Says David Blaska, linking to "The Closing of the Campus Mind" at The Weekly Standard.
I see that, in the comments, a couple people name me and that Larry Kaufmann says: "I'm not sure Ann Althouse qualifies." I agree with Larry. There's no way the University of Wisconsin deserves credit for having "conservatives" by having me. I support abortion rights and gay rights (and have for the entire 30 years I've been on campus). I've never denounced affirmative action. I've written articles in the feminist genre. What is supposed to be conservative about me other than that I have a blog where I take conservative arguments seriously and put them up for discussion and don't kick out the right wingers in the comments but only needle them with questions? To count me as a UW conservative would be to further acknowledge the dominance of the left: I irk them, so I must be what they don't like.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
87 comments:
Conservative women aren't conservative. They're women.
Did you come here to be needled?
Some people need to be needed, and some people need to be needled.
You're not a self-righteous, disingenuous scold. That makes you conservative, I guess.
Another question might be name 5 principled liberal professors at UW-Madison. Maybe you would be on that list, at least conservatives would probably nominate you.
Again, it's amazing that the same people who claim that having an insufficient number of minorities is proof of racism feel that having basically one conservative on campus is OK because, as usual, "conservatives don't want to do the job"
Because a job with good pay, insanely good job security, and instant respect is one NOBODY would want.
People who needle people are the luckiest people in the world.
Do you have any family lore about a great-great-grandparent who was a conservative? I know that counts for some other types of affirmative action.
People who need to needle.
You're polite and open-minded enough to allow authentic freedom of expression, even when you disagree. That makes you liberal in the classic, but not the modern, sense. Like Dershowitz, IMO. Consider it a compliment.
Sounds like a needle exchange program is needed.
Conservatives are too dumb to get teaching jobs.
I appreciate the forum BTW it helps me avoid the insular cocoon of the like-minded. Too easy to stay where it's safe an everyone agrees.
sparrow said...
Too easy to stay where it's safe an everyone agrees.
I agree.
You are wrong, Professor.
You are picky about language and logical reasoning and may be suspected of not grading on a curve.
Obviously not one of theirs, and if you are not with them, you are against them, so, a conservative you are.
Ann, the commenters who refer to you as a conservative are merely reflecting that you do not march in lock step with the program in all facets and in all pronouncements. You are being othered.
"What is supposed to be conservative about me"
You may not consider yourself "conservative", but your blog is being sold to advertisers as not just conservative, but one of the "top conservative blogs".
In reality, you don't seem to be either liberal nor conservative, rather you just happily go along with whatever crowd is willing to pay you - in either attention or cold hard cash.
Problem is, we have let the liberals define what a conservative is. To me, a conservative is someone who is willing to test ideas with experience, and is unwilling to embrace popular wisdom without skeptical inquiry. As in the case of the climate debate, the left will try to brand skepticism as irrational denial or opposition.
The orthodoxy of the academic world is discouraging. I use that description in a literal sense. The conformist pressure of academic orthodoxy, which wields power through hiring and tenure decisions, is hard to resist openly without steadfast courage.
In significant part campus liberalism is a fashion statement, but academia is not as fluid as popular culture. Change in fashion is harder to come by.
I've seen the needle
and the damage done
Risk looking stupid it's part of the fun
But every comment's
like a setting sun.
I irk them, so I must be what they don't like.
Sounds about right. BTW, supporting gay rights does not make you "not conservative." Gay rights is a young people's issue, liberals are lying when they claim it's a left-wing issue.
Perhaps labeling herself as a "right wing blogger" is why so many people believe Ann to be more conservative rather than liberal.
A by-the-book conservative or by-the-book liberal site wouldn't put up with a Laslo. So therefore.
I am the needle in the stack of pancakes.
I am Laslo.
David, I very much like Chesterton's definition. In short, a liberal is someone who, upon finding a fence blocking the road, immediately sets about taking it down. A conservative is someone who, upon finding a fence blocking the road, first tries to find out why the fence is there. Only after determining its purpose does he attempt a solution.
