Updated: Jun 3
The right continually points to schools and universities and notes a left-wing bias. I noticed very little of this at school as developments from guided instructions on how to snort cocaine to perverse sex education materials are a relatively new phenomenon.
However, uni was a different story altogether. Beyond the mob harassment of right-wing students by increasingly vile, confused and angry people, lectures were packed to the brim with progressive causes. Lecturers would openly mock right-wing media and respond to any sign of ideological dissent with a flurry of guardian quotes and that made up dialect academics speak with sometimes.
During several commercial law courses, the focus was less on tax and investment and more diversity in the boardroom. We were informed that women should be represented equally in the corporate world as a matter of urgency. A study the lecturer had read told him that women were more risk-averse and thus could have contributed to a corporate environment capable of preventing the 2008 financial crash. What a ridiculous argument. Not only does it recognise that men and women are different and make different choices (the reason for pay disparities) but it also assumes that risk is inherently bad in business. It is an argument void of any substance or consistency. Yet any dissenting opinions were written off as a misogynistic attack on women. The meritocracy argument or free market principles of commercial freedom were looked on with suspicion as if these arguments hid a desire to return offices to the era of Mad Men.
I asked where all this would end? Would every board of directors need a disabled employee or a gay employee for the sake of diversity? The answer surprisingly was "possibly". There was no recognition amongst the majority of the class or the lecturer that giving the government essential control over the makeup of companies was a bad idea and may in fact be impossible. If a black guy doesn't apply one week do you just cut your losses and go for an Indian? Would a disabled lesbian tick two boxes or only one? And if so which?
I thought this might just be an extreme example yet it was one of the more productive conversations I have had in a tutorial. ( I tended to avoid speaking at all). Other examples of left-wing bias at law school were far more overt. During any property law-related course the rights of the landowner were increasingly undermined or ignored as a mere side note. Instead glowing reviews of wide access rights, community rights to buy, increasingly burdensome regulations on construction and new ways to milk money from the taxpayer were ubiquitous. This quasi socialist position sees the ownership of swathes of land by oligarchs, billionaires and Saudi princes as a negative thing. They of course ignore the vast sums of money invested in the host nation and that as a result these owners maintain the land, meet conservation goals and save the taxpayer millions. This wing of academia also despises traditional uses of the countryside and gives excessive oxygen to the concerns of increasingly radical groups such as PETA. They hate shooting estates and deer hunting and seek to send these pastimes into the depths of room 101 in the same jealousy tinged, unsubstantiated manner as was done with fox hunting.
During courses relating to energy law. the environment would be plugged every 5 minutes. It was done in a manner so forced and insincere that it started to become grating. We had already been told to stop having kids by a prince and not to drive by a 12-year-old girl. Now we have lecturers to contribute to our collective misery. Fracking was given no hearing. Not even a devil's advocate discussion out of pure interest and any discussion about useless forms of renewable energy like wind turbines was always gushing and fetishistic. Nuclear the key to the climate crisis was brushed over and the ineffectual legal frameworks for its implementation in the UK was simply ignored.
Utopian tendencies would also find their way into classrooms as lecturers dreamed out loud about every country working together to tackle the climate emergency or everyone agreeing not to avoid tax in unison. These lecturers astound me. How can someone still hold dear to this infantile idealism? It is the sort of starry-eyed innocence that 4 years at a University knocks out if you. I'm not sure how these people have endured 10+ years at uni and still not found a single grain of cynicism over their academic careers.
Family and criminal law were where the real biases began to show. When abortion was discussed it was at worst a necessary evil and at best a beneficial thing to do in order to pursue a fruitful career at a magic circle firm. Portugal and Scandinavia were used to advocate for the decriminalization of all drugs, yet Hardline approaches to dealers taken elsewhere were seldom mentioned. The rights of asylum seekers were drilled into our heads yet there was no discussion of border security or the safety of those encouraged by lax policy-making to risk their lives on the seas. If the problem was a low conviction rate for rape the solution was definitely to completely flip the justice system and the burden of proof. Corroboration or jury trial are about all we have left from our ancient constitution yet these are targeted for destruction by lecturers and students alike in law schools across the country on the back of one sided and ill-conceived reports from a number of pressure groups.
The reason I single out law schools is for two reasons. Firstly I experienced it so have a somewhat unique perspective. However, I also target law school in particular because of the ramifications this sort of campus bias could have. It is from the ranks of law school students that the next lawyers, judges, MPs and most importantly Supreme Court judges will be selected. With courts now willing to intervene in the Brexit and prorogation process this activist/political nature of legal education being delivered poses a significant threat. Prepare for the legal world to fully merge with the political and for lawyers and judges to become a problem as they struggle to turn off the part of their brain gripped by this politicised form of law they have been indoctrinated with. It is this radical reformism that law school instills in its students that risks making not just law school but the entire legal system part of the woke empire.