Hot on Quora: What is the simplest way to differentiate between a conservative and a liberal?

"Travis" by John C. Drew,
Ph.D. Oil on canvas, 11" x 14".

The easiest tool I use for differentiation of conservatives from liberals is to ask whether they think people are weak or strong. Conservatives see people as strong individuals who can figure things out, make their own way, and create a good life for themselves. Liberals tend to see people as weak and incapable of doing much without the help of government, particularly the federal government. Most of the popular differences between conservatives and liberals easily breakdown between a conflict between seeing people as generally capable or incapable.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Stockholm Syndrome? Two Profs Insist Academia is OK for Nice and Quiet Conservatives

I was startled to read a recent opinion article in the Washington Post by Jon A. Shields and Joshua M. Dunn, Sr., called "Forget what the right says: Academia isn't so bad for conservative professors." 

Shields is associate professor of government at Claremont McKenna College and coauthor, with Dunn, of "Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University." Dunn is associate professor of political science at the University of Colorado—Colorado Spring.

The part of their article that ticked me off the most was the idea that we should be encouraged that conservatives can survive in the academic world if they learn to keep their conservatism as secret until they obtain tenure:

First, conservative professors are not helpless victims -- they have become quite skilled at navigating the progressive university. About a third of the professors we interviewed said they concealed their politics prior to earning tenure. Of course, being in the closet is not easy. (One particularly distressed professor told us: "It is dangerous to even think [a conservative thought] when I'm on campus, because it might come out of my mouth.") But it's also a temporary hardship, since nearly all the conservatives whom we interviewed planned to emerge from the ivory tower's shadows after gaining tenure. Once tenured, conservatives are free to express their politics and publish research that reflects right-wing interests and perspectives. As one put it to us: "I don't mind causing trouble now."

As far as I'm concerned, this is an unacceptable reaction to a vicious, profound discrimination against conservative scholars. 

I served for three years at an assistant professor in the political science department at Williams College. At the time, I was one of only three registered Republicans on the staff. I keep an eye on the college and contribute to two of the websites associated with the college that are okay with freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Here are links to two articles regarding my story.

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/24821/

http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6956

I have never gotten over the way my career as a scholar was gravely wounded due to affirmative action. I am especially bitter about how my doctoral dissertation was belittled by the political science department at Williams College. I developed my thesis while living in poverty, working as a gardener, and surviving without health insurance. 

I’m still immensely proud of it. 

It hurts me to think of all the young conservative professors who are being harmed by our college and university system. There has to be a better way to confront the dominance of the hard left in our college and university system than simply telling young conservatives to be nice and shut up. It is hard to do both when you are confronting a profound level of injustice. 

For some great commentary on this story from another source, I recommend this article by David Henderson called "Academic Conservatives and Survivor Bias." My experience rings true with Henderson's comments that conservatives need to outperform their liberal colleagues in terms of publishing, but the ability to publish is limited by the liberal bias of the journals controlled by the liberals. 

I found this to be a no-win situation and I quickly left to find higher paying work in environments with less outright discrimination. Here's an article from the Williams Record back in January 1989 which captured my mood at the time. See, https://ia802705.us.archive.org/zipview.php?zip=/14/items/thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a/thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a_pdf.zip&file=thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a_pdf/thewilliamsrecord_vol101b_103a_0284.pdf

This article, of course, reflects my thoughts prior to knowing that my dissertation would win national recognition from the American Political Science Association that summer or that it would be easily published as part of an edited book - almost exactly as I wrote it -- about seven years later. The publisher, Praeger, also published One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch by Alexander Solzhenitsyn.

Nevertheless, I have received some very friendly e-mails from both Dunn and Shields since I drafted this article. My gut feeling is that they needed to play up the cooperation with liberals angle to help get their research published and then the Washington Post distorted their true views to provoke a reaction from their audience. (I guess that worked on me.) I'm looking forward to visiting with Shields sometime soon and sharing my story with him. 

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Censored Again: Dr. Drew Banned by 1kthomas and Liberal Fascists at Ephblog

EphBlog has no official connection to Williams College. 

