Why, exactly, do you think conservatives despise America's elite universities? You seem to take the stance here that this is all cynical politics driven by anti-intellectualism. But could it be that universities have done things that merit such hostility?
Even if you think that there's zero merit to the right-wing critique of higher education, America is (as I'm sure you are well aware) very closely divided politically; conservatives will have a major say in higher education whether the professoriate is happy about it or not. And conservatives are finally grasping that they do have the power to effect change within higher education, though they tend to still be distracted by shiny issue-of-the-day objects instead of understanding the design of institutions and more complicated policy mechanisms. But they're getting closer.
Perhaps if academia wants to prove that it is not hostile to conservatives, it could stop its ongoing attempts to root out anyone who dissents from a very particular form of left-wing identity orthodoxy on campus.
Something I haven’t been able to understand from reading news coverage of these Congressional hearings is why university presidents participate in them in the first place. As your final paragraph says, why show up for a show trial designed to humiliate higher ed? That private institutions are participating in this seems especially puzzling? Why give Stefanik the time of day?
Testifying in congressional hearing is not entirely voluntary: those who refuse to attend can be subpoenaed to testify. Additionally, universities are like large companies, which do better when not in confrontation with government.
Sorry, but whenever I hear someone talking about “conservative populism”, I take it as a sign that they lack the courage to call out fascists for what they really are. You define populism as “a set of beliefs and rhetoric depicting politics as a struggle by ‘regular people’ against some entrenched set of ‘elites’ that does not have their interests and heart and is even anti-American.” But that’s just a marketing strategy, not a unified ideology leading to a distinct set of policies.
It’s simply absurd to lump the likes of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump in one ideological bucket. The one significant piece of legislation that Trump managed to pass as president was a tax giveaway to the wealthy - how can you get more elitist than that? Calling that populism is pure Orwellian Newspeak and rewards his lying to the American people that in any way he favors the interests of the common man. His cynical, ugly politics has richly earned the title of “fascist”, and certainly does not deserve the much more positive sounding label of “populist”.
And because Universities are not in the suppression business, they are not aware that suppression of people who believe they have a righteous cause requires much more brutality than ordinary order maintenance. It’s a recipe for disaster.
Great read on protest lawlessness https://tinyurl.com/ye2629md
Why, exactly, do you think conservatives despise America's elite universities? You seem to take the stance here that this is all cynical politics driven by anti-intellectualism. But could it be that universities have done things that merit such hostility?
Even if you think that there's zero merit to the right-wing critique of higher education, America is (as I'm sure you are well aware) very closely divided politically; conservatives will have a major say in higher education whether the professoriate is happy about it or not. And conservatives are finally grasping that they do have the power to effect change within higher education, though they tend to still be distracted by shiny issue-of-the-day objects instead of understanding the design of institutions and more complicated policy mechanisms. But they're getting closer.
Perhaps if academia wants to prove that it is not hostile to conservatives, it could stop its ongoing attempts to root out anyone who dissents from a very particular form of left-wing identity orthodoxy on campus.
They aren't doing that, you're just concern-trolling
Something I haven’t been able to understand from reading news coverage of these Congressional hearings is why university presidents participate in them in the first place. As your final paragraph says, why show up for a show trial designed to humiliate higher ed? That private institutions are participating in this seems especially puzzling? Why give Stefanik the time of day?
Testifying in congressional hearing is not entirely voluntary: those who refuse to attend can be subpoenaed to testify. Additionally, universities are like large companies, which do better when not in confrontation with government.
Sorry, but whenever I hear someone talking about “conservative populism”, I take it as a sign that they lack the courage to call out fascists for what they really are. You define populism as “a set of beliefs and rhetoric depicting politics as a struggle by ‘regular people’ against some entrenched set of ‘elites’ that does not have their interests and heart and is even anti-American.” But that’s just a marketing strategy, not a unified ideology leading to a distinct set of policies.
It’s simply absurd to lump the likes of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump in one ideological bucket. The one significant piece of legislation that Trump managed to pass as president was a tax giveaway to the wealthy - how can you get more elitist than that? Calling that populism is pure Orwellian Newspeak and rewards his lying to the American people that in any way he favors the interests of the common man. His cynical, ugly politics has richly earned the title of “fascist”, and certainly does not deserve the much more positive sounding label of “populist”.
100% right.
And because Universities are not in the suppression business, they are not aware that suppression of people who believe they have a righteous cause requires much more brutality than ordinary order maintenance. It’s a recipe for disaster.