Debate Makes Faculty Members' Political Ideologies Irrelevant

It's an interesting argument. It's also one that was recently echoed and expanded on by John Leo, U.S. News & World Report columnist, in a Sept. 23 column entitled "The Absent Professors."

In the column, Leo asserts that not only does a left-leaning imbalance exist among the nation's professors, it is also growing. Further, it is not a phenomenon isolated to a few traditionally progressive campuses like UNC.

He cites a study of Cornell University that found 166 professors registered with left-of-center parties and only six registered with more conservative parties.

Maybe we should run for the hills. The pinkos are taking over. They're indoctrinating our children. They probably abduct them to perform strange feats of hypnosis that leave them wandering around dully mumbling about diversity, sensitivity and organic grocery stores.

That's certainly what some would have us believe. When conservative commentator David Horowitz visited campus last year, he spared no expense lambasting our faculty. He even falsely accused our teachers of organizing the protests that accompanied his visit. As if he minded the protests -- the attention paid to them meant his books would sell thousands more copies. Perhaps he should use the proceeds to take public speaking lessons.

But I digress.

The obvious response to the data conservatives provide is to ask, So what? There is indeed a disproportionate number of professors who are liberal at UNC, at least disproportional when compared with North Carolina.

But who cares?

Anyone who says that a liberal faculty stifles debate on issues has not spent much time at UNC -- or read this paper.

The main problem revolves around the mistaken idea that college students are some kind of intellectual lamb to be led to the academic slaughter.

I've taken numerous classes, spanning a range of departments from psychology to English, in which there have been debates about politics. One thing I learned in all of them was to listen to views that are not my own.

As long as professors don't preach personal views or at least don't try to pass off their opinions as fact, where their views fall on the political spectrum really doesn't matter.

There is never a lack of students ready to advocate their own perspective, whether this is the view held by the majority or not.

UNC, and I suspect most good schools, is a place where you can make any argument you want -- you just better know what you're talking about.

This goes to the heart of Leo's and the Review's arguments. College students are not sheep being led where the professor wills. Modern students are deeply critical thinkers able to form their own opinions. They are free and generally willing to poke, prod, argue back and disagree with other opinions they come across.

Rote learning has given way to critical analysis. The role of the professor has become, in many cases, to serve as a facilitator to the students.

That is, it has become his or her job to expose them to various points of view about a topic and let them decide for themselves. While the argument that sinister professors could indoctrinate their students might have been valid generations ago, it is certainly not the case now.

So my advice to John Leo is to sit in on a college discussion of political views before blasting faculty. And my advice to conservatives and everyone else at UNC and elsewhere is to keep arguing.

Reach Dan Harrison at harrison@email.unc.edu.