I haven't written in the feminist genre, but support gay rights but not with the word marriage, and think affirmative action oppresses the ones advantaged by it, but I'm a conservative.
There's long been a fiscal and social conservative divide, and a more subtle sociological conservative fragment that thinks that things don't work the way you think, and most often backwards from the way you think. This fragment disagrees with everybody but is still conservative.
Someday I will do a feminist genre satire, if it's still possible to satirize.
Vicki Hearne, James Thurber, for example, do a real feminist genre.
It's most often dismissed as misogyny.
"They irk me, so I must be what they don't like."
FIFY
Voting for Obama was proof Althouse is a woman.
It's the estrogen test.
Is this the thread that needles?
Does he mean Professors who in their private life are Conservatives, vote Republican, etc etc (How would we know this?) or does he mean Professors who teach a Right-of-center Theory?
Estrogen defeats smart.
I would imagine you, Althouse, are among the five conservative professors at UW-Madison. Which would make you a liberal in the classic sense. Progressives have moved past classical liberalism to a more pragmatic view of the world. The old tenets of liberalism are tools which can be used or not used depending on the job at hand. Free speech, for example, is sacred to a true liberal. Not so much to a Progressive.
A classic liberal always struggled with emotion overtaking reason. Emotion won with most.
I am not sure who is more Liberal, Ann Althouse or Mickey Kaus (I would also put Megan McArdle in this small group, but she seems to tilt more libertarian than Liberal/Conservative), but I wish more were like them in that they are at least polite towards others they don't agree with. I suppose that would be the difference between Liberal and Leftist. The Liberal at least has some of the classical tolerance for discussion that is slammed by leftist orthodoxy.
When this sort of issue comes up, I find myself asking 'what do you mean by "conservative"?'
Seriously, I do not consider myself conservative, but others do. I am not in need(le) of a label. Ask me my opinion on a specific subject, if I have one I'll give it.
You can throw out a dictionary definition and stand on that, but will that really apply in even a majority of instances? It almost seems as though you get defined as conservative by defining what you are NOT. Not for gay marriage? Conservative. Not pro-abortion? Conservative. And yet I am repeatedly labeled conservative by people who know me much better than any of you, though I am in favor of gay marriage (as well as polygamy, but that's just me being intellectually consistent) and have no firm opinion on abortion.
AA I think you are viewed as conservative because it feels like 95 per cent of the comments posted on your blog are conservative, usually stridently conservative, yet they're not attacking you.
Remember that many of the same folks who think Althouse is "conservative" thinks that David Brooks is the head fascist who speaks for all us teabaggers.
"What is supposed to be conservative about me other than that I have a blog where I take conservative arguments seriously and put them up for discussion and don't kick out the right wingers in the comments but only needle them with questions? To count me as a UW conservative would be to further acknowledge the dominance of the left: I irk them, so I must be what they don't like."
Anything to the right of the Left is conservative. Whether or not you "acknowledge" that is irrelevant. Deal with it.
Of course, those of us who are to your right recognize you are not conservative in any meaningful sense. Because we see the slightly-left-of-center Other more or less as she sees herself, conversation is possible.
I support abortion rights and gay rights (and have for the entire 30 years I've been on campus). I've never denounced affirmative action. I've written articles in the feminist genre. What is supposed to be conservative about me other than that I have a blog where I take conservative arguments seriously and put them up for discussion and don't kick out the right wingers in the comments but only needle them with questions?
Here's the basic problem for you, Professor. You are so used to social pressure to conform coming from the left that you instinctively assume that conservatives must likewise march in lock step on issues. A fiscal conservative (like me, for instance) doesn't much care about abortion rights beyond the notion that abortions ought to be as safe as they are legal. Ergo I am appalled by Kermit Gosnell and the left's knee-jerk support for him. But I think we pay too much in taxes for the services we get and that too much is spent frivolously. To the extent that we are united, we are united by being "othered" by mindless "Progressives."
Tim McGuire, this is why he was Chesterton, and I am not.
