When professors and politics mix

History professors with passionate views aren't usually a problem - when it comes to the cause of the Civil War or the Industrial Revolution.

But when it comes to politics, some people say opinionated professors may be crossing the line.

During its annual meeting last weekend, the American Historical Association - made up of leading historians across the country - took political activism to a whole new level by voting on a resolution that urges its members to oppose the war in Iraq.

The Historians Against the War - a group devoted to opposing the violence in Iraq - proposed the resolution at the AHA meeting, hoping that historians can help end the war because they can add their "informed historical perspectives," Rowan University history professor and group member David Applebaum said.

"Historians share with ordinary citizens a concern about the future but also bring to the table professional skills that contribute to analysis of information," Applebaum said.

The AHA's Executive Council has asked all members of the organization to vote on the resolution in the coming weeks.

But for those who believe that politics should never cross into academics, AHA's resolution was unsettling.

Penn History Department Chairman Charles Licht - who did not vote on the resolution - said he supports the AHA's right to pass the resolution but added that any political views should not be extending into teaching.

The History Department "does not use the classroom as a pulpit," Licht said.

Stanford history professor and AHA member James Sheehan said he opposes the Iraq war but believes that scholarly organizations should limit its political stances to academic issues.

"The AHA ought to take political positions on issues of scholarship and intellectual inquiry," Sheehan said.

Furthermore, the resolution "has nothing to do with academics," said David Horowitz, author of The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America. "It turns the AHA into a political organization."

Horowitz added that confusing politics with academics is harmful to students because it gives a biased education.

And, for Horowitz, the problem of politics extends beyond this resolution and the History Department.

For example, he said he sees the Women's Studies Department at Penn as "politics masquerading as classes" and referred to Sociology professor Robin Leidner's course, "Sociology of Gender," as "teaching students what to think instead of how to think."

Liedner acknowledged the women's studies field grew out of the feminist movement, saying that "academics is political to some extent."

But she added that she emphasizes to her students the need to "consider each argument critically."

And Liedner's sentiments are echoed by most academics, many of whom believe that politics can in fact have a place in the classroom.

"Absolute neutrality is not possible and not a good thing," Sheehan said.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.