economy" global political context. Although social scientists (incl. psychologists) are a bit more "left" than "hard" scientists, even physicists, chemists, biologists, etc. tend to be to the left of what passes for the "center" in the US. Economists, I think, are the grand exception because, unlike nearly every field, business and political interests will pay large numbers of economists large amounts of money to say things with apparent authority that favor those interests. (To be clear. I don't think this is *entirely* mercenary. I think that if you're a person who leans that way already, money will make it much easier to lean farther and harder, and do it in public.) You don't see this option made available to psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists to nearly the same degree, though, if you did, I bet you would see similar phenomenon. You already see it a bit with a few biologists and climate scientists in the fights over evolution and global warming.) Chris ....... Christopher D Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M6C 1G4 chri...@yorku.ca http://www.yorku.ca/christo > On Mar 2, 2014, at 12:34 AM, Paul C Bernhardt <pcbernha...@frostburg.edu> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I'm tempted to say, 'how I vote is none of your business', but I plaster > Facebook with annoying political 'memes' and rants. So, answering as a > friend describes me: I'd vote for a stump if it had a donkey stamped on it. > My father was a Democratic politician, I kinda have no choice in the matter, > though the Democratic party is not ideal. Clinton and Obama are a bit > conservative in my view. I wish we had instant runoff (ordered preference > voting) so I could vote for Green Party candidates occasionally as my number > 1 pick, with Democrats being (likely) number 2, etc. But, neither party wants > that to happen. It will open up the process too much because the other > parties would get much bigger voting numbers and gain credibility, eventually > be seen as viable alternatives with real chances to win. > > This question has been studied to death, IIRC. > > Simple Google Scholar search turned up numerous interesting hits. > > Here's an abstract from 2005: > Professors and their politics: The policy views of social scientists > Daniel B. Klein & Charlotta Stern > Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society, 17, 257-303 DOI: > 10.1080/08913810508443640 > > Abstract > Academic social scientists overwhelmingly vote Democratic, and the Democratic > hegemony has increased significantly since 1970. Moreover, the policy > preferences of a large sample of the members of the scholarly associations in > anthropology, economics, history, legal and political philosophy, political > science, and sociology generally bear out conjectures about the > correspondence of partisan identification with left/right ideal types; > although across the board, both Democratic and Republican academics favor > government action more than the ideal types might suggest. Variations in > policy views among Democrats is smaller than among Republicans. Ideological > diversity (as judged not only by voting behavior, but by policy views) is by > far the greatest within economics. Social scientists who deviate from > leftâwing views are as likely to be libertarian as conservative. > > Here's an abstract from 2006: > > Is the Academy a LIberal Hegemony? The Political Orientations and Educational > Values of Professors > Public Opin Q (2006) 70 (3): 304-326. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfj009 > John F. Zipp and Rudy Fenwick > Abstract > In the last several years, conservatives have argued that an overwhelmingly > Left and liberal faculty has taken over American colleges and universities. > In particular, two main claims have been advanced: (1) a disproportionate > percentage of the faculty is liberal; and (2) these liberal faculty are > pushing their values on students and colleagues, skewing the educational > process. However, data to support these contentions come from > unrepresentative institutions and/or disciplines and mistakenly equate party > identification with political ideology. In contrast, we use two nationally > representative surveys done by the Carnegie Foundation (in 1989 and 1997) to > address these concerns. We have several key findings: (1) although > left-of-center faculty increased slightly, the best overall description of > these trends suggests increased movement to the center, toward a more > moderate faculty, between 1989 and 1997; (2) there are sizable differences > across disciplines and institutional types, with conservatives being the > plurality in some fields and in two-year colleges; (3) changes in age and > gender have offsetting effects on changes in liberalism; and (4) there are > significant differences in educational values between liberal and > conservative professors. > >> On Mar 1, 2014, at 7:46 PM, Beth Benoit wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Michael alerted me back channel that not many from TIPS have responded. I >> think this is an interesting bit of news: i.e., are psychology profs more >> likely to be liberal or conservative. >> >> What say you, colleagues? >> >> I'm quite liberal. Anyone else willing to admit to one side or the other? >> >> Beth Benoit >> Plymouth State University >> Plymouth, New Hampshire >> >> >>> On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Michael Britt <mich...@thepsychfiles.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> After reading articles like this one: >>> >>> "...90.6 percent of social and personality psychologists describe >>> themselves as liberal on social issues (compared with 3.9 percent who >>> describe themselves as conservative), and 63.2 percent describe themselves >>> as liberal on economic issues (compared with 10.3 percent who describe >>> themselves as conservative)." >>> >>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jarryd-willis/polarized-psychology-is-science-devalued-in-a-divided-society_b_4839207.html >>> >>> one of my Psych Files facebook members asks, "Are most psychologists >>> liberal? Does the liberal mindset affect the way Psychology is understood >>> and even taught?". Good questions. Are we all mostly liberal? >>> >>> Michael A. Britt, Ph.D. >>> mich...@thepsychfiles.com >>> http://www.ThePsychFiles.com >>> Twitter: @mbritt >>> >>> --- >>> >>> You are currently subscribed to tips as: beth.ben...@gmail.com. >>> >>> To unsubscribe click here: >>> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13105.b9b37cdd198e940b73969ea6ba7aaf72&n=T&l=tips&o=35019 >>> >>> (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) >>> >>> or send a blank email to >>> leave-35019-13105.b9b37cdd198e940b73969ea6ba7aa...@fsulist.frostburg.edu >>> >> >> --- >> >> You are currently subscribed to tips as: pcbernha...@frostburg.edu. >> >> To unsubscribe click here: >> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263003&n=T&l=tips&o=35036 >> >> (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) >> >> or send a blank email to >> leave-35036-13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263...@fsulist.frostburg.edu >> > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: chri...@yorku.ca. > > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=430248.781165b5ef80a3cd2b14721caf62bd92&n=T&l=tips&o=35052 > > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > > or send a blank email to > leave-35052-430248.781165b5ef80a3cd2b14721caf62b...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > > > > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=35063 or send a blank email to leave-35063-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