I want to know if Laslo 'needles' his students at the School for Scarlett Johansson look-alikes, and whether he feels he deserves praise for doing so.
If conservative means believing that "with God all things are possible," then, yes, Professor Althouse is a conservative professor at UW-Madison.
"They irk me, so I must be what they don't like."
Let it be known that MadisonFella endorses groupthink and the marginalization of any ideological minority.
There are reasons why you attract a conservative comment following. You like to rag on liberals and offer endless excuses for conservatives.
Althouse gets conservative commenters because she hints at reason, just needing a little helpful correction.
It's not obvious what you can do for a leftist blog.
It's all relative.
I think nearly all of us can agree that in the spectrum of Madison Political thinking Althouse is almost off the scale to the right. 2-3 SD at least.
I appreciate principled liberals and principled conservatives who can put forth their views substantively and respectfully.
I like Tom Coburn. I don't like Ted Cruz. I liked Paul Wellstone. I don't like Elizabeth Warren. I like Mitch Daniels. I don't like Mike Pence.
It's tough to find principled people who are substantive and respectful.
Garage:
I understand that you would view criticism of a leftist position as "ragging" on that position. And Althouse has criticized many leftist positions. I would be interested in seeing an example of her making "excuses" for a conservative position, whatever you might mean by "excuses." Endless or otherwise.
I support abortion rights . . .
What can that feel-good phrase possibly mean, absent some specificity? In your view, how many weeks after conception does the right to abort switch to the right to be born?
. . . and gay rights (and have for the entire 30 years I've been on campus)
And what does that equally squishy phrase mean?
. . . I've never denounced affirmative action. Nor explained what, short of denunciation, your view is.
In this post about YOU, we seem to be short on the details that would make all the difference.
Sarge has it right, I think. By UW standards, Ann is probably to the right side of a very leftward-skewed set.
I tell you, it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for [blank] to happen in Althouse's comment section.
What is a University for if it cannot wipe out the really super bad suspected heretics. It is hard to read the University Seal... it seems to say Conservatorum Prohibitorum, which I believe is Latin for On Wisconsin.
Wow. If Althouse counts as "conservative," then the faculty really DOES tilt further left than I thought.
Matthew Sablan said...
Wow. If Althouse counts as "conservative," then the faculty really DOES tilt further left than I thought.
UW 2012 campaign contributions
Obama $109,900
Romney $2,700
The Professor created her commenter problem when she said the only commenter sin was being boring, and knee jerk liberal believers are completely boring, except for you, Garage.
Drill Sgt, you are assuming a normal distribution. :)
UW 2012 campaign contributions
Obama $109,900
Romney $2,700
A fool and his/her money...
What can that feel-good phrase possibly mean, absent some specificity? In your view, how many weeks after conception does the right to abort switch to the right to be born?
I'm not sure Althouse has ever advocated a specific week limit on abortions, but she has said that abortion is the taking of a human life. Though I'm pro-life, I respect the fact that she isn't shying away from the grisly truth of what abortion is.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
"I tell you, it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for [blank] to happen in Althouse's comment section."
The saying was a response to a young rich man who had asked Jesus what he needed to do in order to inherit eternal life. Jesus replied that he should keep the commandments, to which the man stated he had done. Jesus responded, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
If keeping the commandments, obeying the law, and giving to the poor is considered conservative, I'd say she's pretty darn conservative. But perfectly following Jesus is probably more radical than conservative.
Within the spectrum of contemporary academia, taking "conservative" arguments seriously practically makes you a fascist.
It isn't that you take conservative arguments seriously, it is that you also question leftist/liberal/progressive dogma. To not unfailingly follow all the liberal positions by questioning only conservative positions makes you conservative. Well, at least relatively speaking. When I'm in Honduras, I am tall. When I'm in the Netherlands, I am short.
Your sins are that you (1) don't reject conservative arguments outright nor (2) accept all progressive arguments uncritically. For those two sins you shall be called "conservative" and suffer the shunning of the Hive.
Speaking of the Hive, there's Garage, drone in good standing.
