RealClearPolitics has an article by an academic historian who claims we don't understand academics. His argument: we profs are actually a bunch of scholarly geeks or nerds.
He claims we were all exactly that, people in love with a particular field of knowledge who live to teach it and do research about it. All the while being liberal and slightly involved with politics.
That does describe many of us, certainly. What he fails to emphasize is that the overwhelming majority of us geeks are somewhere on the progressive spectrum.
Those few of us who were, and decreasingly are, conservative don't advertise the fact. Just as those few who are religious don't advertise the fact (except in the South, where religion is nearly mandatory).
Academia (outside the South) is a culture where it is assumed all in the professorate are politically leftish and not religious. If that isn't you, you either leave or, as I did, learn to ignore it and change the subject because you otherwise like the profession.
What author Marshall Poe doesn't mention is that liberalism permeates many classes as the professors' lectures reflect their biases. Believe me, they very much do.
For example author Poe, now retired, was a Russian historian. Can you imagine his biases were not evident when he described and analyzed the Bolshevik revolution, the battles between Reds and Whites? What about his attitude toward the Kulaks (prosperous farmers) the Reds persecuted? How could his sympathies not be on display?
Probably most of my B-school colleagues were not active politically. Those who were, leaned left and knew they were in an environment where they'd not be censured for doing so.
I'd guess few of my students had any idea of my politics, which were heavily influenced by WSJ opinion pieces authored by Irving Kristol. Little known fact: many B-school faculty got free subscriptions to WSJ.
