I recently made a presentation in front of a few hundred students of varied backgrounds at the Washington Center in Washington, DC. At the end of the event, a student approached me and told me that she was so sorry to learn about all the cancellation attempts that have come my way. She asked me why I would remain a professor in such a toxic environment and my response was simple: Higher education is an institution that has lifted Americans up and helped them realize their American dream; working with students and opening their minds is a privilege.
Our students today are not ideologues but are ideologically balanced. This fact is obfuscated by social media and so many students being forced to take positions and actions that they do not necessarily like or truly and fully support. College and university students are better than shouting down speakers. In reality, many are confused and dealing with mental health concerns and are forced to make tough choices foisted on them by an omnipresent and toxic administrative class.
Fielded before the November 2022 election, UT-Austin’s Future of Politics survey powerfully revealed the ideological centrism of our nation’s students today. Querying over 1500 undergraduate students at 91 different colleges and universities, 35 percent are in the ideological middle being moderate or slightly liberal or conservative. Twenty-eight percent are somewhat or very conservative, and another 26 percent are somewhat or very liberal. Eleven percent identify as something else. This shows a healthy balance on campus.
In fact, the data show that when college and university students were asked about which political party is prepared to pursue the reforms our country needs, most students (43 percent) say that neither party is ready and capable, while about a quarter of students state the Republican (24 percent) or Democratic (23 percent) party is best suited to lead. Looking at how Democratic students answer the question specifically, just 53 percent of them believe that their party can lead compared to a higher 63 percent among Republicans who favor the GOP. Trust and support within both parties are low, and it is the lowest among Democratic students.
On campus today, like the rest of the nation, there are powerful differences between actual individual attitudes and then their choices. For almost two decades, I have been showing that while many Americans are in the ideological middle, their electoral choices are polarized and extreme due to activists and primaries. Most Americans are caught between having to opt for the lesser of two polarized extremes.
Today’s students are in the same position on campus. At Sarah Lawrence College, Eboo Patel uncovered this very dynamic, recounting a large, formulaic, and disruptive protest that focused on promoting ideological purity. Patel subsequently spoke with some students after the event and chronicled something that is far too common among leftists: conformity and self-censorship. One student protestor told Patel that the Diaspora Coalition did not fully represent her in both substance and style and that in her attempts to support minority identities, she had taken part in “things that violate [her] own identity, including rudeness to teachers and other educational leaders.” When Patel asked why students supported the protest if they did not feel represented in their attitudes and ideas, the student said that students were deemed either for or against the cause, “and there was a palpable fear of breaking the mold.” If students challenged or questioned the approach, they “risked being ‘Sarah Lawrenced’ — a particular form of cancellation on the college campus.”
Sarah Lawrence is not unique here. Progressive and activist college and university administrators have set many terms of political engagement and polarized so much discourse and debate. Only a few weeks ago, Stanford University’s IT department—not students or faculty—published a long list of words that are part of its Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative. This list creates a Kafkaesque, anxiety-filled campus over speech which leaves no room for nuance now that it is harmful to say the terms “American” and “you guys.” Simply put, students are being forced to the extremes even when they themselves are not close to those positions. I will not abandon or even hold them fully accountable.
While Stanford’s IT department’s behavior is both dangerous and heartbreaking, I know that most students reject this extremism and utter nonsense. Data regularly show that students are curious and reasonable; they are open-minded, tolerant, and practical with their hearts and minds curious and compassionate. Being able to push back on the administrative overreach and insanity, showcasing how education, viewpoint diversity, and open inquiry should actually work, and supporting the far more ideologically balanced student body that is being told how to think and often forced into extreme choices is crucially important and something that I will not walk away from.
Samuel J. Abrams is a professor of politics at Sarah Lawrence College and a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
The post Why I Continue to Teach appeared first on American Enterprise Institute – AEI.