LEO
you raise an interesting set of questions.

It seems that the article's author is defining liberalism in one way, and you are suggesting his way is too narrow, and u offer various other 'isms' as having some validity.

Without tackling each 'ism' individually, I want to suggest that with all these variations and divergences of thought regarding how society should function, that it fits perfectly the mould called 'Make-it-up-as-u-Go-ism'.

By now you are probably aware that I speak from a different perspective to the secular contributor, and hold the view that the social ideas of all these 'ism's are inadequate, flawed and doomed to failure as soon as the next more trendy 'ism' arises and gains the attention of a few opinion leaders and some high profile personalities.

I think much more is to be gained from examining the values contained in Judao Christian history, including the idea of 'social welfare' which was first defined as far as I know in the Old Testament where it instructs farmers not to harvest their crops to the last stalk to allow for the 'widow, fatherless and the alien'opportunity to eat.
Acts 2 in the New testament is the first codification of a socialist approach to a community. In fact I think Marx plagiarised it.

The Magna Carta is only valid if our common and equal humanity is based on common descent.

So, there is a good case Biblically for Governments to take a share of public burden in the fields of Education, Health, Corrections and Defense. I find the idea of a university run as a "corporation"
anathema. I also see any idea of non VSU equally as an anathema.

DFXK Wellll noted.. about the style of 'inventing names, using them as weapons, and hounding' but.. I for one will NEVER be cowed by such terms. Their days are well and truly numbered... they will fade, as the grass and in their place will arise thinking, dynamic people.

Mr Boaz, I find it disturbing that I find myself agreeing with your post...well...apart from the religious(isms), that is.
I am supportive of the VSU policy and fail to understand the opposition to voluntary (pick a word)ism. The freedoms that we enjoy should also apply to those organisations that promote them, should they not? As for the funding issue, it would follow that those that are pro Student Unionism in its current form will unhesitatingly pay their dues accordingly. There are many, judging by the posts and discussions I have had on campus so funding should not be an issue though they may need to curtail a few exercises. There are also those that will pay that are against compulsory unionism but support unionism per se.
It would be a shame indeed if the union would continue to shamelessly forgo its ideals to force people into the hardship of paying. Animal Farm, eat your heart out.

I've noticed that staff in various departments like physics or economics at my university seem to be more conservative than others.

That said, the student unions seem dominated by those who lean to the left.

I'm not sure I agree with Greg's assertion that there is (or in the future) be a lack of varying ideological discussion in universities. After all, how hard is it to book a spare lecture theatre and invite speakers for a debate?

I was only in universities for fifty years, and they seemed to me at the beginning and at the end very similar places, in Australia but also in the US, Canada and elsewhere. A lot of quiet, rather conservative people, especially in the professional faculties, and a much smaller number of people in the arts and sciences who were outspoken and usually critical (of those running their discipline, the university, the state, the country and so on). Of course, we were all taught to be critical: that is the pervading philosophy of the Western university. I don't think the VSU issue has anything to do with it. Nor does it seem that Prtofessor Melleuish has been particularly cowed by his experiences at the University of Wollongong!

The first, middle and last objective of all of my (humanities and arts) lecturers was to encourage critical thought. Some were left, some were right, some we couldn't pick, but all appreciated critical engagement regardless of its colour.

I find it rather frightening that someone from within the system is so ready to condemn any point of view at all. Somehow critical engagement has been transformed into sheer criticism which helps nobody. Least of all students.

What do we want in our future leaders? Do we want single-issue zealots of any description or do we want people who can consider the merits and flaws of any argument?

Marxism may not be on the cutting edge of fashion these days but, like the rest of life, nobody can chuck the bits they don't like and pretend to be telling the whole story.

All this article has succeeded in doing is proving the opposite of its intention - without doubt there are right-wing adherents in our universities prepared to denigrate other opinions. Dreadfully undemocratic for someone teaching politics.

I personally find universities kills the spirirt of people, their personalty. I just see wonderful kids go in, and that age who isn't a communist? and out the end pops a capitalist pin striped suited male totally brainwashed and totally incapable of being anything better than ordinary in life. A robotic technician. Yes they hang on to highly idealised concepts but they never practice them ,just preach them.

I always think to be truly successful in life then you should avoid university like a plague. It is only a place for people with ordinary dreams.
Normally just to make money, not to follow a true vocation.