College liberalism

[Alcon]

Why are colleges so liberal? Even in states like South Dakota, colleges have Democratic landslides.

Even in the facist-falsified (first Nader, now this!) South Dakota results, Kerry won Clay County, South Dakota (Vermillion and the University of South Dakota), 54-44.

I have never quite understood this.

[AuH2O]

Keep in mind many professors live in the area of the school and college faculty are overwhelmingly Dems basically everywhere.

Students are not liberal everywhere, a lot of it just depends on the school. Bush won a poll at my college by a 2-1 margin with students, Kerry won 2-1 with profs. Leftists at some places are very vocal and thus appear to be more numerous than they really are.

I actually devised a way to study this, though it's not ironclad methodologically. I used The Facebook, ran searches for "very conservative," "conservative," "moderate," "liberal," etc. At schools that don't have too many students (because the search returns a max of 1000 people), you can do a pretty good comparison. Seems like a random-enough sample to me.

Some schools, like Berkeley, are considered uber-leftist more on reputation than fact. Liberals outnumber conservatives but at least a couple dozen notable universities/colleges sport more leftist student bodies. I mean, "very conservatve" at Swarthmore turned up like 8 people, and I think a few were joking.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Because they have students who tend to be young and in a very Democratic age group, and liberal professors and faculty. And the overal culture of college towns adds to liberalism overall. Look at my city. It voted for Kerry heavily and Bush only won one precinct in the whole city which was most a bunch of subdivisions on the outside edge of town. There was another one he won but it only had 4 votes in it and he got all, meaning it was probably some sort of statistical classification (there was another with only 5 votes where Kerry got all). The reason it is so liberal even outside of the university areas is people who would like to live in such a city tend to be liberal (or recent grads). Of course there are some other factors (such as a rather blue collar industrial part of town and the proximity to the Twin Cities, we're kind of "Minneapolis-lite")

[J-Mann]

Why are colleges so liberal? Even in states like South Dakota, colleges have Democratic landslides.

Even in the facist-falsified (first Nader, now this!) South Dakota results, Kerry won Clay County, South Dakota (Vermillion and the University of South Dakota), 54-44.

I have never quite understood this.

As Goldwater was saying, professors tend to be more liberal, and liberals at college campuses tend to be more outspoken.  However , it's deeper than that.

Warning: the following will be based on broad stereotypes - I'm sure everyone knows someone who doesn't fit the mould, but bear with me anyway.  Here's the possible explanation for why college towns vote Democratic: the traditional liberal student is far less tied down to his town/city/state of origin and doesn't hesitate to register as a voter in a new city.  Conservative students are more hesitant to register outside of their hometown; they'll only do so when they've made a significant move with an aire of permenance.  In effect, this makes for higher numbers of liberals in college towns, while the conservative votes that may otherwise be represented there are dispersed.

Also, the liberal professor/liberal student stereotypes only work within certain colleges within a university, ie: I attend Kansas State University, I am in the College of Arts and Sciences.  Arts and Sciences tends to have the greatest concentration of liberal students and certainly high numbers of liberal professors.  Since many general education classes are taught through this specific college, students from all backgrounds and of all fields of study get exposed to an increased amount of liberalism from these professors.  But that's certainly not the case in all colleges and departments.  My university has nine separate colleges within it: Arts and Sciences, Architecture, Agriculture, Engineering, Business Administration, Human Ecology, Veterinary Medicine, Education, and Technology/Aviation.  Arts and Sciences stands alone as the bastion of liberalism.

[opebo]

College liberalism is only natural, given that students are somewhat more intelligent - on average - than those who did not go to college, and obviously they're better educated.

[John Dibble]

Intelligent people are usually more idealistic, and liberalism often appeals to that.

However, my college, Georgia Tech, has some of the most intelligent kids in the state, and we have a great variety of political ideologies. The professors don't really preach ideology. Fortunately for me, it also reflects the Tech sector in that there are more people who are friendly to the libertarian ideology - probably because engineers and programmers tend to think in logical terms rather than emotional ones.

[angus]

Why are colleges so liberal? Even in states like South Dakota, colleges have Democratic landslides.

Even in the facist-falsified (first Nader, now this!) South Dakota results, Kerry won Clay County, South Dakota (Vermillion and the University of South Dakota), 54-44.

I have never quite understood this.

