Blogs > Cliopatria > Colorado Conservatives

May 14, 2008

Colorado Conservatives




The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the University of Colorado, seeking to redress its problems with intellectual on diversity on campus, has created a newly endowed professorship in conservative thought and policy.

The move has generated criticism from the left. Poli sci grad student Curtis Bell: "Why set aside money specifically for a conservative? . . . I'd rather see a quality academic than someone paid to have a particular perspective." (There's nothing in the proposal that specifically says a "conservative" has to be hired; and I wonder whether Bell would have offered similar objections to a new endowed chair for a position likely to yield a left-wing hire.) Sophomore Sophomore Marissa Malouff: Students "need to learn about social problems and poverty and the type of things liberal professors are likely to talk about." OK.

But the idea also attacted criticism from some conservatives. George Will: "Like Margaret Mead among the Samoans, they're planning to study conservatives. That's hilarious."

Will's criticism is unfortunate in this instance. Few (outside the academy, anyway) would deny that a Tier One research university should have at least one person on staff who specializes in understanding conservative thought or the history or implementation of conservative policy options.

Ideally, of course, many such figures would be hired in the normal personnel process. But that doesn't seem to be happening, at Colorado or most major universities, as humanities and (some) social science departments redefine lines along lines of race, class, and gender; and away from the sort of questions to be explored by the Colorado position. Whether or not a political conservative is ultimately hired should be irrelevant; the pedagogical diversity that the new Colorado position will bring is welcome.



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Oscar Chamberlain - 5/14/2008

I'm serious.

You say you think it good to hire someone someone who studies conservative policy options. I would agree. But even if it is not written in to the qualifications for obtaining the chair, the fact that it is endowed for this purpose suggests a desire for something more specific than someone who writes books about recent politics with "conservative" in the title.

It suggests that there is a definition--or at least a range of definitions--for conservative thought. Is so, how will that range be determined?

Should the hiring committee look for scholars who reflect the ideas of the Heritage Foundation? Or the CATO Institute? Or the American Enterprise Institute?

Can the scholar be a Marxist who is intrigued by conservatism? Or does it need to be someone who shares those values--whatever they are--as well as studies them?

Or should the chair simply be seen as a way to employ an apostle from the Republicans and define conservatism according to their most recent campaign platform? (I would love to see the Libertarian response to that!)

Yes greater intellectual diversity can be good, but as been stated here before, and I believe by you, it is very very hard to mandate from above.


Alan Allport - 5/14/2008

I wonder whether Bell would have offered similar objections to a new endowed chair for a position likely to yield a left-wing hire.

Since you have absolutely no idea, what is the point of this ad hominem speculation?