well yes, of course all college professors are going to be liberal in their own beliefs. so what? that's what higher-education has always been, historically:
LIBERAL HUMANIST. that's its over-arching ideology. it's the 'live and let live' ethos it aims to instill: big-picture thinking, historical knowledge, wisdom, tolerance, equality, empathy, etc. this is what universities are all about. of COURSE most professors are going to identify themselves as being broadly liberal. however there's a massive fucking gap between a professor identifying as 'liberal' in political belief/outlook, and professors using their lecture halls as pulpits from which to inculcate youth in OMG LIBERAL DOCTRINE. a massive gap. and yes, i know 'liberal' is used differently in america: but here you are doing exactly the thing where you semantically blur and confuse the two definitions. being a 'liberal thinker' (probably teaching a 'liberal arts' education, meanwhile) does not mean you are politically indoctrinating your students to think a certain way. only in the most vaguest sense do university educations peddle an 'ideology', and that's a paradoxical 'ideology' of open-mindedness and critical consideration.
it's the professors that outwardly identify themselves as 'democrat/republican' that worry me far more than liberals. the two-party puppets are at least putting their horses into a race, figuratively speaking. liberalism in the broad sense is far more on-the-fence and chin-stroking than the two parties, who each fervently develop their own internal doctrines and 'schools' of thought. you never get a 'school' of liberals like you get a 'neo-con' school - be it for economics, poli-sci, or even fiction writing.
who would you rather have teaching a 101 class on marxism, or feminism, or evolution? a liberal, or a dyed-in-the-wool republican? think about it.
Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-03-01 09:07:14)