In my book, “The Indispensable Right,” I write about the intolerance for viewpoint diversity in higher education and the atmosphere of orthodoxy created by overwhelmingly liberal faculties. We have also discussed consistent studies showing that students no longer feel free to express their viewpoints in class or on campuses. A new study offers additional data on this problem, showing that almost 90% of students misrepresent their views in class and on assignments to satisfy faculty by adopting more liberal views. The authors explain that “these students were not cynical, but adaptive.” Faced with the intolerance and rigidity of liberal faculty, they pretend to be liberal to avoid being penalized for their real views or values. In other words, they “quickly learn to rehearse what is safe.”
In a recent op-ed, Northwestern University researchers Forest Romm and Kevin Waldman detail their findings:
Between 2023 and 2025, we conducted 1,452 confidential interviews with undergraduates at Northwestern University and the University of Michigan. …
We asked: Have you ever pretended to hold more progressive views than you truly endorse to succeed socially or academically? An astounding 88 percent said yes.
These students were not cynical, but adaptive. In a campus environment where grades, leadership, and peer belonging often hinge on fluency in performative morality, young adults quickly learn to rehearse what is safe.
The result is not conviction but compliance. And beneath that compliance, something vital is lost.
This has been a long-standing problem in higher education. The current generation of faculty and administrators has destroyed the sense of free thought and expression on our campuses. Faced with consistent polling showing that students feel compelled to mimic liberal ideology and viewpoints, faculty shrug or even attack students for being weak. In a debate that I had at Harvard Law School, a Harvard professor called such students “conservative snowflakes.”
However, they are not conservative. Take Harvard. A recent survey of the graduating class by the Classroom Social Compact Committee found that, despite an overwhelmingly liberal faculty and student body, even liberal Harvard students found a chilling environment for free expression at the school. And it is getting worse. The results show a 13 percent decrease from the Class of 2023.
Last year, Harvard found itself in a familiar spot on the annual ranking of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE): dead last among 251 universities and colleges.
What is most striking is the fact that Harvard has created this hostile environment while maintaining an overwhelmingly liberal student body and faculty. Only 9 percent of the class identified as conservative or very conservative.
Yet, even liberals feel stifled at Harvard. Only 41 percent of liberal students reported being comfortable discussing controversial topics, and only 25 percent of moderates and 17 percent of conservatives felt comfortable in doing so.
This sense of orthodoxy is conveyed by the Harvard faculty, which itself does not tolerate opposing voices except for a handful of conservative academics. The Harvard Crimson has documented how the school’s departments have virtually eliminated Republicans. In one study of multiple departments last year, they found that more than 75 percent of the faculty self-identified as “liberal” or “very liberal.”
Only 5 percent identified as “conservative,” and only 0.4% as “very conservative.”
The virtual purging of conservative faculty members across the country sends a message to students that such ideas are not favored or acceptable. The result is that the vast majority of students — liberal and conservative — self-censor in an environment of intolerance.
In the latest study, the researcher found:
Seventy-eight percent of students told us they self-censor on their beliefs surrounding gender identity; 72 percent on politics; 68 percent on family values. More than 80 percent said they had submitted classwork that misrepresented their views in order to align with professors. For many, this has become second nature — an instinct for academic and professional self-preservation.
The authors’ research suggests that on some issues, such as the nature of gender and gender identity, students’ actual beliefs are quite different from what appears to be the prevailing orthodoxy on campus.
They write further:
Authenticity, once considered a psychological good, has become a social liability. And this fragmentation doesn’t end at the classroom door. Seventy-three percent of students reported mistrust in conversations about these values with close friends. Nearly half said they routinely conceal beliefs in intimate relationships for fear of ideological fallout. This is not simply peer pressure — it is identity regulation at scale, and it is being institutionalized.
Universities often justify these dynamics in the name of inclusion. But inclusion that demands dishonesty is not ensuring psychological safety — it is sanctioning self-abandonment. In attempting to engineer moral unity, higher education has mistaken consensus for growth and compliance for care.
Again, if students saw a meaningful number of conservative, libertarian, or contrarian faculty members, they might believe that opposing views are tolerated. Instead, they receive a steady drumbeat of often strident ideological commentary. I constantly hear reports of students having to sit through diatribes from faculty members against conservative politicians, justices, and values. Years ago, a graduating student told me that my Supreme Court class in her final term was the first time in college or law school that she felt comfortable expressing her conservative views, including pro-life views. It was a profoundly sad statement about the state of higher education.
