By Pushpa Iyer and Jason Buchanan
We truly appreciate the time and effort that each of you put into reading, answering, and commenting on our interactive section “Reflection and Response.” We enjoy the interactions and feel that with each issue the engagement grows in depth if not always with numbers.
Look out for our next poll on the topic of Safe Spaces to let us know your perspective. Click here to read about the topic, and here to take the poll.
Here we report on our most recent survey on the topic of Conservative Voices in Academia. We received 148 responses to the survey with comments to help illuminate our collective understanding of the representation of conservative voices at MIIS.
Our first question was, “Do you think conservative ideas and voices are included at MIIS?” 23.65% of our community members said that such voices are included, and 37.16% disagreed. The plurality of responses (39.19%) was unsure.
When asked if respondents liked learning or teaching in a classroom that represented a variety of ideological differences (including conservative and Republican ones), a majority answered affirmatively (64.19%). 6.08% of respondents answered “No,” indicating they did not like learning or teaching in a representative environment. However, 29.73% of respondents were unsure.
The last question asked respondents whether they had restricted themselves from expressing a conservative point of view at MIIS because of fear of retribution or a negative reaction. 41.89% answered no, and 35.81% responded yes—that they had restricted their speech for fear of backlash. An additional 22.30% responded that this statement wasn’t applicable in their situation.
The submitted comments further elucidate community feelings and understanding of conservative voices at MIIS. Responses were fairly varied. Some of the recurring themes from these comments can be found below.
MIIS, and academia in general, has a liberal bias
There was almost a sense of resignation from some of the respondents who perceive that academia in general, and not just MIIS, had a liberal bias. Respondents had a variety of questions: were there efforts made to hire conservative faculty? Do faculty encourage and present conservatives views (from some comments it seemed few faculty balance out different perspectives)? Were conservative approaches encouraged in the classroom? In this article, Chris Mooney says that while it is true that academia may have a liberal bias, the question should be: why is such a bias identified? He argues that professors do not indoctrinate, so why would it matter? It matters because we must consider viewpoint diversity, which we explore under the next theme. Respondents referenced forums held on our campus after Donald Trump’s election where conversations did not consider students who identify as Republicans. They argue that when some identities are ignored on campus, it creates fear, isolation, and a feeling of alienation from the broader community.
A desire to have a multiplicity of perspectives in the classroom
The responses to our second question show that a sizeable number of respondents–including those who identified both as faculty and students–want multiple perspectives in the classrooms. Many, who identified themselves as liberals, wrote to say that they would welcome more conservative voices in the classroom and would be able to hear those views respectfully. They chastised those who were intolerant of conservative voices calling their peers hypocritical. One comment that really caught our attention was: “We can be welcoming about so many other identities and walks of life here on campus, yet many in our community are unable or unwilling to entertain conservative ideas as a legitimate topic of conversation.” Indeed, this is something that Rod Dreher argues here and Clay Routledge argues here. Clearly, we must pay attention to viewpoint diversity as an academic institution because, from an inclusion perspective, we have to bring everyone into the conversation. However, it does seem like a stretch to argue that political viewpoint marginalization is the same as the marginalization of various identities. Conservatives do not necessarily experience discrimination and marginalization the same way as those who are oppressed for their race, gender, sexuality, nationality or other identities either on or off-campus. See this article for an example.
Liberal voices are louder at MIIS, leading to self-censorship from conservative students
The large majority of respondents agreed that liberal voices are louder both in sheer number and are more commonly represented in classroom discussions. Some find this potentially problematic: “Something I find disappointing about this campus is the way liberal ideas are communicated to conservative students. It’s unnecessarily aggressive, and sometimes not very well-informed.” Part of the problem, some said, with liberal voices being loud was that there was a lot of self-censorship on the part of conservative students to voice their opinions. Writing for the Washington Post, Jeffrey Adam Sachs presents the perceived fall-out from self-censorship using different studies to substantiate his point in this article. Self-censorship can be really bad for any institution such as ours–it means some perspectives are being stifled. Students feel like they might be punished for speaking their mind or face ostracization or ridicule from peers. On the other hand, self-censorship might not be entirely bad if we wanted to be sensitive to diverse and complex environments; it can, in fact, be healthy to self-censor, according to Sachs.
Wariness of conservative views as they are commonly represented
A number of respondents expressed a certain wariness of the version of conservatism as often expressed in the United States and how that might be presented at MIIS. Many respondents seem to underscore the sentiment that they welcome the expression of conservative viewpoints in the classroom setting, however with caveats. “I am open to discussion and invite views from all sides provided it is not hateful or deliberately offensive.” The underlying factor here is that conservative ideology is perceived to be more likely to present offensive views. One respondent stated that though they could understand how conservative students and faculty may feel marginalized, these opinions do feel harmful. Another expressed reticence at fully accepting conservative views based on personal experience. According to this respondent, conservative views seem “to only value and listen to white, heteronormative, Christian males. Hence, I have a certain ambivalence toward conservative views and opinions, as they often lack space for the perspectives of others.”
Conservatism and liberalism are applied to the individual in a binary
While conservatism and liberalism are treated as opposites, we often apply these same attributes to individuals with no room for nuance, according to some respondents. An individual may express a single conservative opinion and the rest of the community is quick to brand them as “conservative” and assumes this label will apply to the rest of their opinions. An individual may, in fact, be more varied. Yet the overwhelming tendency on campus, according to some, is to otherize these opinions, making it difficult to have more nuanced discussions.
Faculty role in how much conservative voices get represented in the classroom
Not surprisingly, there was a lot of emphasis on how much space faculty provided in MIIS classrooms for conservative perspectives. Some respondents who identified themselves as students felt the atmosphere was established by faculty. They felt that if faculty did not encourage these conversations, there could be no healthy debates. Other respondents mentioned that the nature of their programs, courses, or faculty themselves were why conservative viewpoints were brought into class. Respondents who identified themselves as faculty were certain that they encouraged a diversity of viewpoints. One faculty felt that bringing in diverse viewpoints always generated more conversation–which was a good thing–but that could throw the class off schedule. Another faculty mentioned how incorporating conservative views also generated more discussion and that all students were deeply respectful to each other and to the faculty member. While the ability to create space may remain in the hands of faculty, this article authoritatively argues, based on studies, that faculty do not force their views on students.
Overall, it seems like MIIS is a mixed bag when it comes to how much space is provided for conservative voices on campus. There is evidence of no space, and also of pockets of spaces where conservative voices are encouraged. There are conservative students who practice self-censorship and face discrimination, while there are others who are able to speak up in certain safe spaces. There are liberal students who do not believe conservative viewpoints have the right to be aired at MIIS, especially if they are offensive to our diverse population. There are also others who recognize their own bias against conservative students but are unsure how to go about changing this. There are faculty who provide spaces for–and even bring in–conservative viewpoints, but there are also other faculty who are reticent to make this space for a variety of reasons. The administration is seen as less balanced and is judged primarily by the policies that seem to favor liberal views (for example, respondents mentioned the recent decision to go with a 100% vegan menu at commencement without any discussion). It is not a bad thing that we are a mix of contradictions rather than leaning fully one way or the other. Let’s keep pondering on these responses and continue to brainstorm together on how we would like to move forward (see this article).
