It’s time for a change in campus political culture 

| Junior Sports Editor

For a high school field trip, I attended the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Oxon Hill, Maryland in March 2023. My progressive, New York City high school provided a history elective for juniors and seniors called “The Rise of the Right in Contemporary American Politics,” which took students to CPAC after learning about the changes in the Republican party dating back to former President Richard Nixon. Chaperoned by two teachers, the 28 of us students were bussed down to Maryland for a two-day experience that would leave a lasting mark on us.

One afternoon at CPAC, I found myself face-to-face with a doorway patrolled by private security guards. While this room was located separately from the conference’s main area and was not advertised well, a trail of attendees wearing yellow ribbons trickled in. I had learned in class that these ribbons symbolized individuals’ support for the Jan. 6 insurrectionists. Curious, I followed the yellow-ribboned trail. Upon entering the classroom-sized room, my attention lingered on the row of five adults. They were of varying ages and genders, sitting on stools, facing a projector displaying the symposium’s title: “True Stories of Jan. 6: The Prosecuted Speak.” It was at that moment that I suddenly felt acutely aware of my surroundings — not only was I at a conference promoting the ultra-conservative agenda, but I was also just feet away from individuals involved in what many consider to be an act of domestic terrorism.

As much as I wanted to walk away from the sea of yellow ribbons and escape the fear of distress I felt, there was something inside me that begged me to stay. While it was one of the most frightening moments of my life, I relished the opportunity to finally hear people share ideologies that could not be further from my own. Why would I pass on this rare opportunity to hear in-person accounts from and about those who broke into the Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021? 

Despite many moments of being ill at ease, I am deeply thankful that I decided to remain in the room a bit longer and ignore the notion that conservatives and Trump supporters are “bad” people, which was instilled in me growing up in the ultra-liberal bubble of Manhattan’s Upper West Side. As a Jewish daughter of divorced parents, it was naturally discomforting to listen to someone at CPAC explain the power the traditional Christian family unit has in shaping American society. Even so, despite the uneasiness I repeatedly felt throughout the weekend, I was compelled to expose myself to more perspectives I would not find at home. 

At CPAC, I conversed with individuals wearing “Trump Forever” hats, “Ultra MAGA” pins, brick-wall suits, and more. I challenged myself to engage in as many respectful discussions with attendees as possible; instead of trying to change their views on climate change, bodily autonomy, or education, I asked questions. It was not until I learned enough about these people that I found I  could ask more difficult, probing questions. My enriching experience at CPAC exemplified the need for Americans to learn how to seek discomfort in political conversations — a skill that should be present at academic institutions.  

Despite attending a K-12 school and a university that claim to prioritize diversity of thought, the only time I ever learned about right-wing politics in a classroom setting was in an elective class I took during my senior year of high school. Progressive education institutions strive to increase discussions surrounding identifiers such as race, gender, and ethnicity; however, they hypocritically fail to promote political diversity. Increased education on the histories of the Republican and Democratic parties and the evolution of their ideologies could minimize extremist views and lead to more productive conversations instead of worthless debates. Universities and their culture should encourage diversity in all areas. Instead, I have found that WashU fosters an environment that deters students from discussing politics with friends of differing political backgrounds. As WashU students hail from all over the country, and thus, are brought up with an array of experiences and political ideologies, this practice needs to be ruptured.

We live in a time where politics can make or break friendships and relationships. Research from the Institute for Family Studies demonstrate that there is a downward trend of individuals who are willing to marry across partisan lines. At WashU, the Student Life 2024 Election Survey concluded that when nearly 700 respondents were asked whether they would date someone affiliated with a different political party than their own, 73% responded with “Maybe” or “No.” This survey was conducted internally, and select findings from this survey were published in the 2024 Election Issue of Student Life.

This is a frightening precedent that we are setting — one that emphasizes that there is a “right” and a “wrong” political ideology. WashU’s political culture should combat this, but the University’s dominant liberal population and loud far-left community fosters a practice where people refrain from discussing non-mainstreamed political views. 