This report will now be added to a tall stack of other reports showing a culture of intolerance and intimidation in higher education, particularly for more conservative students. It also reflects why the last election shocked so many in the media and establishment, as young people voted Republican. This generation of faculty and administrators has created a type of underground culture as students mouth liberal orthodoxy in class to avoid the retaliation or disfavor of liberal professors.
After many years of such studies, there is no evidence that faculty members are prepared to change in adding more diversity to their ranks. While this environment is the antithesis of higher education, it is advantageous for those who espouse accepted viewpoints and values. The students are left to “adapt” or face the consequences.
My sons went to a Big 10 school in 2017-2021. They absolutely regurgitated whatever liberal drivel was required to get by, particularly in required diversity classes. While they didn’t get the intellectual debate that would be useful in a classroom setting, they did get good grades. And became more staunchly conservative.
“required diversity classes”
Remember, the real reason that these classes are required is provide jobs for the otherwise unemployable graduates with worthless diversity degrees.
Gigi, you lack the intellectual ability to make a point, so you’re back to thread hijacking? Have you ever considered how pointless your pathetic life has really become?
I think this is apt, At High School Debates, Debate Is No Longer Allowed
“At national tournaments, judges are making their stances clear: students who argue ‘capitalism can reduce poverty’ or ‘Israel has a right to defend itself’ will lose—no questions asked.”
https://www.thefp.com/p/judges-ruin-high-school-debate-tournaments?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Yep, the only way imbeciles like Gigi here can win an argument is to ban the opposition.
A key take away,
” judges are making it clear they are not only tilting the debate in a left-wing direction, they will also penalize students who don’t adhere to their ideology.”
The author of The Free Press article got it,
“In 2019, I gave up on the NSDA and formed a new debate league, Incubate Debate. To judge debates, we recruit elected officials, members of the armed forces, business executives, faith-based leaders, and others. At the eighteen no-cost tournaments we’ve hosted this year, thousands of students have come together to debate, have fun, and learn from each other.”
And that is what needs to occur in American “higher education.” It has started with The University of Austin and needs to continue with more, better universities and colleges than these left wind indoctrination camps.
Upstate Farmer: Just reviewed your link. That is an excellent addition to today’s topic. Thank you.
Lin,
It is older article but based on what we are seeing the the study the good professor notes, it appears the situation is not getting better but worse.
You are welcome!
The professor is absolutely correct.
Colleges and universities have been discriminating against conservative faculty members for decades. We need to find a way to force them to be more inclusive.
We need more inclusion, equity and diversity in college faculties to favor conservative viewpoints.
I agree.
But how would we do that?
Quite simple really.
We would simply require colleges to set up special administrative offices to ensure that greater numbers of conservative faculty members are hired even if they are less qualified than more liberal applicants.
We could call them Offices of Inclusion, Equity and Diversity, or IED for short.
Wait, wait, wait !!!!
That sounds an awful lot like the DEI programs that leftists have been pushing for years, and that got us in this position in the first place.
No, no.
This is the complete opposite of DEI.
This is Inclusion, Equity and Diversity, NOT Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.
It is the complete opposite, don’t you see.
Ahhhh!!!
Yes, of course, that makes perfect sense.
But how would we enforce that ????
Very simply.
Most colleges rely on federal funding for their programs and student loans.
All we have to do is to deny federal funding to any college or university that refuses to set up an office of Inclusion, Equity and Diversity to ensure that conservative faculty members are hired even if they are less qualified than liberal applicants.
Problem solved !!!!
We could also require colleges to teach classes about how society has unjustly diminished the rights and opportunities of conservatives and rendered us as second class citizens.
These classes in Critical Political Theory would be required for all students as a condition of graduation, regardless of their personal political views.
Great ideas !!!
The Trump administration needs to get on this ASAP.
They should probably set up a Department of Education to oversee these programs.
“set up a Department of Education”
Why? I thought that whole point of your dumb rant was about improving education. The objective fact is that the soon to be shuttered department was a complete failure, other than as payback to left-wing teacher unions.
Or, or, or, Gigi, and hear me out, the faculty could simply stop their discrimination against anyone to the right of Mao? Ever think of that? Of course not. Thinking is not something that you’re known for.
In other words, college professors are teaching their students how to practice insincere flattery and outright lying in order to survive in a hostile social setting.
And making students more conservative and more hostile to the viewpoints of their professors in the process.
How do we know that is true? Or it could be that students are not brave enough to pipe up and express their views or challenge an idea in class? How is that the fault of professors? Most liberal professor encourage it and promote it. Can you picture that happening at a school like Liberty U or Prager U?
Claims about professors teaching students to practice insincere flatter or outright lyng is a lie itself. Where’s the proof?
