We live in a world where there needs to be a balance of forces because, if this does not happen, the dominant force will oppress the supporters of the other. Take this and apply it to the struggle between communism and capitalism for instance.
This clutch in ideology is very important in shaping human society. If capitalism is the dominant ideology and it goes unregulated by communism, we get a situation where the workers and the poor are highly exploited. Similarly if communism was to be a dominant ideology and goes unregulated, we would get a situation where capital is taken from its owners, to benefit the ruling elite not the masses. So a question has been posed, “Is university education pro-communist?” In my opinion, it is clear that the author of this question wants the answer to be yes, but I say no.
I say this because if you look at it, academics understand that if the dominant ideology (capitalism) is left unregulated exploitation of the workers will worsen. Communism is not being taught at universities but academics are critical of capitalism.
Academics like critically analysing dominant ideologies. Let me outline a succinct history of academics analysing dominant ideologies. When Adam Smith’s theory of deregulation was largely accepted in Europe as the dominant ideology in the late 18th century and early 19th century, academics criticised it of being “pro-capitalist and leads to exploitation”, this was the analysis of Karl Marx. This gave birth to the new ideology (communism) which was to be almost dominant in the early 20th century, but it too was criticised by academics as a way of abolishing private property. Criticism of both communism and capitalism is a continuing process in the academic field, only because they are both ideologies which shape human society. Academics believe that capitalism is left unregulated, and so they are trying to regulate it. They mostly blame capitalism for third world poverty, but this does not mean that they are pro-communist.
Nevertheless academics differ in their fields, for instance economics lectures may know well about communism, but most economics students know nothing about it. To specify, economics lectures don’t talk about communism in lectures. I believe that Marx and Lenin specialised in economics, even if you go to the library shelves their book are under the economics section, but economics lectures don’t talk about them in lectures. Why is this so? Is the economics department pro-capitalism?
From this view it is clear that you can not say that university education is pro-communist or capitalist.