We desperately need more ideological diversity, but how we talk about viewpoint diversity obfuscates more than it illuminates. Many supposedly left-wing institutions DO have both conservative and liberal factions, but they're quarantined to different spheres of the operation. 2/
Take academia as an example, the supposed epicenter of left-wing radicalism. It is not actually true that elite academia lacks viewpoint diversity. Certain public-facing elements of the university (e.g., humanities departments, students) are openly and loudly progressive. 3/
However, the real power-centers of the universities – economics departments, business schools, administration – are neoliberal and reactionary. @leifweatherby has argued that there's actually a good case to be made that universities are fundamentally conservative enterprises. 4/
@leifweatherby We might think of this split within elite institutions as front-of-house versus back-of-house. The public-facing parts of these institutions – say, the tweedy English department – are radical, so the public (and some less discerning faculty) believe the INSTITUTION is radical 5/
@leifweatherby Meanwhile, the back-of-house parts of the university – say, the folks who make decisions about tuition hikes, or whether to prioritize tenure lines or temporary hires – are hotbeds of market fundamentalism. The university is viewed as a hedge-fund-meets-job-training-facility. 6/
@leifweatherby The real ideology of elite academia and elite media is not left-wing, it's an unholy matrimony of front-of-house, extremist progressivism with back-of-house extremist neoliberalism. I've called this left-right hybrid ideology "corporate radicalism." 7/ theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
@leifweatherby I agree that viewpoint diversity matters. Political polarization isn't just bad for our country, it's bad for our ideas. We exist in ideologically frictionless siloes, quarantined within different segments of institutions where bad ideas find no resistance, only accelerant. 8/
@leifweatherby I'm not just talking about the humanities. Yes, I think English departments would be more interesting if they had a conservative and Marxist or two, rather than being ruled by shitlibs. But I'm also talking about viewpoint diversity among people who control the purse-strings. 9/
@leifweatherby The problem is that it's not very obvious how we ideologically de-stratify elite academic and media institutions. I think conservatives like to fantasize that the liberals gate-keep conservatives out of the academy and glossy magazines, but I don't think that's quite true. 10/
@leifweatherby Sure, I know plenty of academics who would absolutely refuse to hire a conservative professor. And I am sure Boards of Trustees are not chomping at the bit to hire socialist college presidents. I've never met a Marxist dean. But practically speaking, that's beside the point. 11/
@leifweatherby Even if the English department WANTED to hire a conservative scholar of Wallace Stevens, or whatever, where exactly are they supposed to find one? So much of this is driven not by gatekeeping, but by selection-bias and feedback loops that are not easy to change or redirect. 12/
@leifweatherby The same is true of journalism or the glossy magazines. Is there gate-keeping? I'm sure. I'm also sure that a huge reason there aren't more conservatives in glossy magazines is because most intellectually-minded conservatives are not signing up to spend their 20s - 30s broke. 13/
@Tyler_A_Harper @leifweatherby I would think that someone who's specialty is Wallace Stevens is more likely to be conservative given his dead white man status.
@Tyler_A_Harper @leifweatherby It's absolutely a feedback loop. There are countless right-of-center English students who have learned that their point of view will earn them Bs, while parroting views they don't agree with will get them As.
@Tyler_A_Harper @leifweatherby In many stem careers this same so called "pipeline problem" exists it just affects a different group of people than universities. I think you are very right but we can't just give up because it is hard either in the private sector or in academia.