She's not conservative? Bwhahahahaha!
"AA I think you are viewed as conservative because it feels like 95 per cent of the comments posted on your blog are conservative, usually stridently conservative, yet they're not attacking you."
By that standard, liberals and lefties have the power to change me into a liberal, just by hanging out here and doing conversation. Why don't thet? I remember when it was left wing to love vivid debate. To me, it's sad.
The Left in modern day American doesn't engage in ideas. They boycott, disrupt speech, protest, show up at brunch counters to lecture patrons, etc., etc.
So, one can argue, that the Hostess here is "functionally" a conservative, because, to her credit, she does engage in ideas. Yes, that is a low standard in the modern world of academia, but we'll take it.
Or, on second thought, maybe we should just grade on a curve.
To me, it's sad.
To me it's something to push back against. Today's "Liberals" are impervious to objective fact and incapable of rational argument. Their weak spot is their utter humorlessness. You poke fun at them and they can't take it.
"By that standard, liberals and lefties have the power to change me into a liberal, just by hanging out here and doing conversation. Why don't thet? I remember when it was left wing to love vivid debate. To me, it's sad."
I'm don't think you're a conservative, so I've been scratching my head to figure out why your commenters trend overwhelmingly very conservative. And face it, most comments are hardly insightful. They're too often variations on the theme of "Today's 'Liberals' are impervious to objective fact and incapable of rational argument. Their weak spot is their utter humorlessness. You poke fun at them and they can't take it." I'm a liberal who can take it. "Sticks and stones . . . " But what's the point?
Ann (please excuse my addressing you in this familiar manner; I know you prefer "Althouse", but the first name seems more appropriate for what I want to say): I have never thought for a moment that you were a conservative. I hadn't really thought about it before this post, but you remind me (I'm a conservative with libertarian tendencies) of my liberal friends with whom I'm able to have good conversations about social and political issues. I love such conversations and I'm sorry I don't have enough opportunities for them, given how scattered we have become. So I like your blog. I even like some of your commenters, although respect for opposing opinions is not a major feature.
Too often, when we get up on stage talking publicly about political and social issues, we all get into a controversialist mode, and certainly it's fun to read comments from people who, for real or just for fun, creatively mock one side or the other of some issue, and those that creatively respond to them. And I don't think that a blog -- any blog -- is the ideal medium to encourage respectful conversation. But it does leak through, from time to time here, and I thank you for that.
Didn't read all the comments but this seems another example of Conquest's law.
Actually, it applies to all three of his laws.
Conquests’s Three Laws of Politics:
1. Everyone is conservative about what he knows best.
2. Any organization not explicitly right-wing sooner or later becomes left wing.
3. The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies .
Never forget that Althouse is an artist who became a law professor. She tries to see things truly. There are not many like her around, unfortunately. I don't know another with that resume.
When this sort of issue comes up, I find myself asking 'what do you mean by "conservative"?'
That's a good tactic. Most liberals I know couldn't define "conservative" if their lives depended on it.
They would bleed out whimpering "racist sexist homophobe?"
@Meade said: "If conservative means believing that 'with God all things are possible,' then, yes, Professor Althouse is a conservative professor at UW-Madison." Well, @Meade, that's not what "conservative" means, but it is what "Christian" means, and that's even worse.
What's always fascinated me about that saying of Jesus [Matthew 19:20, Mark 10:27, Luke 18:27] is this: First, Jesus says "It will be hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven." Then his disciples say, "Then who can be saved?" Clearly, they were thinking that the rich would have an easier time getting into the kingdom than the poor -- presumably because they could afford lots of sacrifices, but also because they didn't need to commit sins (theft, etc.) just to survive. That's what Jesus was responding to when he said "for God all things are possible". Jesus tells us that the rich will have a harder time getting into the Kingdom than the poor, but they can still make it. Even those who have the least hope of saving themselves -- that's us, rich or poor -- can be saved by God.
Even lawprofs.
And their spouses.
"Why don't they? I remember when it was left wing to love vivid debate. To me, it's sad."