Here is a great exchange that was apparently censored by one of the folks over at http://www.ephblog.com/  I imagine that the Dr. Drew fans paying attention to that site will be curious to see what information is currently being censored.  It starts with one of the editors, 1kenthomas, adding his "Potential Hate Speech" warning to the speech I gave this week at the Capistrano Republican Women Federated on April 20, 2011.  I thought my former students at Williams College and others would be interested to see it.  This is where the fun begins. 

71. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

===== POTENTIAL HATE SPEECH / FRINGE / TROLL WARNING =====

Here’s the YouTube video showing my recent speech on young Obama’s extremist revolutionary perspective at the San Juan Capistrano Republican Women Federated meeting on April 20, 2011. See, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81bhSQo_44E&feature=BFp&list=WL61A573845C692CF3&index=1 If I was still teaching political science at Williams College, then I think this YouTube would be quite exciting to the undergrad students.

===== END WARNING =================[93kwt]===

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 2:20 pm

72. kthomas says:

@John C. Drew, Ph.D.:

The biblical names index shows both “Stanley” (as per ‘Stanleigh’) and “Anne” as historical gendered female, though “Stanley” (per Stanly) has been primarily used for males in the 20th century. Otherwise, you’re engaged in a witch hunt and I’m not going to condescend to treat that witch hunt as anything but what it is.

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 2:58 pm

73.frank uible says:

You careerist, type A, over-achievers, when are you going to learn that lazy is good?

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 3:45 pm

74. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

=== WARNING: FRINGE IDEAS, POTENTIALLY RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ===========

LOL Really, I don’t know how anyone can take left seriously any more. :-) I’ve never really been attacked for “potential hate speech” before. LOL. (I’m laughing so hard I have tears in my eyes right now.) For the video tape of my recent speech, along with my commentary, please see http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2010/08/no-more-keys-for-you-president-junks.html

Also, notice the applause for my wife and for her bravery in getting out the truth about young Obama’s extremist ideology at 11:00 minutes into the YouTube video.

=== END WARNING =================[93kwt]==

Synopsis: “Closet Muslim” meme

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 9:27 pm

75. kthomas says:

WRT John C. Drew,

I’m not attacking anyone. Various individuals have expressed concerns about your postings, and I’m merely applying the best descriptive label I can to let people sort, at this point.

By ‘potential,’ I mean that your postings may potentially be considered hate speech, as I understand the articulation of that (admittedly questionable) term.

There are, of course, twenty-some other odd editors here, any of whom who can choose (wiki-style) to contradict me.

Otherwise, John, I don’t intent to deny you a forum at this point, but in my book, you look like a loon and quack like a loon, and are being treated as such :)

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 9:37 pm

76. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

@ #75 kthomas

Please… I’ve never even heard of “potential hate speech” before and your even sillier “potential religious hate speech” label is really causing me to split my sides with laughter.

The last time I looked, my Republican friends took over the U.S. House of Representatives. My take on Obama has appeared in at least four major publications since 2011.

As you may know, I’m a published author, and award-winning political scientist and a former Williams professor. I’m also a contributor at American Thinker and David Horowitz’s News Real Blog Site. I think it is fair to say that your silliness marks you as part of the cutting edge of what normal people think of as “liberal fascism.” See, http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html

[NOTE: Edited to remove editorial bolds / misuse of blockquote / bad behavior by JCD. --93kwt]

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:21 am

77. whileback says:

a neocon goes into a bar and says ‘i want 15 shots of your best whisky’. so the bartender lines them up and the neocon starts pounding them down.

the bartender says ‘whoa, slow down’. the neocon says ‘you’d drink this fast too if you had what i’ve got’. the bartender says ‘what do you have?’ the neocon says ‘a dollar’.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:24 am

78. kthomas says:

@John C. Drew, Ph.D.:

You’re not an editor on EphBlog. I don’t care who or what you are anywhere else, but you’re just a passer-by here– we’re not equals in this forum in terms of privileges and you need to learn and play by our rules.

Don’t do what you just did. Got it?

ReplyApril 22nd, 2011 at 12:28 am

79. kthomas says:

@whileback:

Thanks. Now I’ve had a laugh :)

Back to dealing with the AWS outage caused by SkyNet.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:37 am

80. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

=== WARNING: PARODY OF LIBERAL SILLINESS – REALLY VERY FUNNY…LIKE MONTY PYTHON===

Please… kthomas. You are over the top silly right now.

