The Badger Herald

OPINION & EDITORIAL

Bias against conservatives prevalent

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Joelle Parks:

Affirmative action has no place at collegiate level (April 13, 2006)
Local media expedite petty politics (November 29, 2006)
Campus safety needs high priority (November 21, 2005)
Obese must admit own fault (April 20, 2006)
Board of Regents' new disciplinary policy overdue, welcome (December 13, 2006)

by Joelle Parks

Friday, September 30, 2005

John F. Kennedy once said, "Let us think of education as the means of developing our greatest abilities, because in each of us there is a private hope and dream which, fulfilled, can be translated into benefit for everyone and greater strength for our nation."

Everyone has the right to a decent education and the freedom to express their opinions. In recent years, the debate over religion in public schools has skyrocketed, but are students today discriminated against not by the color of their skin or their religion, but rather their political stance? From not reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to political conversations, the question has to be asked: where is the line drawn between what is acceptable and what is not?

Elections last year were the pride and joy of every conservative student in Madison. Most proudly displayed their Bush-Cheney stickers on their jackets and sported campaign signs on their doors. By the fifth "Did you vote yet?" phone call and the fourth knock on the door from students asking the same question, many became annoyed. Not because of the constant pressure to vote, but because of the statement that followed …"Who did you vote for?"

It soon became evident that these students were not concerned with whether or not the student had voted; they were more concerned with who they voted for. Most proudly stated their vote, time after time, and received harassment each time. It was enjoyable for many to watch Democrats take down their signs in lament. After being terrorized and ostracized for their opinion, there was finally one day they could stand proud to be Republicans.

When did "traditional" become "bad?" There are many traditions that stand undisturbed for centuries. Yet change is inevitable and necessary for growth, even at a gradual pace. Liberals, especially in Madison, are so open and willing to accept new ideas, but at the same time so disrespectful of the old ones. It does not make sense.

At a school as liberal as The University of Wisconsin-Madison, students are judged and graded by professors and teaching assistants according to their political stance. It is depressing to say that many students bite their tongues in fear of discrimination in the eyes of those who are supposed to be fair and unbiased. Grades are important. But what is more important: receiving a good grade for being polite or receiving a bad grade for standing up for what they believe in? Many students have confronted a very similar conundrum and all have made decisions of what to do for themselves. When did it become acceptable to tell people that their political stance is wrong? Actually, when did it become acceptable to tell someone that his opinion is wrong? It didn't, and therefore this behavior should not be allowed in the classroom.

People are open to critique and ready to accept it and defend their own ideas. But, when criticizing another, prepare for the consequences and at least have the self-pride to identify yourself. Mark Twain once said, "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." School is more than memorizing facts and dates and numbers, it is about growing into your own person. All around, The University of Wisconsin-Madison is the best place for an actual education.

Joelle Parks (jparks@badgerherald.com) is a sophomore intending to major in journalism.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (September 30, 2005 @ 9:29am):

Yawn...students are liberal. They tried to get you to vote for their candidate (something conservatives would never do). Some people disagree with your opinions and you feel like they're telling you that you're wrong. While I do sympathise with the difficulty of being in the minority, all of these things are pretty minor. The major allegation you make is that professors grade based on ideology, and there's no justification used to back it up. It's as if there could be no question that professors put ideology ahead of ethics and lower the grades of the evil conservatives. I'll offer you this piece of advice: your ideology should not come through in your academic papers. As a freshman I wrote papers to voice my ardent liberal beliefs and consistently was sub-par grades. Political rhetoric divides the world into black and white, where academia looks at all of the shades of gray. If conservative students are writing conservative papers they're likely to recieve grades that are just as bad as the liberal students writing liberal papers.

Anonymous (September 30, 2005 @ 9:48am):

Way to back up your argument with generalizations, assumptions and stereotypes, Joelle. You've got a bright future ahead of you.

Incidentally, students making fun of you for voting for W. isn't discrimination, it's them exercising their freedom of speech, just like how you were free to gloat after the election.

By the way, when are you volunteering for service in Iraq?

Anonymous (September 30, 2005 @ 11:14am):

There is one statement here in her editorial that pretty much sums it up.

"It does not make sense."

Sara Gittings (September 30, 2005 @ 12:46pm):

Going along with your contention that UW-Madison is a great place to get an "actual education" (whatever that means), I'd have to agree. Go the next step and see no coincidence in the fact that some of the brightest students and most distinguished faculty on campus also happen to be liberal in their politics. Wealth of intellect? Overwhelming liberal culture? Coincidence, I think not.
As to your BASELESS comment on teacher crucification of conservatives in terms of down-grading because of ideology, you need to get fome evidence before someone sues for slander. That is completely ridiculous, and only makes you look like a liar. I know of no one that has happened to, none the less, someone who would really believe you.
As for an intimidating political culture, I feel really sorry for you. Being a white, conservative female in this day in age is so oppressive, and "traditionalists" getting the short end of the stick in W's America is a real shame.
You make liberals sound like cowards in that they don't have the courage to "identify" themselves. If that were a problem, where is all this political fear and alienation coming from? Make up your mind.
Crying about being challenged over your beliefs is like crying over spilled milk--in a country that is supposed to be based on and value competition in the marketplace of ideas, it means nothing. In case you missed the memo, that's what supposed to happen. Good grief.

