How come right wing people don't have their own Harvards?

[Anonymous]

None of the places mentioned really represent what OP is talking about, IMO.

This isn't about traditional fiscal conservatives, ala UChicago; this is about contemporary right-wingers (Trumpsters). I can't think of a major university that really has a significant contingent in support of that ideology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:None of the places mentioned really represent what OP is talking about, IMO.

This isn't about traditional fiscal conservatives, ala UChicago; this is about contemporary right-wingers (Trumpsters). I can't think of a major university that really has a significant contingent in support of that ideology.

Most academics tend to be liberals. It's partly because life-time academics have only a sheltered life experience. Thomas Sowell tells it that he became a Marxist-turned-conservative - not by UChicago education, or even from Milton Friedman - but from his work experience of working for a federal agency one summer.

[Anonymous]

Every top MBA program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford/Cambridge. They don't believe in AA.

And Oxbridge > HPY, Stanford.

Actually, Harvard has taken over in terms of reputation. In the last 15 years, those schools (Oxbridge) have lost a ton of money in terms of endowment. Also, no longer the desirable schools for world leaders.

Isn’t, literally, Malala at Oxford

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford/Cambridge. They don't believe in AA.

And Oxbridge > HPY, Stanford.

Actually, Harvard has taken over in terms of reputation. In the last 15 years, those schools (Oxbridge) have lost a ton of money in terms of endowment. Also, no longer the desirable schools for world leaders.

Isn’t, literally, Malala at Oxford

Oxbridge have something which no Harvard can give. Oxbridge students acquire their British accent from Day 1. Harvard women of the flock to Oxbridge grads the way the Markles of the world flock to Prince Harry. The same way flies flock to cow dung.

Harvard and Oxbridge. No comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Duke, UVA, Chicago.

Add Stanford to that list.

Lots of libertarians in SV and the Bay Area. They're right wingers masquerading as left wingers. They say things like "I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative" (which really means just plain conservative - if you're not willing to put your money where your mouth is, then STFU).

Classic NIMBY. Fake liberals. AKA hypocrites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They celebrate ignorance.

The rich ones don't. They just pretend they do in order to pander to the poor and working class and convince them they're "likable" and fun to have a beer with.

Like likability matters one jot in a world leader.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the places mentioned really represent what OP is talking about, IMO.

This isn't about traditional fiscal conservatives, ala UChicago; this is about contemporary right-wingers (Trumpsters). I can't think of a major university that really has a significant contingent in support of that ideology.

Most academics tend to be liberals. It's partly because life-time academics have only a sheltered life experience. Thomas Sowell tells it that he became a Marxist-turned-conservative - not by UChicago education, or even from Milton Friedman - but from his work experience of working for a federal agency one summer.

Most academics tend to be liberals because the liberal agenda is to invest in the health, education and welfare of the citizenry to try to maximize the potential of society. Conservtive and Trumpism are counter to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford/Cambridge. They don't believe in AA.

And Oxbridge > HPY, Stanford.

Actually, Harvard has taken over in terms of reputation. In the last 15 years, those schools (Oxbridge) have lost a ton of money in terms of endowment. Also, no longer the desirable schools for world leaders.

Isn’t, literally, Malala at Oxford

Oxbridge have something which no Harvard can give. Oxbridge students acquire their British accent from Day 1. Harvard women of the flock to Oxbridge grads the way the Markles of the world flock to Prince Harry. The same way flies flock to cow dung.

Harvard and Oxbridge. No comparison.

Was your misogyny learned from your parents or from the f*ckwads at Liberty U?

[Anonymous]

Hillsdale
Whitman
Liberty
Trump U

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duke, UVA, Chicago.

Add Stanford to that list.

Lots of libertarians in SV and the Bay Area. They're right wingers masquerading as left wingers. They say things like "I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative" (which really means just plain conservative - if you're not willing to put your money where your mouth is, then STFU).

Classic NIMBY. Fake liberals. AKA hypocrites.

+ 1

The hypocrisy and NIMBYism in SV is astounding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Conservatives study science, technology, engineering, medicine, etc. That's why we make all the money. We don't need your kind of schools, thank you.

+1 my son is an engineering major at Cornell and says it’s not a big deal. The key is to stay away from the fluffy, ridiculous majors.

Those groups have notoriously discriminated against women and minorities in school and employment, at the peril of the women and minorities and also our whole society due to wasting so much talent. Those engineering majors need to broaden their minds more, not less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Duke, UVA, Chicago.

Chicago is not ‘conservative’ but accepting of all viewpoints. They encourage discussion of all views. Or ‘not ignorant’ , if you will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the places mentioned really represent what OP is talking about, IMO.

This isn't about traditional fiscal conservatives, ala UChicago; this is about contemporary right-wingers (Trumpsters). I can't think of a major university that really has a significant contingent in support of that ideology.

Most academics tend to be liberals. It's partly because life-time academics have only a sheltered life experience. Thomas Sowell tells it that he became a Marxist-turned-conservative - not by UChicago education, or even from Milton Friedman - but from his work experience of working for a federal agency one summer.

Most academics tend to be liberals because the liberal agenda is to invest in the health, education and welfare of the citizenry to try to maximize the potential of society. Conservtive and Trumpism are counter to that.

You are only begging the issue. You still have to ask why liberals go for the agenda to invest in the health, education, welfare of the citizenry. This is what we all do when coming out of HS and go off to college - to change the world. Conservatives quickly get over this utopian dream after their real-world experience out of college. Those who go into academics never awake from the dream, always living in the Platonic shadows of the reality. Sowell graduated from UChicago under Milton Friedman still a Marxist. It took just one summer of working for a government agency for him to realize that the government is not the solution. It took him just one summer to realize the government is not our friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oxford/Cambridge. They don't believe in AA.

And Oxbridge > HPY, Stanford.

Actually, Harvard has taken over in terms of reputation. In the last 15 years, those schools (Oxbridge) have lost a ton of money in terms of endowment. Also, no longer the desirable schools for world leaders.

Isn’t, literally, Malala at Oxford

Oxbridge have something which no Harvard can give. Oxbridge students acquire their British accent from Day 1. Harvard women of the flock to Oxbridge grads the way the Markles of the world flock to Prince Harry. The same way flies flock to cow dung.

Harvard and Oxbridge. No comparison.

Was your misogyny learned from your parents or from the f*ckwads at Liberty U?

Truth bombs sting, don't they?