The “adaptive learning” phrase caught my attention.
I went to Catholic schools as a young child. Early on, a nun would slap my hand with a ruler if she caught me trying to “color” in the coloring books or write my ABCs with my left hand. I was a declared “deviant.” I was forced to use my right hand to appease the teacher. As the researcher above stated, “This is not simply peer pressure — it is identity regulation at scale, and it is being institutionalized.”
(My parents let me use either hand. One day my mother telephoned the school, and that was the end of that. Thereafter, I was allowed to continue using my left hand and went on to earn several awards in Art over the years. Today I continue to favor my left hand for writing, but everything else is pretty much right-handed (including scissors use, golfing, and precision tasks).
To the point, this makes me think about the “we know what is best for you” attitude, carried further into a demand for conformity and uniformity in ideological learning. While it may have its merits in certain behaviours and environments, it certainly is repulsive and contrary to critical thinking development and long-standing achievement for an inquisitive student .
(I think of the recorded visuals of thousands of Chinese soldiers/troops marching in precise uniformity, parading past President Xi Jinping and CCP authorities.)
I thought this was already a “given”.
Turls, everyone knows they adopt the liberal views because they learn their fascist ones suck. How my confederate magats this beautiful Sunday morning?
“Turls, everyone knows they adopt the liberal views because they learn their fascist ones suck. How my confederate magats this beautiful Sunday morning?”
Gigi, I see that you’re feeling more inadequate this morning than usual. Did one of your truck drivers give you the once over last night behind the dumpsters?
They adopt liberal views as they are forced to by their fascist illiberal professors. If they do not, their fascist illiberal professors will give them a failing grade. My daughter was forced to take a DEI class in order to graduate by those fascist faculty.
Gigi is just jealous because her worthless degree didn’t do much to prepare her for her chosen career of rest stop bathroom “servicing”
They do not “adopt”, they merely echo those views as nececary to succeed in academia.
The last paragraph and the 2024 voting data is suggesting that young people are becoming MORE conservative not less.
The truly bad part of this is that what we WANT is vigorous debate – that improves everyone’s views.
The left rants about the importance of academic freedom – and yet we have the least freedom of thought on college campuses that we have ever had.
And that means students have learned to shape shift to succeed – that is NOT academic freedom and it does NOT produce the next generation of the worlds greatest thinkers.
It is NOT good for the right, it is not good for th left, it is not good for any of us.
ATS – that is not at all what these studies have found.
As Turley notes toward the end – the result is a generation of students that is MORE conservative, not less.
Democrats are losing the working class – most of us KNOW that Trump and Republicans are agressively courting it and Democrats response has been to further piss on those voters.
But as Turley noted – the voting data from 2024 is ALSO showing a move to the right in the youth vote – 18-35.
If you were not so much of a moron – you would grasp that the intolerance of the left is bad for everyone.
Without real challanges – leftists tend to beleive their own garbage. Their views do not get refined to reflect their very real problems in reality.
Conversely as students shape their expression to suit professors – not only are the ignorant and unrealitic views of professors unchallenged and their errors unaddressed.
But the views of students are also deprived of the benefits of argument, debate.
And so students too end up with conservative views – but NOT well thought out and defensible conservative views that work – but just like the professors with views that had not been tested by being challenged.
That is bad for students, bad for professors and bad for all of us.
John Say,
Well said.
As for the working class and voters in general, there is only so much of the woke leftist thinking that people will put up with. Demanding that thinking even one iota outside of the woke leftist box is forbidden or get called a whatever-ist was a bridge too far for most sane and normal people.
Turley doesn’t link to the studies. So anything he’s saying is purely an assumption. We don’t know if what he’s saying is really true.
Conervatives complaining about not being heard or discriminated have not done a good job of making their argument. All I’ve seen are claims about studies that are not presented or linked to.
“Turley doesn’t link to the studies. So anything he’s saying is purely an assumption. We don’t know if what he’s saying is really true.
Conervatives complaining about not being heard or discriminated have not done a good job of making their argument. All I’ve seen are claims about studies that are not presented or linked to.”
George, if you used a spellchecker, you might have more gravitas here. And I’m sorry if you haven’t had any experience with American universities given that you’re sitting in some basement in Moscow.
Unfortunately it is not just in the schools. My daughter at 17 (21 years ago) fell into a coffee club that was promoting alternative gender. Through this club she was introduced to a psychologist that believed in transition. She counselled her and eventually she started taking hormone drugs. She had and has our loving support but at that age the influence from this group was more than we could counter. After about 6 years she realized who she was and fortunately stopped the drugs and changed her lifestyle. It has taken years for the effects of those drugs to wear off especially in the sound of her voice.