I always found this one easy to understand.  (I assume by liberal you mean american liberal, not classically liberal)  College towns are filled with college students, and college professors.  College students are poor.  College professors aren't too rich either.  For example, when I was in college and grad school, I was a very left.  I was a card-carrying, dues-paying member of several leftist organizations, including The Socialist Party of Texas, The Massachusetts Revolutionary Workers Party, and The Green Party.  Once I got that first really good paying job a few years ago, I became a Repbulican.  My views on economics changed dramatically.  (of course, my views on social issues didn't, but that's irrelevant since I don't vote on social issues)  Now that I've quit the good paying job in favor of more leisure time and gone back to living in a college town, I've shifted left economically.

we vote in our own economic self-interests.  at least I do.  My assumption is that others do as well.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Just about every exit poll that I know of shows Republicans doing better among college-educated voters.  (ones who have actually had to go out into the world and get a real job).

Though Democrats tend to do better among post-graduate voters (i.e. lawyers).

College liberalism is only natural, given that students are somewhat more intelligent - on average - than those who did not go to college, and obviously they're better educated.

[angus]

Because they have students who tend to be young and in a very Democratic age group, and liberal professors and faculty. And the overal culture of college towns adds to liberalism overall.

I think that's another execellent point.  Age.

Another that I've thought of is internationalism.  College towns attract many more folks from all over.  Countries like Mexico, China, Russia, etc., where folks obviously see a much greater role for government than do we.  For example, for about 5 months I've been living in a small town in flyover country.  But there can be no doubt that my little town is Kerry country (though certainly not the county it's in, which is overwhelmingly Bush country).  Now, part of that is obviously because the town is poor and about half black.  But a huge part is the college life aspect.  For example, In my apartment, of the two adults who live there, one is from a communist country.  Just below me, lives a professor who is a citizen from Bolivia.  To my right, next door, is a couple who are Canadians.  To my left, next door, lives a guy from Bangladesh.  I have usually lived in college towns, and I have usually had foreign roommates and neighbors, and I have usually noted an unusually high support for the Democrat candidate over the GOP in most local and presidential races.  (albeit, this doesn't mean that the Dem wins, because this very local phenomenon may be outweighed by the suburbanites and rural folks.  But as a local phenomenon, it's right on.)

So, low age, low income, high incidence of foreign-born population, etc., all add to the "liberal" flavor of most college towns.  Though not to the suburbs and rural areas surrounding those small cities. 

htmldon points out an important trend, sure GOP does better among wealthier and better-educated overall.  this explains why dems are more often disenfranchised than republicans.  it's a very well established fact that "overvotes" and "undervotes" will always help the GOP candidate, not the dems.  NO, it's not fair, but that's life.  but that's an entirely different issue, and need not be considered here, as it is is not directly related to the question.  I do think it's an excellent point, and worth mentioning, that among college educated (bs and ba) voters, republicans do better.  But among those who hold graduate and professional degrees (conscpicuously excepting MDs, who are republicans) the dems often do better.  The answer to that corollary to this thread may lie in something John Dibble posted earlier.  (idealism and such)

[minionofmidas]

Should be pointed out that while there is some correlation between higher education and voting Republican, this correlation is a good deal smaller (If I remember correctly, an important caveat here ) than the correlation between a high income and voting Republican...in other words, well-educated people tend to be more Republican than the population as a whole, but less Republican than people who make just as much money with less education.

I'm wondering about John Dibble's last comment btw...my experience (from Germany) with computer sciences students, and IT specialist workers, is that, although many of them don't look the part, they're as Leftist as they come. Less activist than, say, students of sociology, but no less left-leaning in their positions and voting patterns.
Must be the logical thinking.

[angus]

Should be pointed out that while there is some correlation between higher education and voting Republican, this correlation is a good deal smaller (If I remember correctly, an important caveat here ) than the correlation between a high income and voting Republican...in other words, well-educated people tend to be more Republican than the population as a whole, but less Republican than people who make just as much money with less education.

that's right.  CNN has lots of stats collected via post-election polling.  I'll try to dig up a link. 

also, your post seems to have, at its core, an underlying theme is that socialism is good for humanity as a whole, but those among us who allow personal greed inhibit that realization are somehow undermining that Great Leap Forward.  I used to think that myself.  Again, I thought that only when I didn't have two coins to rub together, but still, you may be on to something.  I've often dreamed of living in a Star Trek world where no money changes hands, where you walk up to the food replicator and say "Tea, earl grey." and it appears.  No personal private property.  No coins.  No class.  I'm sure many of us do.  But it requires letting go of too many Western Notions.  I'm not sure any Earth society is truly ready for that.  Not to mention that with today's technology, the fundamental problem of limited supply requires a certain greediness if you really want to live comfortably.  (In fact, it was John's use of the word Idealistic that made me think of Star Trek.  And my thought of that show which made me snap back to the capitalistic reality of the modern primitive world.)

