Comment by newacct23 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by newacct23 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

>The article defines highly educated as people with advanced degrees. They are not academics

Definition from article:

>But the most highly educated Americans — those who have attended graduate or professional school — are starting to come together as a political bloc.

Doctors make up 1/3 of a percent of the US population (they don't necessarily have Phds)

http://www.wisegeek.org/what-percent-of-the-us-population-do...

Doctors chose Romney over Obama 55% to 36%.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/01/survey-doctors-choose-romn...

1.68% of Americans have a Phd (actually significantly more than I expected and significantly more than I think deserve to be handed out). I really wonder how many of these people do practical work. I can't find statistics to prove my bias so we will have to leave it as is unless someone can find some.

>Doctors make up 1/3 of a percent of the US population

>1.68% of Americans have a Phd

If you mean medical doctors you should specify that, Doctors has a different meaning especially within the context of post graduate degree holders.

Doctors are also among the highest-paid members of American society and, along with wealthy financial professionals, you will typically find them siding more with the Republican Party often out of concern for their tax bracket.

I modified my main post with some more evidence in support of my theory which I'm posting here so you can see it as a response.

Professors in humanities that identify as Republican range from 6 to 11 percent.

Social Sciences 7 and 9 percent

2% of English professors are Republican.

Meanwhile 18% of social scientists are Marxists.

This evidence leads me to believe that Academics self select to be liberal and that people with a conservative mindset do not find academia appealing for whatever reason. The reason I rule it has little to do with intelligence of the groups is the prevalence of Marxism amongst academics. Intelligent people that use evidence to reason about their beliefs wouldn't be Marxist.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/opinion/sunday/a-confessio...

Is that true across sciences or more prevalent in humanities?

I don't think social scientists are Marxist in perhaps the sense you understand it. Social scientists don't want to overthrow the bourgeosie so much as they interpret social systems through the machinery of gender, race, and social class. Gender, race, and social class are absolutely necessary to understand contemporary social structures.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com