How much intellectual, political, or ideological diversity is there on college campuses? My colleague Alvin Rabushka likes to look up available numbers. Here are results from Tuesday’s primary. Stanford zip code 94305 is divided into 11 precincts for voting. The Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters aggregates them into two precincts, 2542 and 2545, for the purpose of reporting results for all the faculty, staff, and the few students who are registered to vote in zip code 94305. Most students are registered to vote in their home state precincts.
My favorite quote when hearing academics wax poetically about diversity is from Thomas Sowell, also a Chicago grad who is at Hoover: "The next time academics tell you how important diversity is, ask them how many Republicans are in their Sociology department."
You wish there was eternal life on earth for people like Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman.
Bit like the "globally trusted" "impartial" BBC with its 25,000 employees. So how many of them are conservative voters? Does that number get beyond what you can count on two hands?
According to Greg Lukianoff, a survey of the humanities faculties in all American universities, shows 33 voting Democratic for every one voting Republican. More narrowly, in the sociology faculties, 99 vote Democratic for each one who votes Republican. The struggle for free speech and free expression of ideas will be lengthy.
What makes you think that the 33% and 99% are not the consequence of free speech and free expression? Is this not why free speech and free expression are so energetically suppressed, wherever and whenever possible, by those in power?
"Most students are registered to vote in their home state precincts."-- Alvin Rabushka
"I’m actually surprised there are as many as 14 Trump voters. They keep quiet, I guess, even around Hoover." -- John H. Cochrane
Perhaps, as A. Rabushka stated, those who are registered to vote in their home state precincts did just that and you overlooked it. If the voting population of the U.S. is about evenly split between Biden and Trump, then either Stanford is an outlier or the greater majority of students are registered to vote in their home state precincts. If the latter, then the data which Rabushka presents is biased towards Biden as a result the censoring of those voters who are registered to vote in their home state precincts.
Either way, the voting pattern at Stanford is immaterial in the larger scheme of things (cf., national primary election returns, and the presidential election later this year).
-----
Diversity? If 75% of the usual residents are brand W, and 12% of the usual residents are brand B, and brand W and brand B are each of uniform quality and capability though not necessarily of equal quality or capability, then the remaining 13% must be composed of a greater variety of brands each in lower proportionate share but each having different degrees of quality and capability from every other brand, in order to obtain a given level of diversity. Ergo, it is not the absolute shares that determine "diversity", but the absolute difference in quality and capability of each brand that produce diversity in a given population, locale, or species. Having 37% of brand B and 50% of brand W, while keeping the total share of all other brands at 13% without changing the number or attributes of each of those other brands does not give rise to an increase in diversity, but it may result in either an increase or decrease in the overall quality or capacity of the population and/or ecology of the space occupied by that population. Does it matter when a student body in one university is all of one brand or of another brand? The answer goes to the purpose of the university and its fit with the larger society in which it resides. In essence, the question does not have a unique optimal answer -- in terms of social welfare in society at large, not only is there no unique optimal answer but the question is ill-posed.
Having read to the end ("Now, does anyone care about the question?") I had to wonder what was the question?
Aha, it is at the top ......
"How much intellectual, political, or ideological diversity is there on college campuses?"
Well, the "answer" says nothing about intellectual diversity.
Neither does it say anything about ideological diversity.
I really don't think it says much about political diversity (or lack thereof) either.
Counting votes for a highly constrained set of options says little about diversity.
YES, I am interested in the answer to the question. While the numbers are exact they do little to uncover the subject matter.
It has been suggested that USA is a one-party state with two right wings. Can we get some information about diversity of ideologies outside of the narrow confines of D vs R ?
AND, I look forward to reading your assessment of the "Orwellian language" that you refer to.
It's Alice in Diversity Land in the Western world now. More 'diversity' = less diversity. 'Diversity' has slithered its way into every corner of our pluralist Western democracies: Vote for a right-of-centre politician or political party (because you want things to move in a conservative direction0? Here's what you get: " Unsurprisingly, neither governmental bureaucracies and quangos nor other civil institutions keep statistics on the political leanings of their employees. But there are clues. Unherd columnist Peter Franklin reflecting on his own experience of working in two UK government departments comments: “How many of the civil servants that most closely serve this Conservative government are actually Leftwing? Well....I would say approximately all of them”. And it’s not just the UK. Research in the US context finds that “the political beliefs of the median federal government employee lie to the left not only of the median Republican, but also the median Democrat”." https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/carry-on-governing
Now, does anyone care about the question? -->How much intellectual, political, or ideological diversity is there on college campuses?
When diversity, as actually sought-out, as implemented, is by race/ethnicity/sexual orientation/gender identity--surface traits--then the institution has embarked on a different path than substantive intellectual, political, or ideological diversity.
In other words, a giant bait n' switch--or rather the fraud of intentional deception--has been perpetrated on the public. Wink, wink, everyone inside the institution is in on it--and they go along to get along.
The championing of "diversity" is public relations and image marketing. It's the Me generation becoming the Look-At-Me generation.
Voters approved raising the top state marginal rate of tax to 14.4% -- what a strong display of virtue signalling! Given how money is wasted in our state and the loss of high earners to other states, I really do not understand why voters continue to pony up for tax increases...
If I recall, the vote to raise the rate to 14.4% was done through another ballot measure. Prop 1 has "no new taxes" explicitly stated. Prop1 redistributes the moneys raised by a millionaires tax increase 20 years ago.
A very interesting article. As I drink my coffee here in the desert of southern Arizona, I will contemplate its significance. The wandering thoughts of an old hermit.
"I’m actually surprised there are as many as 14 Trump voters."