Corey Sheahan (September 30, 2005 @ 1:19pm):

"At a school as liberal as the University of Wisconsin-Madison, students are judged and graded by professors and teaching assistants according to their political stances."

I don't have a comment, I'm just going to let this ridiculous statement stand on its own.

Anonymous (September 30, 2005 @ 3:48pm):

Joelle,
Just because a tradition stands for centuries does not mean that it is beneficial or non opressive. The tradition for hundreds of years was to oppress people of color into slavery and refuse women the right to vote. Many traditions are upheld throughout time because they benefit the majority which comes at the price of oppresseing the minority. Your views are as tired as Bush's views of "even if it's broke, don't fix it". You are correct in saying that everyone deserves to have an opinion, but it should be formed around facts and logic, not sentiment and distorted half truths. Your opinions are dangerous Joelle, becausee someone might mistake the trash you report as truth. Here's a tip: pay attention in your classes and then maybe we won't be forced to listen to your pointless, meritless opinions.

Anonymous (September 30, 2005 @ 4:44pm):

There is no more reason to suspect bias by teachers than ther is to suspect bias by the media, is there?

Anonymous (September 30, 2005 @ 8:43pm):

First, to Joelle: Good column. It's nice to know there's at least a skosh of balance left on the Herald's opinion page. There used to be a lot more variety of viewpoints on the page, but hey, I'll take what I can get.

Next, to address the points Sara Gittings makes.

I do not know Sara or her background, but to make comments which suggest that liberalism is analogous to a "wealth of intellect" just reeks of arrogance and ivory tower elitism. Many individuals who are at the top of their fields hold positions in the private sector, where political viewpoints are often in sharp contrast with those in the fantasy land of academia. Also, if you step outside of the L&S campus, you might find a few counterexamples to your hypothesis.

Sara is also another example of a lefty who can't answer the overall point that Joelle (and Darryn a couple of weeks ago) makes-- namely, that a lot of liberals on this campus don't know how to behave civilly toward those who dare to stray from the official Madison template of thought. Joelle gave a few examples, and I'll give a few more. The left on this campus decided to "challenge the beliefs" of students supporting President Bush by urinating on them during the Michael Moore event. It was also the left that told Bush supporters "I hope you get drafted and killed in Iraq" (we heard that one a few times).

Also, I love the language that gets used by the left. If a conservative speaker comes to campus, it's "hate speech". But the constant, everyday culture of obnoxious liberal indoctrination, why that's "challenging [our] beliefs".

Good grief.

Michael Malcolm (October 1, 2005 @ 1:21pm):

Is this a joke?

Can you provide a single example of: "students...are judged and graded by professors and teaching assistants according to their political stance"?

Yes, that's right - when you fail to differentiate ln(x^2) correctly, that's because you're taking a stand against the *liberal* derivative. Similarly, in my department, when students fail to compute Marshallian demand functions correctly, it's because the Marshallian is the *liberal* demand function. People who support our president and our troops clearly prefer Hicksian demand functions. Can't find the MLE of the Pareto distribution? Why bother? The MLE is a *liberal* estimator. Those of us with family values clearly prefer method of moments estimators.

Also, learn to use "who" and "whom" correctly and to write above an 8th grade level.

Anonymous (October 1, 2005 @ 2:49pm):

"People who support our president and our troops clearly prefer Hicksian demand functions. Can't find the MLE of the Pareto distribution? Why bother? The MLE is a *liberal* estimator. Those of us with family values clearly prefer method of moments estimators."

What sociological abstract did you copy/paste all that from?

Michael Malcolm (October 2, 2005 @ 7:52am):

I'm an economist. You can find the former terms in a good intermediate micro text, and the latter in an undergraduate math stats book.

Of course, my point was that you needn't bother since they're all secretly part of this liberal propoganda machine we're running - just like the *libreal* derivative of ln(x^2).

You see how silly you sound?

Anonymous (October 2, 2005 @ 12:42pm):

"By the way, when are you volunteering for service in Iraq?"

When are you volunteering for the opposition?

Anonymous (October 2, 2005 @ 2:19pm):

"when you fail to differentiate ln(x^2) correctly"

I think that it's more likely that you receive low grades for any paper which contains positive references to Bush and/or Republicans.