Kudos to you for being sad.
But the answer is simple: why debate when you can enjoy power and have what you want?
You enjoy debate. I enjoy debate. But most people just want to have their own views confirmed.
Of course, I'd like to think that free and open debate is the situation in which my views are most likely to prevail.
And face it, most comments are hardly insightful.
Every message board in history says "Hello"
Professor. I don't know if you're liberal or conservative. I visit this blog daily because even if I disagree, I think you're a straight shooter.
You seem more like a truth seeker, and your tone doesn't seem agenda driven or disingenuous.
You are, however, willing to point out and post about the ridiculous. Often about campus culture, hyperbole, and certain feminist issues which I often wonder if it is detrimental to you in Madison or UW.
Cudos.
I am conservative, Christian, support Gay rights, and would not outlaw abortion, but believe it does end a life.
I do belive in the value of Christianity in American Culture. I believe Jesus supported Gay rights, evidenced by his inclusive message in the Gospels, and the array of people,he chose to associate with, and defend.
I also believe Jesus valued women in the manner by which women wish to be valued.
And I don't know what's so bad about all that.
Professor. Can you name five conservative professors at UW?
And if you can, are you willing to 'out' them?
Ann,
I am a somewhat conservative, somewhat libertarian, classical Liberal. I appreciate liberals with an open mind. I appreciate you and what you and your clever sidekick are doing.
I turned down a tenure track position (Psychology) because of increasing political correctness and uniformity of thought in a place where I hoped there would be free exchange of ideas - even the one's that hurt people's tender feelings. It was the right decision.
Your blog is often refreshing, sometimes annoying, but I still visit frequently.
Thanks.
You seem to have some respect for truth and honesty and a dislike of dogma. That makes you old fashioned, a fusty throwback to ancient times. You are immensely conservative by current standards.
Conservatives have flaw, they 'can."
Althouse is number 20 on this list of the top 60 conservative blogs. Below Michelle Malkin but above Power Line.
Ann Althouse has many conservative/libertarian commenters because she does not treat them like dirt. She lets them have their say, usually. She has manners. Manners are not superficial. Manners reflect respect.
For what it's worth,
28.66% of your Twitter followers lean left (dem/green)
and
71.34% lean right (repub/libertarian)
My company has a report coming out soon ranking nearly 2000 political journalists/bloggers by both social influence as well as measuring the partisanship of their follower bases. I note it, even though I doubt it will interest you very much.
I met only one conservative professor when I went to UW in the 80's.
However, I must credit all of the liberal instructors for turning me into a conservative.
rhhardin said...
Voting for Obama was proof Althouse is a woman.
It's the estrogen test.
4/2/15, 1:09 PM
I looked up the origin of the word estrogen, suspecting that it might link with the fertility aspect of Easter. I was wrong, but amused by what I found lurking: link.
I hope that doesn't make any women testy.
Some physicist recently claimed that 90% of what we think we see is an optical illusion. It's like that dress of different colors depending on the light and the cones & rods of the viewers. Against a UW backdrop Althouse appears conservative, especially on Saturday night, but transpose her to a Sunday morning church service and she's the Weather Underground.
We can pretend you are or aren't a conservative, but this post proves you are the most self-absorbed UW professor. And I know Downs (who also pretends he's not a conservative). So that's saying a lot.
Althouse didn't leave the left wing, the left wing left Althouse. I would have used 'liberalism', but I don't feel the left deserves that term anymore whereas Althouse is the authentic embodiment of it.
The real question is: Why do conservatives *accept* you so much more than progressives?
Some people may erroneously consider Althouse conservative because she thinks for herself.
"Some people may erroneously consider Althouse conservative because she thinks for herself."
Yeah, they've mostly abandoned that standard. The Borg shoots out an answer on every question and your only choice is to assimilate utterly or be cast aside. When a new question arises, all must pause for the new talking points to be generated. Hence Garage's usual delay in responding to a new issue.
Interesting that the professor uses only "social" issues as the litmus test for conservatism.That in itself pretty well makes her point.
Post a Comment