Trump divide among American conservative professors.

IF 1.6 2区 社会学 Q2 SOCIOLOGY
David L Swartz
{"title":"Trump divide among American conservative professors.","authors":"David L Swartz","doi":"10.1007/s11186-023-09517-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There has been an outpouring of research on right-wing populist conservatism since the advent of the Trump presidency and right-wing movements in Europe. Yet, little research has been devoted to divisions among conservatives themselves, especially among conservative academics. Although Trump has maintained remarkable unity within the Republican Party for electoral reasons, he has fostered sharp divisions among conservative intellectuals and academicians. This article compares 102 politically conservative professors who are Trumpists and 80 conservative professors who are anti-Trumpists. All 182 function as public intellectuals who advocate their views in print and digital media. Drawing on recent research in the sociology of intellectuals and particularly Pierre Bourdieu's analytical field perspective, this article proposes a <i>fielding political identities and practices</i> framework to show how these two groups of professors (Trumpists and anti-Trumpists) differ in where they teach, their intellectual orientations, their scholarly productivity, where they network with think tanks, scholarly professional associations, and government agencies, and their stances on key issues surrounding the Trump presidency. The academic Trumpists embrace the right-wing populist wave mobilized by Trump and the conservative academic critics resist this move. This polarization of views between these two groups of conservative professors is enduring and rooted in two distinct social networks that connect positions in the academic field to affiliations with think tanks, government agencies, and professional associations in the field of power that reinforce their respective political identities. This research contributes to political sociology, the sociology of intellectuals, and the sociology of conservative politics in American higher education.</p>","PeriodicalId":48137,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Society","volume":" ","pages":"1-31"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10224651/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-023-09517-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There has been an outpouring of research on right-wing populist conservatism since the advent of the Trump presidency and right-wing movements in Europe. Yet, little research has been devoted to divisions among conservatives themselves, especially among conservative academics. Although Trump has maintained remarkable unity within the Republican Party for electoral reasons, he has fostered sharp divisions among conservative intellectuals and academicians. This article compares 102 politically conservative professors who are Trumpists and 80 conservative professors who are anti-Trumpists. All 182 function as public intellectuals who advocate their views in print and digital media. Drawing on recent research in the sociology of intellectuals and particularly Pierre Bourdieu's analytical field perspective, this article proposes a fielding political identities and practices framework to show how these two groups of professors (Trumpists and anti-Trumpists) differ in where they teach, their intellectual orientations, their scholarly productivity, where they network with think tanks, scholarly professional associations, and government agencies, and their stances on key issues surrounding the Trump presidency. The academic Trumpists embrace the right-wing populist wave mobilized by Trump and the conservative academic critics resist this move. This polarization of views between these two groups of conservative professors is enduring and rooted in two distinct social networks that connect positions in the academic field to affiliations with think tanks, government agencies, and professional associations in the field of power that reinforce their respective political identities. This research contributes to political sociology, the sociology of intellectuals, and the sociology of conservative politics in American higher education.

Abstract Image

特朗普在美国保守派教授中存在分歧。
自特朗普担任总统以来,对右翼民粹主义保守主义和欧洲右翼运动的研究层出不穷。然而,很少有研究专门研究保守派之间的分歧,尤其是保守派学者之间的分歧。尽管出于选举原因,特朗普在共和党内部保持了显著的团结,但他在保守派知识分子和学者之间造成了尖锐的分歧。本文比较了102名政治保守派教授和80名保守派教授。所有182人都是公共知识分子,在印刷和数字媒体上倡导自己的观点。根据最近对知识分子社会学的研究,特别是皮埃尔·布迪厄的分析领域视角,本文提出了一个实地政治身份和实践框架,以展示这两类教授(特朗普主义者和反特朗普主义者)在教学地点、智识取向、学术生产力,他们在那里与智库、学术专业协会和政府机构建立了联系,以及他们在围绕特朗普总统任期的关键问题上的立场。学术界的特朗普主义者拥护特朗普发动的右翼民粹主义浪潮,而保守派的学术评论家则抵制这一举措。这两组保守派教授之间的观点两极分化是持久的,并植根于两个不同的社会网络,这两个网络将学术领域的职位与权力领域的智库、政府机构和专业协会联系起来,从而强化了他们各自的政治身份。本研究有助于美国高等教育的政治社会学、知识分子社会学和保守政治社会学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Theory and Society
Theory and Society SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.90%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Theory and Society is a forum for the international community of scholars that publishes theoretically-informed analyses of social processes. It opens its pages to authors working at the frontiers of social analysis, regardless of discipline. Its subject matter ranges from prehistory to contemporary affairs, from treatments of single individuals and national societies to world culture, from discussions of theory to methodological critique, from First World to Third World - but always in the effort to bring together theory, criticism and concrete observation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信