The Academic Trumpists Radicals Against Liberal Diversity

1. Academics for Trump: An Oxymoron?  2. Fielding Academic Conservatism  3. Rationales for Supporting Trump  4. Trumpism in the American Academic Field  5. Public Engagement Beyond the Academy  6. Field Differences: The Trump Divide Among Conservative Professors  7. From Field Positions to Opposing and Enduring Views & Stances  8. Challenges to Liberal Diversity and Democracy  Appendix 1: The Data and Method  Appendix 2: Scholars and Writers for America  Appendix 3: College and University Rankings

Biography

David L. Swartz, retired from teaching, is now visiting researcher at Boston University. He is author of Symbolic Power, Politics, and Intellectuals: The Political Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (2013), co-winner of the 2014 American Sociological Association History of Sociology Section Best Book Award. He is also author of the widely cited Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu (1997). He is one of the founders of the political sociology standing group of the European Consortium for Political Research. His research interests include social theory, education, culture, stratification, and political sociology.

With Nicholas Rodelo who is an independent researcher and data analyst. He has been studying right-wing academics and think tanks with David Swartz since 2019, when he was an undergraduate in economics at Boston University. He lives in the United States.

"It is not news that the American right-wing, particularly in the past decade, attacks universities for being hotbeds of ‘woke’ ideology and accuses professors of indoctrinating students, even as many state governments are putting restrictions on academic freedom and cutting university budgets. And there isn’t much dispute that, on average, college professors are more liberal than other adults in their generation and class brackets. So how do we explain the very vocal support given to the candidacy and then administration of Donald Trump? David Swartz has put together an interesting dataset of academics who are public Trump supporters and explores this question. In the process, he also finds a committed group of academic conservatives who firmly did not support Trump. How these two groups differ, in the justifications they use and the professional networks they use, provides a fascinating study of the current American academy.

While the sociological study of conservative Americans has been flourishing, one particular group is drastically understudied – college professors. Perhaps because they have a public reputation for being progressive, but understanding conservative academics is overdue. David Swartz has put together a fascinating study of conservative professors and public intellectuals – in particular comparing those who supported Donald Trump’s candidacy and presidency with those who did not. The differences in ideologies between the two groups, and the subtle differences in professional networks and career paths, is required reading for those who study the professions, the academy, or the American right.

Using a Bourdieusian theoretical framework that examines the interplay between ideological commitments and social and professional location, David Swartz examines the ideas, the networks, and the career paths of two groups of American academics – those who supported Donald Trump’s candidacy and presidency, and those equally conservative professors who did not support Trump. The differences are fascinating and have much to tell us about the American academy, professions, in general, and contemporary American conservatism." 

Rhys H. Williams, Professor Emeritus, Loyola University Chicago, Visiting Scholar, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Past-president, Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and Past-president, Association for the Sociology of Religion.

"Donald Trump seems both anti-intellectual and hostile to universities (though proud of his own elite degrees). Why would any serious professor support him? David Swartz uses evidence and analysis to go behind loose assumptions about what it means to be a ‘rightist’. He shows how positions in academic fields matter: where professors work, what they teach, and the reception of their research distinguish not only liberals from conservatives but which conservatives back Trump. This is a valuable contribution to both public debate and the sociology of intellectuals."

Craig Calhoun, Arizona State University, co-author of Degenerations of Democracy.

"This book explores the irony of scholars who explicitly reject the culture of careful and critical discourse on which universities are expected to be built. No scholars have compared academic Trumpists to conservative academics who are anti-Trumpists.  The Bourdieusian field perspective provides a valuable and illuminating theoretical framework. I have no doubt that this will be an important and timely work. "  

Steven Brint, Distinguished Professor of Sociology and Public Policy, University of California, Riverside. 

"Like other conservative academics who opposed Donald Trump, I am bewildered that so many of my right-wing colleagues still champion him.  David Swartz explains why by uncovering the deeper professional and intellectual divisions we could not see.  And he reminds us that academic Trumpists have not merely aligned themselves with a dangerous populism, they represent a threat to conservatism itself." 

Jon A. Shields, Professor of Government, Claremont McKenna College

"Understanding the conservative politics of Trumpism with respect to higher education is of paramount concern in all democratic countries in the world. David Swartz recasts the discussion of public intellectuals in a seminal and important way, which I believe will have a long shelf-life in discussions of the new public intellectual. This is a great, timely, and important topic, and Swartz utilizes an excellent methodology in its pursuit. Anyone interested in public intellectuals in America should read this book."

Jeffrey R. Di Leo, author of Dark Academe: Capitalism, Theory, and the Death Drive in Higher Education and co-editor of The New Public Intellectual.

"With keen insight, David Swartz analytically dissects and sheds light on the small but influential cadre of right-wing academics he calls Trumpists. Unmoored by the advances made by a liberal, pluralist democracy, they are part of a reactionary backlash movement that is motivated by what Theodor Adorno once described as a “feeling of social catastrophe” that encourages a wrecking ball approach to politics.  Swartz illustrates in fine detail how this feeling is sustained and promoted by a network of academic centers, institutes, and think-tanks.  This political network amplifies the Trumpists resentments, only adding fuel to the fire.  This is a bracing but essential book for anyone seeking to understand the dark political time we live in." 

Peter Kivisto, Richard A. Swanson Professor of Social Thought, Augustana College. 

"How is it that some members of a profession devoted to the pursuit of truth and employed in institutions sustained by their traditional cultural authority, have rallied around a populist confabulator?  In The Academic Trumpists, David Swartz provides a thorough and satisfying answer. Using an analytic framework based on Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory, the author deftly excavates the practical strategies and institutional network that enable the Trumpists to create their own enclave within the academic field – a position not just isolated from academic liberals, but also distinct in status, associations, and style of work from the many academic conservatives who reject Trump and his movement.  The Academic Trumpists is an important contribution to our understanding of the academic right."

Paul DiMaggio, Affiliated Faculty, NYU Wagner; Professor of Sociology, NYU Department of Sociology, New York University.