Liberal Academe

My friend Marie showcases a study purporting to explain why so many academics are liberals:

A recently released study ... concludes that 43 percent of the political gap between academics and a random population sample can be attributed to four factors more common among academics: 1)high levels of educational attainment; 2) disparity between levels of educational attainment and income; 3) self-identification as Jewish, non-religious, or a member of a faith that is not theologically conservative Protestant; and 4) high tolerance for controversial ideas.

The authors of the study, Neil Gross and Ethan Fosse [also] see intellectuals as defined by "possession of high levels of cultural capital and moderate levels of economic capital." [French Sociologist Pierre] Bordieu asserts that this structure shapes intellectuals' political views. ".... Deprived of economic success relative to those in the world of commerce, intellectuals are less likely to be invested in preserving the socioeconomic order, may turn toward redistributionist policies in hopes of reducing perceived status inconsistency, and may embrace unconventional social or political views in order to distinguish themselves culturally from the business classes."...

A whole bunch of thoughts. First, as to educational attainment and income, two points: one, I'd say that professors are on the whole pretty well paid. They can envy their former roommates who went into investment banking, but we all envy somebody. I suspect the vast majority of profs enjoy family incomes above the national average, with intangibles to boot. Second, the proponents may have forgotten that the taste for "redistributionist policies" is almost inverse to actual income. The richest Congressional districts in the country--Manhattan Upper West Side, West LA--are among the most "redistributionist;" the poorest--Eastern Kentucky, Western Kansas and Nebraska--are somewhere to the right of Ivanhoe.

And what's this stuff about "high tolerance for controversial ideas?" When was the last time anyone spotted a controversial idea around a faculty lounge? My impression is that virtually every faculty homogenizes inside two tenths of a decimal point on a 10-point scale. I should think this would be true independent of your position on the political spectrum: you'd never mistake Chicago for Yale, but it would be hard to mistake either for anybody else.

Finally, I trust the authors of the study recognized that they can sustain their case if at all only within the humanities and social scientists. The hard scientists are by almost any measure still a pretty conservative bunch. Come to think of it, I wonder if the hard scientists might show actually a broader "tolerance for controversial ideas" than their colleagues in the lib arts?

H/T John for the pointer.

Afterthought: I guess I'd agree that economists are special. They tend to be secular, wet on social issues (gay marriage, dope-smoking, etc.). But they believe in a lot of things that the standard liberal agenda does not embrace--markets, lower trade barriers. Yes, even the "liberal" economists. So I don't think they are on this chart at all.