NZ University Supinely Bows To Chinese Communist Government

For a University That Deserves The Name

Leonid Sirota
Newsroom

[AUT law expert Leonid Sirota says his own university ought to apologise to those behind a cancelled meeting to mark the Tiananmen Square massacre - and begin to live up to its obligations as a university.]

As reported by Newsroom, the Auckland University of Technology, where I teach constitutional law, prevented an event commemorating the Tiananmen massacre from being held on its campus. Despite AUT’s denials, there is good reason to think that this happened as a result of a suggestion, or indeed pressure, from the Chinese government’s diplomatic representatives. This is an ominous sign for the future of the freedom of inquiry and of expression at New Zealand’s universities.

AUT says that the Tiananmen commemoration had not been booked through the appropriate channels, and that in any case no event could possibly be held on campus on a holiday, as this one was supposed to be. It has been insisting, both to Newsroom and in what appear to be canned responses to me and others on Twitter, that the booking contretemps is the only reason why the event had to be cancelled.

This is not easily believable. For one thing, it would be a remarkable coincidence for the booking problem to be discovered and addressed just as the Chinese diplomats were bearing down on AUT’s Vice Chancellor. For another, it seems unlikely that such a mundane issue, and one with a supposedly straightforward resolution, would have prompted the frantic email exchanges among a number of highly-placed university apparatchiks, which Newsroom has published. One rather worries that, in abetting the Chinese Communist Party’s lies about history, AUT is taking its own liberties with the truth.

New Zealand's Vast Echo Chamber

The Prejudice and Cant of New Zealand's Universities 

Our Universities are Not Giving Us Unbiased Knowledge


Alex Davis
NZ Herald  


As any number of graduation speeches formulaically tell you, the purpose of a university education is to "open minds", "search for truth" and inspire students to think broadly and freely. We turn to academia for what we assume is scientifically rigorous, evidentially based, objective and unbiased knowledge about the world and how to solve its many and varied problems.

Except of course that's not actually the case. Six decades of research from the United States clearly demonstrate universities and academics are frequently heavily biased and skew overwhelmingly to the political left.

In 1955 (ironically out of concern that right wing McCarthyism was negatively impacting academic freedom) Paul Lazarsfeld led the first systematic attempt to poll academic political leanings. Lazarsfeld surveyed 2451 social science professors. He found they leaned left (liberal) to right (conservative) by a factor of 2 to 1.

In 1969 the hugely influential American sociologist Seymour Lipset surveyed over 60,000 academics in multiple fields about their political views and found almost half identified as liberal while only a quarter identified as conservative.

Follow up studies in the 70's, 80's and 90's showed an intensifying swing to the left. This trend took a sharp turn further left in the 2000's. Research from this period found that barely 12 per cent of American university professors identified as Republican.

Regrettably there is virtually no research on this issue in New Zealand. This is not surprising - in a small country there is little incentive for a biased and unobjective academia to turn a spotlight on itself.  Further, there is nowhere to run for any professor foolish enough to do so – not a single one of New Zealand's seven major universities has any reputation for embracing right leaning thinking.

Is Planet Earth Round?

Are New Zealand's Universities Too Left Wing?

Alex Davies
Stuff

The recent controversy surrounding Don Brash's banning by Massey University has opened the lid on deep bias within universities, both in New Zealand and offshore.

As any number of graduation speeches tell you, the purpose of a university education is to “open minds”, “search for truth” and inspire students to think broadly and freely. In the “knowledge economy” we turn to academia for what we assume is scientifically rigorous, evidentially based, objective and unbiased knowledge about the world and how to solve its many and varied problems.

Except of course that’s not actually the case. Six decades of research from the United States clearly demonstrate that universities and academics are frequently heavily biased and skew overwhelmingly to the political left.

In the 1955 (ironically out of concern that right wing McCarthyism was negatively impacting academic freedom), Paul Lazarsfeld led the first systematic attempt to poll academic political leanings. Lazarsfeld surveyed 2,451 social science professors. He found they leaned left (liberal) to right (conservative) by a factor of 2 to 1.

In 1969 the hugely influential American sociologist Seymour Lipset surveyed over 60,000 academics in multiple fields about their political views and found that almost half of professors identified as liberal, while only a quarter identified as conservative. Follow up studies in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s showed an intensifying swing to the left. This trend took a sharp turn further left in the 2000’s. Research from this period found that barely 12 per cent of American university professors identified as Republican (right wing).

Drilling down to the disciplines within universities the results were even more concerning. Researchers at George Mason University examined six fields: anthropology, economics, history, philosophy, political science and sociology. Within these fields professors supported left-wing candidates to right wing candidates by an average of 15 to 1. In anthropology and sociology this skew to the left increased to almost 30 to 1.

Interestingly in the more empirical field of economics this skew dropped to “merely” 3 to 1 to the left. A federal study of political donations by academics found that of those who donated to politicians, 99 per cent (literally) donated to Democrat (left) candidates.

What is particularly concerning is the extremist nature of left wing academic bias. In 2012 UCLA’s Higher Education Research Institute found that while barely 0.4 per cent of academics held “far right” views, over 30 times that number (12.4 per cent) held “far left” views.

Based on a variety of studies, the best evidence suggests that fewer than 1 in 10 professors hold conservative political, social, moral or economic views.

Regrettably there is virtually no research on this issue in New Zealand.