“It has taken years for the effects of those drugs to wear off especially in the sound of her voice.”
Gigi, take note. There’s hope for you yet.
Higher education is no longer higher education. I it is expensive indoctrination. It is a forced, captive, I would say hostage like situation where the hostage i.e. the student, is forced to take and pay for classes that amount to nothing in the real world. My daughter was mandated to take a DEI class as a graduation requirement. If there is going to be “higher” education, then streamline it to a specific degree reflecting a career without all the BS classes.
Or, companies have paid internships, with testing, where the intern reaches proficiency in their career field equal to a college degree. They get real world experience, real world training, get paid, an asset to the company, no debt, no useless classes they are forced to take, no indoctrination from leftist professors who punish students for not adapting their leftists viewpoints.
Its obvious you never got past grammar school old wise one.
Internships do not give students proficiency in anything but ass kissing; they apply social-dynamics that were acquired in grade school. They never mature beyond that stage as is so noticeable with you and many others here.
“Its obvious you never got past grammar school old wise one.
Internships do not give students proficiency in anything but ass kissing; they apply social-dynamics that were acquired in grade school. They never mature beyond that stage as is so noticeable with you and many others here.”
Throwing shade again, Gigi? Just because your gender studies degree was useful for your night job behind the truck stop dumpsters, don’t go knocking folks that didn’t waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on worthless degrees.
I worked a PT job in fast food in high school. I learned social skills working with the general public that went far beyond the social setting of high school at a early age.
More reasons why internships may be better than colleges,
Bosses are firing Gen Z grads just months after hiring them—here’s what they say needs to change
https://fortune.com/article/why-are-companies-firing-gen-z-employees-workplace-bosses-workers-jobs/
Personally, I would ask why 90% adapt this way. I’ve long claimed that recent generations of kids are brought up with no firm morality and sense of right vs wrong. They’ve been brought up in a world of equivocation. The wolf-like professors see students as a bunch of Little Red Riding Hoods, and pounce. The students have no defense against these smooth talking wolves. They hardly know they’ve been ensnared.
It seems to me that the students are in college to achieve a goal – a degree that will result in a job. It’s not that they’re not interested in the subjects they major in, but that post-graduation job is the aim, and college is – or has been sold to them as – the key.
Therefore the profs who can further or stymie that aim have tremendous power over them.
Let’s say you’re in love with someone and about to meet that person’s mother for the first time. Would you go into that meeting with the attitude that if the mother says things you disagree with, your response will be to push back – or that your response will be to keep quiet and smile and assume (or at least hope) that after the wedding you’ll have more flexibility, to coin a phrase?
Nothing novel or surprising here. The instructors are *supposed* to have strong expertise in their specialties; (in theory) they were chosen to pass the benefits of that expertise on to their students for that very reason. It is a typical human error to defer to a person who is a verified authority in one subject on unrelated matters, that error is particularly unsurprising when it occurs in relatively inexperienced young adults. The phenomenon has a clinical name: “authority bias” (I had cause to look it up earlier this morning when researching the background to an article I read about a fool who allowed himself to be deluded by a ChapGPT hallucinatory episode (cite link below). To that extent, this is not a critical problem, and could be effectively combated with a primer in critical thinking. What makes it such a problem critical is when the universities choose instructors who are absolutely unacceptable as influences on students in any way, shape or form, often including their alleged areas of expertise.
ChatGPT Plunges Hapless User Into Epic Hallucinatory Crash-Out
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2025-08-16/chatgpt-plunges-hapless-user-epic-hallucinatory-crash-out
“Engagement-hungry AI plunges pothead into month-long, potentially career-ending delusional spiral in which they collaborate to conjure a nonsense “mathematical framework” called “Chronoarithmics””
Unless and until faculty have the integrity to educate instead of indoctrinate students, the trend in universities will continue to bend ever more to the Left. Fortunately, many students are shying away from overly expensive, and overly political universities to trade schools that actually allow them to finish debt-free with marketable skills, with their own personal integrity intact.
If conservatives want to win this battle, we need role models of meritocratic argument without a hint of ad hominem attack. We should gently mock conservatives who resort quickly to dissing the person while ducking discussion of the issue. And we need leaders at the top who model this behavior, and stick to it even when things are going sideways. You know what I’m talking about.
” …conservatives who resort quickly to dissing the person while ducking discussion of the issue.”
Unlike what typically goes on in this space, right ;?>
anon, you are absolutely right. Don’t tell them what they want they hear, they respond with an attack.
