It doesn't take a conspiracy . . .

. . . to produce a left-leaning faculty

Why do college faculty lean left? Why do novelists and screenwriters? Why do journalists?

Do they actually?

I think they do. And I think the reason is simple.

First some ground rules. What do we mean by left? Ever since the days of the French revolution, the political left has meant critics of the status quo. The political right means defenders of the status quo.

Because the status quo is a moving target, left and right have shifted over time. In the early 1930s, Social Security was a leftist project. But after it was enacted into law in 1935, it became part of the status quo. Now it is supported by everyone on the left and most on the right. Gay marriage was a leftist idea as late as the beginning of this century. But now it's part of the status quo and isn't much debated. On most topics, rightists have favored a lighter hand for government than leftists have. But on abortion rights, the roles are reversed.

All this is by way of a reminder that every generalization about left and right can be contradicted by specific instances. It's important not to lose the forest for the odd tree.

One other thing: When I speak of college faculties here, I'm speaking mostly of folks in the humanities and social sciences. I'm not sure chemists and engineers tilt conspicuously left compared with the general population.

What do professors and writers in various genres have in common? They are professional observers of society. They sit on the sidelines, as it were, and write about the game unfolding before them. They are reviewers of the book of life. They are critics of the theater of humanity.

What do critics do? They criticize. Book reviewers who say only nice things about every book they read are no reviewers at all. Their job is to point out where authors could have done better, as well as noting where authors did well. Theater critics who rave about every play give theater goers no guidance as to which plays to see. Novelists and screenwriters who write only sunny stories become insipid. Journalists who don't challenge the rich and powerful are apparatchiks.

Because their job descriptions require professors and the others to challenge the status quo, those job descriptions attract people temperamentally and intellectually inclined to do so. People happy with the status quo are more likely to look elsewhere.

Social dynamics within professions reinforce the tendencies that draw people to them. The critical inclinations of most professors causes those who want to stand out to become more critical. The journalists who make the biggest names are those who discover the deepest dirt on the powers that be.

But similar dynamics shape the conservative side. A person of unformed political opinions who goes to work on Wall Street finds it's easier to advance by adopting Wall Street views. It's the rare personnel director at a large corporation who seeks Marxists to hire.

A final thought: Few people consider themselves ideologists. Ideology — a rigid framework of political views — is ascribed to others. Rightists detect leftist ideology more readily than they detect their own. The counterpart is true of leftists. A history professor who devotes one lecture to slavery out of forty lectures in the semester is tagged by conservatives as a woke America-hater. Gordon Gekko is taken by lefties as an exemplar of the capitalist mindset.

Almost ten years ago I published a biography of Ronald Reagan. I thought the quarter century that had passed since his presidency ended would have allowed emotions to cool. I was quite wrong. Conservatives noticed only the criticisms I made of Reagan and his policies and branded me a loony liberal. Liberals noticed only the positive things I said and called me a running dog of the Republicans.

Politics is a subject many people enjoy getting exercised about.