Among others, at CPAC, I listened to Political Commentator Candace Owens preach about how liberals are “brainwashing” their kids and promoting the mentality of the country needing “fighters,” not people willing to “sit down and break bread.” 

What many fail to realize is that this notion of not wanting to “break bread” with those who have different beliefs is not solely a characteristic of one party. There are individuals on the far left who fight for what they believe in without having any interest in listening to opposing conservative beliefs. Many of WashU’s liberals are unaware of their hypocrisy; they condemn the conservatives for not cooperating, even though they, too, would fail to respectfully and civilly “break bread” with their party’s adversaries.  

Out of the 693 respondents to the recent Student Life survey, 77.78% of students identified as Democrats, 6.64% identified as Republicans, and 15.58% identified with a different party. The majority-Democrat student body has created an echo chamber of political thought, failing to make room for other political ideologies. 

From this data, I would assume that most conservatives at WashU do not support the storming of the Capitol. Nor would they fit in at CPAC. It is not fair to our peers that we Democrats assume all conservatives yield to the extreme right. Before we can even begin to discuss implementing any change, we must first strip ourselves of the vision, which news outlets and social media have mainstreamed, regarding who a conservative is and what they believe in. This can start with reading news outlets we might typically disagree with — however, as we are at a university, this must be displayed in the classroom as well. 

While many WashU professors aim to diversify their coursework by assigning readings by authors of varying identities, in my three semesters at WashU, I have not read about or discussed many non-liberal ideologies. The closest I have come to experiencing efficient and effective political conversations in class is when adjunct professor Nicholas Waerbury played devil’s advocate in “Supreme Court, Law, and Public Policy,” forcing us into a possible conservative-minded thought process for a given court case. Even still, my classmates explicitly and unproductively put down right-leaning views in these discussions, thus preventing people with opposing opinions from feeling welcome in the conversation. 

Despite nearly 80% of WashU students affiliating with the same political party, according to FIRE’s 2025 Free Speech Rankings, only 9% feel “very comfortable” sharing their views on controversial topics in class and 13% feel this way when conversing in public spaces on campus. 

The issue on this campus is not that people are scared to discuss their political views because they do not want to be proven “right” or “wrong.” Rather, it is the fact that the students are not respected when mentioning or even alluding to any non-left-leaning ideologies. WashU does not foster a safe atmosphere where non-leftists feel welcome sharing their political beliefs. 

Whether or not you agree with someone should not impact the way you approach a conversation. Two people can disagree with each other and still have a gratifying conversation. The issue only emerges the second someone becomes defensive and puts their guard up — productive conversation must center around mutual respect for one another regardless of ideological differences. While it is naturally difficult to listen to oppressive rhetoric, conversation participants still must be courteous of the fundamental human right to opinion and expression.

WashU’s Professor John Inazu, a Sally D. Danforth Distinguished Professor of Law & Religion and a professor of Political Science, recently published a book titled “Learning to Disagree: The Surprising Path to Navigating Differences with Empathy and Respect.” In a recent ABC interview, Inazu said that in difficult conversations, we should focus on our relationship with the human being, rather than the argument itself. We need to learn how to enter political discussions mentally prepared to “take some hits” so, instead of immediately acting defensively, we can better receive the comment and ask a follow-up question.  

WashU’s culture of attacking people’s beliefs instead of thoughtfully hearing them out prohibits the existence of a community that truly welcomes civil discourse. In “The vital importance of an open ear and a desire to listen,” junior Tim Mellman argues that campus culture should promote diversity of political thought rather than normalizing a specific political view.  

WashU claims to cultivate the leaders of tomorrow, but how can this be achieved when students are only exposed to one political ideology in class? How can we overcome the bipartisan divide on campus if many professors only provide anti-conservative ideas to their students?

To properly prepare us for a future of complex conversations and nuanced problem solving, students and faculty alike must become more explicitly accepting of non-liberal ideologies. It is time to become comfortable in the uncomfortable. 

Sign up for the email edition

Stay up to date with everything happening at Washington University and beyond.

Subscribe