95% of the comments here are from uninteresting and/or have no relevance to the subject.
“95% of the comments here are from uninteresting and/or have no relevance to the subject.”
Case in point
We have to point out faulty leftist thinking. It is not ad hominem attack to say out loud the obvious, like biological men should not be in women’s sports, locker rooms, bath rooms. Or pornography should not be in elementary school libraries.
“We have to point out faulty leftist thinking. It is not ad hominem attack to say out loud the obvious, like biological men should not be in women’s sports, locker rooms, bath rooms. Or pornography should not be in elementary school libraries.”
You’re attacking their recruitment when you think this way. Seriously. This what they mean by trans “genocide”, the fact that they can’t brainwash your tomboy daughter into sterilization, unnecessary destructive surgeries, and lifetime hormone treatments.
It is simple, lose the battle (to pass the class), win the war! (Graduate). It’s been going on for decades.
This was going on 50 years ago.
Do you think I’m going to risk my GPA on a POS professor who is inflexible?
Meh!
Regurgitate on paper. Erase brain. Next class!
I naively expected the college would censor these inflexible pods after reading student reviews.
Then, I discovered tenure and stopped caring.
“Then, I discovered tenure and stopped caring.”
Tenure is dying, in STEM anyway. Who stays at any single job for that long?
So, you became what you (presumably) despised. That is a great recipe for personal satisfaction and high self esteem, and makes a wonderful recommendation for young students.
“So, you became what you (presumably) despised. That is a great recipe for personal satisfaction and high self esteem, and makes a wonderful recommendation for young students.”
Gigi, unlike your chosen field of truck stop “servicing”, a lot of real jobs have a pointless requirement of needing a college degree just to get in the door.
The answer is to turn away from those institutions who fail in their core mission which is to educate instead of indoctrinate. The cost of a degree from these schools far outweighs the value received. Employers are coming to realize that the ivy brand is tainted by turning out an inferior product that can’t perform as expected and is more likely to disrupt the workforce than contribute to its productivity. The marketplace may ultimately correct the problem when the universities themselves are faced with a choice similar to what they have given students. Either adapt or die.
“Employers are coming to realize that the ivy brand is tainted by turning out an inferior product that can’t perform as expected and is more likely to disrupt the workforce than contribute to its productivity”
Hamas would hire every one of them. They could even skip the onboarding lecture, since they’re already had the proper indoctrination.
“an inferior product that can’t perform as expected and is more likely to disrupt the workforce than contribute to its productivity”
NTM vastly overpriced…
Consider the impact on the offending professors. They’re getting this constant reinforcement of their morally twisted viewpoints as being widely accepted and almost never contradicted, if at all. That’s a downward spiral of epic proportions. Calling it an echo chamber doesn’t do it justice.
I’ll add my typical comment. Does that sound like Nazi Germany? It should. There, teachers were not told what to teach or say, but they knew very well that one comment could get them fired or even jailed. Students were raised to one viewpoint.
The point is, the liberal left here and now has become fascist, Professor. Now, the tough question. Ask yourself, even with your great standing among lawyers and the public. Haven’t you been intimidated yourself to moderate your public views on what your party, perhaps your former party now – I don’t know, have become? Because you know what they are as well as I and everyone else not brainwashed do.
It sounds like every authoritarian regime throughout history. That’s what makes them authoritarian. Nazis were nothing special in this regard.
True.
Nazi Germany? this is the typical stoopid and ignorant commenter on this blog.
“Nazi Germany? this is the typical stoopid and ignorant commenter on this blog.”
Gigi, you don’t need to keep defending the Nazis here. Your shared hatred of Jews is well established.
It should be noted that the universities in Germany were very much at the forefront of the anti-semitism at the time. In the case of our so-called elite universities today, history isn’t merely rhyming.
Politics is downstream from culture. You must take back our universities and secondary schools and change the narrative
And change it what?
“And change it what?”
If you meant “And change it TO what?” (uncertain as your level of literacy is suspect) how about to a rational correspondence to reality (others please forgive the redundancy, but I doubt that Wally understands what “rational” means…)
“. . . how about to a rational correspondence to reality . . .”
Precisely!
With the reality being: In the classroom, an academic’s job is to teach an important body of ideas — the arguments for and against those opposing ideas. Their fundamental responsibility is to *educate*, not propagandize.
The “rational correspondence” (to that reality) is: A responsibility to know those ideas, to have an extensive grasp of that body of knowledge. And then to communicate that knowledge via an objective method.
That, not politics, would solve academia’s woes.