[minionofmidas]

Should be pointed out that while there is some correlation between higher education and voting Republican, this correlation is a good deal smaller (If I remember correctly, an important caveat here ) than the correlation between a high income and voting Republican...in other words, well-educated people tend to be more Republican than the population as a whole, but less Republican than people who make just as much money with less education.

that's right.  CNN has lots of stats collected via post-election polling.  I'll try to dig up a link. 

also, your post seems to have, at its core, an underlying theme is that socialism is good for humanity as a whole, but those among us who allow personal greed inhibit that realization are somehow undermining that Great Leap Forward.  I used to think that myself.  Again, I thought that only when I didn't have two coins to rub together, but still, you may be on to something.  I've often dreamed of living in a Star Trek world where no money changes hands, where you walk up to the food replicator and say "Tea, earl grey." and it appears.  No personal private property.  No coins.  No class.  I'm sure many of us do.  But it requires letting go of too many Western Notions.  I'm not sure any Earth society is truly ready for that.  Not to mention that with today's technology, the fundamental problem of limited supply requires a certain greediness if you really want to live comfortably.  (In fact, it was John's use of the word Idealistic that made me think of Star Trek.  And my thought of that show which made me snap back to the capitalistic reality of the modern primitive world.)

You're sorta-kinda right about me...except for a few points...
I'm fully certain no Earth society is ready for that at-all, nor do I really expect much progress while I'm alive.
Another thing is that, knowing a bit about life in Asia, I know full well that I, for one, am living much more comfortably, in many though not all respects, than any of us have a right to expect really...and I'm pretty sure I got a good bit less than the average poster here already.
Oh, and I don't like the hightechy shade of utopia. Mine is more like a "Undo the Fall of Man - For a return to the Paleolithicum" type of sentiment really.
That's the idealist groundwork...the second half of my personal philosophy, then, is wholly pragmatic: How can we make things as fair as possible - even if that means just a little bit fairer - on this planet, bearing all those truths in mind, working with just about anybody, evading solutions that ignore market forces?

[angus]

When I'm in Asia or SA or CA I get into that really reflexive mood as well.   But on friday afternoon at 2, when the work is finished and I know I should be headed home to the old lady, I tend to be much more grounded.

Also, be careful what you wish for.  Einstein, when asked what he thought would be the weapon of choice for the third world war said, "I don't know, but I can tell what the fourth will be fought with:  sticks and stones."  There's really only one way to go back, and it's not good.  But many ways to go forward, and a few of them actually make sense.  Now that Bush has been re-elected and my serotonin levels are appropriately elevated, I find that I am safely returning to my previous non-ideological equilibrium centrist state in which I can be sold on any right-wing or left-wing idea without malice or prejudice.  Even a Walden-type natural existence without amenities.  I may even go back to posting Mullet-rock lyrics, which I still contend contain all the philosophy you ever really need to know. 

the following may or may not be relevant to this thread, but I found it interesting.
http://communication.ucsd.edu/911/grovesofacademe.html

meanwhile, take a look at america's most warped and possibly most mulleted generation, mine, while we were all in high-school singing "Safety Dance" and cheering on Reagan and the Cold Warriors. 

[Smash255]

I went to Stony Brook University (graduated in May).  In Newsday (Long Island paper) they had a breakdown of all the towns on LI & how they voted (including the Stony Brook Campus)  My old campus vote was approx Kerry 2,300 Bush 450

[J. J.]

If I see another mullet, I will panic.  :-)

Some of liberalism may have to do with a college being basically a cloistered environment.  It's isolated and a lot of professors really don't go into the "real world."  

Professors are authority figures.  The young, based on grouping up in an environment where authority figures rule, tend to be attracted to them.

[angus]

Some of liberalism may have to do with a college being basically a cloistered environment.  It's isolated and a lot of professors really don't go into the "real world." 

Hmmmm.  but are monks "liberal"?   are hermits "liberal"?

my gut says no!  but an earlier post by Trondheim says maybe!  You may be right. 

("you may be wrong, but for all I know you may be right...") 

I do agree that most of 'em aren't going out into the private sector much (Can you blame?!  They actually expect folks to work in the private sector!  Thanks, but no thanks.)

Nice stats smash.  As I recall when I was living in Somerville (aka Slummerville), a bedroom community for college & graduate students adjacent to Cambridge, Mass., in 2000, that Gore got 69 percent of the vote in that city, Nader 16%, and Bush 15%.  Ouch.


We can dance if we want to
We can leave your friends behind
'Cause your friends don't dance and if they don't dance
Well they're no friends of mine
I say, we can go where we want to
A place where they will never find
And we can act like we come from out of this world
Leave the real one far behind

[Alcon]

I do not base this soley on perception. Public universities are overwhelmingly liberal in all cases I have found. The University of Oregon at Eugene voted 85%-15% Kerry in the precinct results I saw. Similarly, other public universities vote by such landslide margins.

The question primarily references public universities - I know that private ones vary greatly.

[J. J.]

