Skip to comments.Academia Culpa
Posted on 04/21/2006 9:13:02 AM PDT by JSedreporter
Professors are never more revealing than when they are trying to deny that higher education and those who deliver it have any bias whatsoever. Dr. John Doolittle of American University offered several such insights in a debate with me at the AU campus earlier this month.
Dr. Doolittle pointed out that when he studied at the University of Wisconsin in the early 1970s, I knew for a fact that three professors voted for Richard Nixon. He did not say what happened to the political balance on the university faculty when that Republican trio retired. Moreover, UWI has hundreds of professors on its payroll now and was hardly a Mom and Pop operation then.
Both the professor and members of the audience seemed to take the slim attendance at events such as our debate on academic freedom as a sign that there is scant evidence of a problem. I took an informal poll of my students over the past 48 hours and found that they do not rate this as a problem, Dr. Doolittle said during our debate.
Such a reaction may be superficial at best. I have had students come up to me for years to tell me that they have been the victims of academic abuse but they are afraid to tell their stories because they fear reprisals, State University of New York trustee Candace deRussy said at the Students for Academic Freedom conference three days after the AU debate. They will lose letters of recommendation.
They will get no help from the Office of Career Services. Dr. deRussy spoke from the floor at the SAF conference before taking part in one of the panels.
Back to the AU debate; Dr. Doolittle invoked the name of one of his heroesEdward R. Murrowso I brought up the name of one of the CBS icons targetsUnited States Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, R-Wisconsin. I pointed out that unlike most of the people who have written books about Senator McCarthys 1950s investigations of Soviet penetration of the U. S. government, I have actually read the hearings that the late lawmaker presided over.
The guilt of Annie Lee Moss, who Murrow alleged was a McCarthy victim, was confirmed by the rolls of the Washington, D. C. communist party, I said. Dr. Doolittle did admit that some of the people McCarthy investigated were communists but said; I saw the tape of Senator McCarthy and Annie Lee Moss. He was a bad man.
For good measure, I noted that it was not Senator McCarthy who wanted to publicly name names but that his Democratic detractors who then controlled the upper legislative chamber insisted that he do so. Also, we now know through declassified executive session Senate committee hearings that Sen. McCarthy and his staff went to some lengths to clear those wrongfully accused of communist loyalties.
But dont expect to read about it in history textbooks anytime soon.
Malcolm A. Kline is the executive director of Accuracy in Academia.
Slightly OT, but I've noticed as time goes by and more and more is learned about Sen. McCarthy, the more and more it looks like he may have been right after all, and not the drooling monster that dems paint him to be.
Absolutely. Coulter's book skewered many criticisms of McCarthy and M. Stanton Evans' book when it is published will almost certainly eradicate them. The problem is that so many people have heard he's evil for sooooo long that very few people bother contradicting that image.
I was around when McCarthy was on TV. He was a sinister looking man, with Nixonian five o'clock shadow on his large jowels, and shifty-looking eyes. He looked like a bully.
So, it was not too hard for the media to demonize him. What he looked like had nothing to do with the truth he was telling, but it didn't help. I was taken in at the time myself, although I have always been strongly anti-communist.
It was only years later that the truth of the matter started coming out. And the media continue to suppress the truth, so only people like Freepers who are willing to dig for themselves really understand what happened.
I do not agree. My grandmother and Sen. McCarthy were great friends.
Yes, Ann Coulter deserves a LOT of credit. Not all that many people read even a best-selling book, and in her case it was probably mostly conservatives who read it.
But it has been very noticeable that the left wing press has nearly stopped using McCarthy as its bogey man to beat people over the head with. No more of that Salem Witchcraft Trial nonsense.
WOW! Three (count 'em, three) professors that voted Republican. And over thirty years ago!
We're not biased: Communism IS the real world.
Now pay your taxes, I need a raise.
In those days the MSM ruled...if only we had an Internet then!
Ah Rades, we finally meet a point of great disagreement! I feel that McCarthy, while his goal was noble, made a huge tactical error, and as a result, anti-communism and conservatism in general wound up being viewed with hostility by those who should have known better. Even today, the albatross of McCarthyism gets hung around our necks whenever the mildest criticism of the left is uttered, while communist atrocities continue to be defended on idealistic and ideological grounds. In McCarthy's defence, it was really HUAC which was responsible for the worst excesses of the period, and the behavior of the communists and their apologists was much more reprehensible, even more so today now that we know the facts.
Nope. I agree with you completely. However, he was not a bad man as was suggested earlier. I also think there really were closet communists/traitors.
Even today, the albatross of McCarthyism gets hung around our necks whenever the mildest criticism of the left is uttered, while communist atrocities continue to be defended on idealistic and ideological grounds
Ahhh. Sorry for the misunderstanding!
Enjoy the weekend, my friend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.