To the editor: Regarding this opinion piece, Ronald Reagan probably would not be considered conservative enough in today’s Republican Party, yet Fredrik deBoer contends the problem is liberal academics. (Re “This trend won’t end well,” Opinion, July 24)

Today’s conservatism is nihilism.

Trump is practicing “burn it down"”while the GOP rejects the scientific method.

Republicans don’t believe colleges are valuable because science and skepticism are counter to their orthodoxy. And yes, this trend won’t end well.


David Greene, San Pedro

::

To the editor: In attempting to explain the lack of respect for universities among conservatives, DeBoer notes the media’s “amplify[ing] every leftist kerfuffle” and the imbalance of liberals vs. conservatives among professors.

No one would object to that imbalance if the university were able to maintain open inquiries regardless of majority affiliation. Hecklers did not shut down liberal speakers in the ’50s, and “The Communist Manifesto” was taught as an historical document, without “safe spaces” for Republicans.


As to “kerfuffles,” the frequency of black-masked thugs setting fires, throwing bricks, violently suppressing opposing views, and other acts of overt fascism cannot be “amplified” enough.

David Goodwin, Los Angeles

::

To the editor: I hate to sound to like a broken record, but a large part of the blame for this attitude of Republicans denigrating education can be placed squarely at the doorstep of Fox News.


It beats its audience 24/7 over the head with lies and misinformation, constantly berating colleges and universities as hotbeds of liberal thought. As if learning and higher education are bad things, Fox spews this nonsense day after day, week after week.

Of course universities slant liberal, that’s why people go there to learn stuff.

Scott W. Hughes, Westlake Village

::


To the editor: Leftists have politicized all learning: scientists who alter data to conform to leftist orthodoxy; scholars with a nonconformist viewpoint who are shunned, banned, and ignored; labeling anyone who presumes to disagree as a “reactionary.” None of this is either science or expertise; this is Marxist cherry-picking of people and information to conform to preconceived ideas of what is acceptable as a fact.

If I want an “expert,” I’ll go elsewhere than to one of our typical, brainwashed college professors.

Donate money to one of their institutions of narrow learning? Ridiculous.

Patrick M. Dempsey, Granada Hills


::

To the editor: I agree with the op-ed by DeBoer about the decided anti-intellectual trend of the current GOP and the attitudes of Republicans and especially Trump supporters toward higher education in this country.

Forty years ago, it was President Reagan’s “trickle down” economics that asked Americans to suspend common sense and believe that giveaways to the rich and powerful would somehow improve their employment opportunities and overall well-being.

Then it was the phony tax cut philosophy that only benefited the 1%.


Then it was the tea party that wanted to dismantle all government protections of the poor and middle class regardless of the wisdom involved.

All benefiting from an anti-intellectual approach.

From immigration to voter fraud, from climate change to Russian election interference, it is the uneducated and undereducated that Trump has hornswoggled.

During the campaign, Trump declared “I love the poorly educated!” No wonder he and his supporters have turned their backs on higher education.


He is the master of dumbing down the American electorate. It doesn’t take a college graduate to see that.

Tim Geddes, Huntington Beach

::

To the editor: I read the op-ed with great interest. The writer’s concern about the potential crisis facing educational institutions is an issue of great importance.


But there is another issue at stake: the terrible disservice being done to today’s students. By hearing only one side of a political or social position, students are not equipped to differentiate between disparate points of view. I don’t think they have the opportunity to contrast or to weigh the pros and cons.

How can a student ever decide what to choose to believe if no alternatives are ever presented?

Without that type of discussion, there is no intellectual stimulation that leads to choosing what to believe, instead of merely parroting their professors.

Naomi Feldman, Beverly Hills


Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook