People on other forums mostly aren't educated in social sciences. Linguistics, on the other hand, appears to be a very hard social science. So, it could be meaningful to know which political ideology the linguists subscribe to.
In what way is it "meaningful"? There seems to be an underlying assumption that the validity of an idea is determined by the social company it keeps. Suppose I tell you that all linguists are Reagan conservatives: what would be the impact of that revelation? (I feel compelled to object to the incorrect characterization of linguistics as a social science. Sociolunguistics is one, no doubt; the study of grammar is not).
Historians are mostly left-wingers. And history doesn't appear to be such a hard science. Economists are mostly right-wingers, and economics appears to be a bit more of a science than history. Linguistics appears to be even more scientific than economics is. It's probably less scientific than physics is, but it studies things somewhat relevant to politics.
I would guess that you're saying, the better a person's epistemology is, the more credible his conclusions about politics would be. And then you're using a subjective "scientificness" metric (applied to their profession as a whole) as your measure of the quality of an individual's epistemology.
Actually, there is another way to judge the validity of an idea: sharpen up your epistemology, and evaluate the idea yourself.
So, again, are you conservative, liberal or libertarian? Or maybe something else?
That is correct. I will give you a hint: I've never met a linguist that I agree with politically. That should narrow it down for you.