It makes me grin to think that your ego is so fragile and that you think my comments regarding President Obama’s ideology and cultural background are so important that they demand that you take righteous action – right way – to prevent me from making fun of your silliness through imitating your use of bold and blockquote features of this website. Please… LOL

I can’t believe you have time for this sort of controlling, plainly aberrant behavior.

I wish someone from FOX News was watching this exchange right now. Your implied threat of your mysterious status as a high ranking government official is particularly bizarre.

It is a good example of why giving liberals just a little, itty bit of power rapidly turns them into scary, even dangerous people. You are behaving like a liberal fascist. I can’t believe, for example, that you are making up two new categories in the field of “potential” hate speech simply because you are too lazy to defend your outright censorship of my comments.

You should read A Conflict of Visions by Thomas Sowell. FYI: I’m also an appointed member of the Orange County Republican Central Committee. I’m sure that an extremely important diplomat – like you – certainly understands the meaning of “appointed” when it comes to credibility in the real world.
=== END WARNING ===

Synopsis: “POTENTIALLY BEAUTIFUL EXAMPLE OF LIBERAL FACSISM” Meme

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:58 am

81. kthomas says:

I have moved a(nother) comment by JCD to “pending” status, largely without reading it. JCD seems to want to engage in a flame war or something. The comment will be restored by tomorrow unless another editor sees fit.

I plan to change any other incendiary comments from JCD tonight to “pending”, without further notice.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 1:01 am

82. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

=== WARNING: LIBERALS CAUSE UNCONTROLLABLE LAUGHTER ===
One of the cool things about this blog site is that it provides a lot of us with ammunition for the upcoming Presidential campaign regarding how dangerous it is to have liberals in power. They are, quite frankly, a threat to freedom of speech. My wife and I have been willing to give our lives – and to risk our business – to get the word out about my face-to-face observations of young Barack Obama’s extremist Marxist ideology. I thought kthomas’s invention of two new categories of “potential” hate speech – as a tool to discredit me in public – was over the top silly tonight.
=== END WARNING: John Clayton Drew, Ph.D. ===

Synopsis: “CAN’T TAKE A PUNCH” Meme
Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 1:47 am

83. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

=== WARNING: DR. DREW EXPLAINS HOW LIBERALS ARE GETTING SNIPPY UNDER PRESSURE ===

Like kthomas, President Obama is also getting “snippy” under the stress of Democrat party failure. See, http://www.ketknbc.com/news/president-obama-gets-snippy

=== THIS CONCLUDES YOUR SNIPPY LIBERAL WARNING ===

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 2:49 am

84. frank uible says:

Book burning – sieg heil!

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 6:43 am

85. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

As they say, liberal fascism is alive and well…complete with demeaning others and censoring it’s independent and conservative opponents. On my Anonymous Political Scientist blog site, liberals can post their work without interference. Then, conservative ideology teaches me the value of freedom of speech. Snippy people are dangerous…if they are given just a little bit of power.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:52 am

86. frank uible says:

Ya wohl, mein Fuhrer!

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:26 pm

87. kthomas says:

Ya nerozumim nemetzcy, dobje pritelkine.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:28 pm

88. kthomas says:

Dear John C. Drew,

I have given you a wide leeway in face of objections of others, and in fact in the face of PO-ing a great deal of others on this forum.

Any restrictions you face are not content-based but based on the quality and nature of the material you post, and the behaviors you engage in.

In particular, you posted links to your “work” which suggests that Barack Obama’s mother is … something dark, shall we say… because one of her names is, in your rather uninformed opinion, typically “male.”

If that’s not “demeaning others” (for non-substantive reasons), I don’t know what is.

I did not censor this piece of material, but I did mark it in a way that our visitors might identify clearly, as, among other things, outside our norm.

That seems fair to me, though since we are a collectively edited site, other editors are free to express objections or take contrary actions.

You then began to engage in a childish game of tit-for-tat. Well, we’re not going to play such games, if for no other reason than I am not amused by them.

I hope this provides some explanation, insomuch as I am not seeking your understanding or consent. This is likely to be the final explanation you receive.