Hmmmm.  but are monks "liberal"?   

Judging from what I've seen, yes.

My particular point is that insular groups tend to suffer from "groupthink."

[angus]

I do not base this soley on perception. Public universities are overwhelmingly liberal in all cases I have found. The University of Oregon at Eugene voted 85%-15% Kerry in the precinct results I saw. Similarly, other public universities vote by such landslide margins.

The question primarily references public universities - I know that private ones vary greatly.

aaaah, well, that throws a further level of complexity into an already complex model (monkeywrench into the clockworks, you might say, except that this particular clock stopped working long ago due to the profusion of wrenches in its gears).  Large state schools are often located in state capitals.  (not always, of course)  but take UT Austin, for example.  One of U magazine's "most liberal schools in America" in one of pop-cultures most "conservative states in America"  Note that state capitals (and our nation's national capital) always weather economic recessions far better than other large cities.  This is due, in part, because of the large number of government jobs in those cities.  Government employees have "safe" jobs in the sense that they're not subject to the high-amplitude fluctuations in any market.  Thus grocery stores, porn shops, head shops, art galleries, cafes, movie theaters, etc., located in capital cities turn a pretty brisk business even in the Worst of Times (not to be confused with the excellent Mullet-Rock song by Styx, "The Best of Times")  Professors, Senators, Assembleymen, their janitors, secretaries, cafeteria workers, hair-stylists, etc., know that a great big dole favors their causes well.  Don't be alarmed, as this is neither good nor bad (in fact, I contend that nothing really is, but then I'm not a Zoroastrian), but it is a well-known trend.  The bigger the school, the bigger the state, the more diverse (really diverse, not the currently fashionable use of that term which, as often as not, refers to enforced racial diversity, but really ideologically, geographically, intellectually, economically diverse) the population.  Thus any large state school in a large state capitol can be expected to be overwhelmingly "liberal" in the american sense.  And even a small state school in a small state capitol can be shown, by the same argument, to be liberal as well, it's just a matter of degree.  (certainly no pun intended there) 

Private schools, and schools in small towns waaay outside any major metropolitan center, and in particular outside a state's capitol city, will, of course, be subject to a different analysis.

[angus]

  JJ,
I present the prior post for your approval as a fair example of groupthink 

I gotta get outside and start reading some Ayn Rand.  Thanks for the early diagnosis.  Admitting that one needs help is the first step.

(I say "fair" rather than "excellent" example because of the profusion of obnoxious, gratuitous, and distracting cultural references.  Any self-respecting groupthinker would lose the Styx reference, at a minimum.)

[AuH2O]

Oklahoma State isn't liberal. Same can be said for many other public schools.

[KEmperor]

I went to Stony Brook University (graduated in May).  In Newsday (Long Island paper) they had a breakdown of all the towns on LI & how they voted (including the Stony Brook Campus)  My old campus vote was approx Kerry 2,300 Bush 450

My little brother goes there now.  Having been there, I am not surprised.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Just about every exit poll that I know of shows Republicans doing better among college-educated voters.  (ones who have actually had to go out into the world and get a real job).

Though Democrats tend to do better among post-graduate voters (i.e. lawyers).

College liberalism is only natural, given that students are somewhat more intelligent - on average - than those who did not go to college, and obviously they're better educated.

The 2004 national exit poll had a tie amoung the 42% of voters who are college graduates, so they were 3 points more Democratic then the population as whole. Looking at the gender break down, it looks like Kerry probably narrowly won them.

There's a huge gender gap amoung college graduates. It was 18 points this time, and 35 points in 2000.

[J. J.]

  JJ,
I present the prior post for your approval as a fair example of groupthink 

I gotta get outside and start reading some Ayn Rand.  Thanks for the early diagnosis.  Admitting that one needs help is the first step.

I do think that it's a question of groupthink, and that is not limited to either the left or the right. 

My Poli Sci 1 instructor was outstanding, and after 22 years I can remember his lectures.  One reason was that he was a Democratic Committeeman in Altoona, PA.  He understood how the system really worked.

Now, I publish a lot in my field, and a number of times, I explain the theory behind what I've been involved.  In several cases, I've finished up and said, "Okay, nobody's done this before, now I have to sit down and write the paper explaining it."  It's because of that that I get some good articles out of it.

[angus]

Now, I publish a lot in my field, and a number of times, I explain the theory behind what I've been involved.  In several cases, I've finished up and said, "Okay, nobody's done this before, now I have to sit down and write the paper explaining it."  It's because of that that I get some good articles out of it.

well, that's the way it ought to be done, I think. 

and of course groupthink doesn't have to be left or right, or either, or both.  I don't think the term implies a sociopolitical bias, does it? 

out of curiosity, what is your area of professional interest?