Surely these two precincts aren't all Stanford faculty and students? Perhaps Trump gets his support from some residents who are not faculty or students. Maybe even kitchen staff, custodians, or groundskeepers at Stanford? Or could such people afford to live so close to campus?
My favorite quote when hearing academics wax poetically about diversity is from Thomas Sowell, also a Chicago grad who is at Hoover: "The next time academics tell you how important diversity is, ask them how many Republicans are in their Sociology department."
You wish there was eternal life on earth for people like Thomas Sowell and Milton Friedman.
Bit like the "globally trusted" "impartial" BBC with its 25,000 employees. So how many of them are conservative voters? Does that number get beyond what you can count on two hands?
According to Greg Lukianoff, a survey of the humanities faculties in all American universities, shows 33 voting Democratic for every one voting Republican. More narrowly, in the sociology faculties, 99 vote Democratic for each one who votes Republican. The struggle for free speech and free expression of ideas will be lengthy.
What makes you think that the 33% and 99% are not the consequence of free speech and free expression? Is this not why free speech and free expression are so energetically suppressed, wherever and whenever possible, by those in power?
"Most students are registered to vote in their home state precincts."-- Alvin Rabushka
"I’m actually surprised there are as many as 14 Trump voters. They keep quiet, I guess, even around Hoover." -- John H. Cochrane
Perhaps, as A. Rabushka stated, those who are registered to vote in their home state precincts did just that and you overlooked it. If the voting population of the U.S. is about evenly split between Biden and Trump, then either Stanford is an outlier or the greater majority of students are registered to vote in their home state precincts. If the latter, then the data which Rabushka presents is biased towards Biden as a result the censoring of those voters who are registered to vote in their home state precincts.
Either way, the voting pattern at Stanford is immaterial in the larger scheme of things (cf., national primary election returns, and the presidential election later this year).
-----
Diversity? If 75% of the usual residents are brand W, and 12% of the usual residents are brand B, and brand W and brand B are each of uniform quality and capability though not necessarily of equal quality or capability, then the remaining 13% must be composed of a greater variety of brands each in lower proportionate share but each having different degrees of quality and capability from every other brand, in order to obtain a given level of diversity. Ergo, it is not the absolute shares that determine "diversity", but the absolute difference in quality and capability of each brand that produce diversity in a given population, locale, or species. Having 37% of brand B and 50% of brand W, while keeping the total share of all other brands at 13% without changing the number or attributes of each of those other brands does not give rise to an increase in diversity, but it may result in either an increase or decrease in the overall quality or capacity of the population and/or ecology of the space occupied by that population. Does it matter when a student body in one university is all of one brand or of another brand? The answer goes to the purpose of the university and its fit with the larger society in which it resides. In essence, the question does not have a unique optimal answer -- in terms of social welfare in society at large, not only is there no unique optimal answer but the question is ill-posed.
Having read to the end ("Now, does anyone care about the question?") I had to wonder what was the question?
Aha, it is at the top ......
"How much intellectual, political, or ideological diversity is there on college campuses?"
Well, the "answer" says nothing about intellectual diversity.
Neither does it say anything about ideological diversity.
I really don't think it says much about political diversity (or lack thereof) either.
Counting votes for a highly constrained set of options says little about diversity.
YES, I am interested in the answer to the question. While the numbers are exact they do little to uncover the subject matter.
It has been suggested that USA is a one-party state with two right wings. Can we get some information about diversity of ideologies outside of the narrow confines of D vs R ?
AND, I look forward to reading your assessment of the "Orwellian language" that you refer to.
It's Alice in Diversity Land in the Western world now. More 'diversity' = less diversity. 'Diversity' has slithered its way into every corner of our pluralist Western democracies: Vote for a right-of-centre politician or political party (because you want things to move in a conservative direction0? Here's what you get: " Unsurprisingly, neither governmental bureaucracies and quangos nor other civil institutions keep statistics on the political leanings of their employees. But there are clues. Unherd columnist Peter Franklin reflecting on his own experience of working in two UK government departments comments: “How many of the civil servants that most closely serve this Conservative government are actually Leftwing? Well....I would say approximately all of them”. And it’s not just the UK. Research in the US context finds that “the political beliefs of the median federal government employee lie to the left not only of the median Republican, but also the median Democrat”." https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/carry-on-governing
Now, does anyone care about the question? -->How much intellectual, political, or ideological diversity is there on college campuses?
When diversity, as actually sought-out, as implemented, is by race/ethnicity/sexual orientation/gender identity--surface traits--then the institution has embarked on a different path than substantive intellectual, political, or ideological diversity.
In other words, a giant bait n' switch--or rather the fraud of intentional deception--has been perpetrated on the public. Wink, wink, everyone inside the institution is in on it--and they go along to get along.
The championing of "diversity" is public relations and image marketing. It's the Me generation becoming the Look-At-Me generation.
Voters approved raising the top state marginal rate of tax to 14.4% -- what a strong display of virtue signalling! Given how money is wasted in our state and the loss of high earners to other states, I really do not understand why voters continue to pony up for tax increases...
If I recall, the vote to raise the rate to 14.4% was done through another ballot measure. Prop 1 has "no new taxes" explicitly stated. Prop1 redistributes the moneys raised by a millionaires tax increase 20 years ago.
From a Booth / GSB Chicago grad 1985 ... the survey obviously missed including "none of the above."
A very interesting article. As I drink my coffee here in the desert of southern Arizona, I will contemplate its significance. The wandering thoughts of an old hermit.
"I’m actually surprised there are as many as 14 Trump voters."
Surely these two precincts aren't all Stanford faculty and students? Perhaps Trump gets his support from some residents who are not faculty or students. Maybe even kitchen staff, custodians, or groundskeepers at Stanford? Or could such people afford to live so close to campus?