K

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:51 pm

89.frank uible says:

Rest easy Williams basketball fans. Mike Maker has been overlooked by Princeton in its search for a new head basketball coach.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 7:16 pm

90. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

#88 kthomas

I’m sorry, but your last comment has caused me to think that you are seriously mentally ill. If you persist in this behavior, I’m going to put you in the same classification as “jeffz” – someone it is not fair for me to argue with…

To any normal person, naming your daughter “Stanley” is a sign of dysfunction in a household. As one of the few political scientists in the nation who has also taught courses on child abuse and neglect, I think you are dangerously out of touch with reality if you sincerely believe my comments on this aberrant, deviant behavior by Obama’s grandparents is, in any way, hate speech.

===WARNING HARSH WORDS FROM DR. DREW==FYI: There is no such thing as “potential” hate speech.===DR. DREW’S HARSH WORDS ARE NOW OVER===

Your suggestion that centuries ago some girls were named “Stanley” strikes me as plainly silly and beside the point. I wish you had been in one of my child abuse and neglect classes while I taught through the political science department at Williams in the mid-1980s. You would better understand the implications of Dunham’s cruel decision to name their daughter after her father without regard for the damage this would do to her life and her mental health.

As far as I can tell, all the comments that you have blocked from me are focused on making fun of your silly, snippy behavior last night. In these posts, I’m ripping up your pretentious, self-importance and the sheer nonsense that your cloak in politically correct jargon. What a joke! You don’t even post here under your own name. I feel sorry for the people around you who put up with you snippy behavior and what we used to call – at Opera Pacific – ‘queening out.”

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 8:58 pm

91. kthomas says:

I have quaranteened another comment by our favorite Ph.Dud. No further notice of quaranteened comments from this source will be given tonight.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 9:23 pm

92. frank uible says:

Why are EphBlog editors necessary or desirable?

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:10 pm

93. kthomas says:

@frank uible:

Roughly, and not wanting to go into it: it’s like a ship, it’s how 99 out of 100 successful forums work, and thus, is how the whole software package (admittedly not “best in breed”) is set up. Or: the entire history of online forums says moderation is necessary, lack of moderation leads to pit-dom.

Our particular form, is of course not ideal, but it’s how we run.

You may best understand JCD’s current status as “twerp.”

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:13 pm

94.frank uible says:

I hold no brief for Drew (that’s his job), but I believe that I’m perfectly capable of self-editing any unedited thing which might appear on EphBlog as I believe most other EphBloggers are.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:35 pm

95. frank uible says:

unedited.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:38 pm

96. whileback says:

there are way worse ones than this one as far as censorship goes.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 11:24 pm

97. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

===WARNING HARSH WORDS FROM DR. DREW==FYI: It’s not cool, in America, to pretend to be an aristocrat.===DR. DREW’S HARSH WORDS ARE NOW OVER===

I’m really amazed at kthomas’s behavior. I think when, if ever, my comments are released, objective NYT reporters will be amazed at this example of pure liberal childishness.

What is particularly funny to me right now is kthomas’s aristrocratic language – reminding me that I’m not his equal on this forum :-) – or the really funny, “I’m not amused” comments. LOL This is a perfect example of everything people find frightening about liberals.

I’m grateful that I have my own website and my own access to the public through American Thinker and David Horowitz’s News Real Blog Site. This is a bizarre episode in my life. I give a well-received speech to one of the top Republican organizations in the nation and enjoy tremendous applause. Here, however, the exact same talk is given the bizarre label of “potential” hate speech. This is a fitting reminder of how sick, mentally ill and dangerous liberals have become to freedom of speech. In the current political climate, liberals are increasingly dangerous to the cause of liberty.

===WARNING MORE HARSH WORDS FROM DR. DREW==FYI: There is no such thing as “potential” hate speech.===DR. DREW’S HARSH WORDS ARE NOW OVER===

Sadly, in a divided nation, the real "hate speech" is the censorship and hostility directed at young, white, male and female conservative students.  As this censored exchange demonstrates, there is little sense of humor, or reality, among the liberals like Kenneth Thomas who think they know better than the rest of us what is the right course for our nation.  Standing up to these bullies is becoming an important part of protecting our freedom and liberty. 

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.