Louis Sagarriga Visconti

Question 1: Are universities sites of radical politics? Should they attempt to be? Why or
why not? (1953 Words)

Universities represent an ideal environment for young, motivated students to voice their
opinion on important matters and develop their social and political understanding of the
world. Thanks to the endless possibilities of meeting many similarly-minded individuals,
universities can become subject to the development of radical politics. Students in the British
colonies utilized campuses to voice their opinions on European oppression and independence,
going as far as to utilize violence to voice their demands. Should universities allow, or
perhaps even support the creation of radical movements on their campuses? Although
university campuses are provided by the institutions, there is no effective way to control what
students choose to believe and how they act in their own time. Therefore, it would be
impractical for universities to attempt to censure and restrict students from voicing their
opinions on campus. If the institution wishes to allow the development of its young thinkers,
it should not bear the responsibility of choosing what is a correct political movement and
what is not. However, the university should maintain strict guidelines as to the order and
safety of the campus. Furthermore, although students' voices must be heard, in the modern
day, no political agenda should make its way into the teaching or the structure of the
university, which should remain objective and unbiased. Students should always take in the
information from such institutions to then form an opinion for themselves. In this essay, I will
argue how universities can be sites of radical politics through their campuses, though they
should never take part in supporting any political agenda in order to maintain the integrity of
the institutions' teaching.

University campuses can serve as homes for up to tens of thousands of students at a time.
They serve as an excellent opportunity for motivated young men and women to develop their
beliefs and values by living amongst like-minded individuals who can share similar interests
and passions. Protests are a common sight on university campuses around the world. Campus
manifestations can vary in size and radicalism. Student protests can be of relatively
innocuous intent. Simple yet relevant issues such as students’ demand for more economic
funding (Rhoads, 1998) is an example of the youth uniting and utilizing the campus to voice
their concerns. An example of more politically motivated political expression is the wave of
Black Lives Matter protests that were ignited after the 2014 St. Louis shooting of Michael
Brown, an African American man, by Darren Wilson, a Caucasian police officer. Two
hundred peaceful protesters marched onto Saint Louis University campus and were met by
the Saint Louis University president, (Johnson, 2017, Pg. 212). University campuses are ideal
for peaceful protests, as students can easily gather and can express their opinions on matters
of all kinds. However, not all protests on university campuses are peaceful. As the British
Empire declined, universities across the colonies were subject to mass protest by the new
generations of the subjected territories. A prominent example of the role of university
campuses in the fight for decolonization occurred in the British colony of Rhodesia, modern
day Zimbabwe. On August 7th 1973, African students at the University of Rhodesia staged
the most violent demonstration of the pre‐independence history of Zimbabwe. This protest
led to the arrest of over 150 students, all of whom received jail sentences ranging from three
to nine months(Mlambo, 2007, Abstract). The events of 1973 were caused by the rise of anti-
white radicalism caused by the British Empire’s colonial presence in the territory of
Rhodesia. The result of the violence further raised polarization between the black majority
and the white minority of the colony. The protest of 1973 would become one of the most
memorable events in the lead up to Zimbabwe’s recognized independence in 1980. The
university responded by banning those who participated from being within twenty kilometres
of the university for three years. Although it can be argued that the protesters were fighting
for a good cause, it is undeniable that universities should draw a clear line as to what can and
cannot be tolerated on campus. It must be understood that radical politics should not be
censored by universities, as silencing the voices of young motivated students is not a fair and
practical method of managing campus manifestation. However, violent manifestation should
be suppressed with immediate effect in order to maintain tranquillity on a university campus,
which should be an environment of open discussion and learning. By analysing those three
examples of protests within university campuses, it is undeniable that universities are a site of
radical and non-radical politics due to the unified presence of young, motivated, and often
passionate students.

Besides what occurs inside of university campuses, are the university institutions
themselves sites of radical politics? Can radical politics affect decisions and structures within
the walls of the institutions? We must not forget that universities, especially those that are
public and are therefore state funded, are extremely important to nation’s governments. They
have an unparalleled influence on the minds of the youth and have been used as a weapon by
the state in the past to push certain agendas. A clear example is that of universities in Nazi
Germany, where massive influence was applied on the appointment of staff positions as well
as to the expulsion of Jewish professors (Hentschel, 1996, Introduction). Such actions were
mandated by the state in order to push anti-Semitic agendas contributing to the massive
National Socialist propagandist push. It is therefore no doubt that, in the past, universities
have shown to be sites of radical politics under certain circumstances. However, it can be
argued that political agendas can still affect universities in the present day. Political agendas
can infiltrate the crucial information fed to students. For example, with the rise of the social
justice movement in the western world, professors have criticized the effect of such
developments on the lecturing of universities. Higher Education promotes “woke” agendas
that narrow debates and confine curricula content, by dismissing thinking and action that does
not align with new identity policy and practice (Sage, 2022, Abstract). Although one might
argue that the “woke” agendas Dr. Sage mentions aren’t as radical as she implies, the issue of
interpretation remains present. By looking at two examples of how universities, albeit
through very different circumstances, can be a site of radical politics from within, I can
conclude that universities are not completely immune to political influence in the content that
they are lecturing. This is largely due to the crucial role of universities in instilling ideas in
the young workforce of each country which makes them an incredible asset for governments
as well as political movements to influence.

The recent controversy regarding the influence of political agendas on universities raises
the question as to how universities should respond to political pressure. Should they attempt
to take part in potentially radical politics? Universities should not allow outside influence to
affect the structure or the teaching of the institution. Academic institutions must be aware of
the highly important role they hold. They are respected as reliable sources of information for
young students and pride themselves in offering objective teaching, not to be manipulated to
promote certain political views. Students should be encouraged to develop their own thinking
by taking in the information taught to them and using it to form their own opinions. If
universities were to succumb to outside pressure and display political bias of any kind there
would be two different outcomes. Firstly, the future generation may lack the critical thinking
skills necessary to fill the most important positions in society. If students are taught their
syllabus through one point of view, there is a chance that scholars will not have any margin
left to form their own opinions or ideas on any given topic. Their thoughts will have already
been instilled onto them by the institution. Universities should allow students to process the
information taught to them independently in order to utilize their own critical thinking skills.
The future generations of workers must be capable of analyzing issues themselves. Such
skills can only be developed through an education that values objectivity and unbiased
teaching, leaving the students to develop their own ideas on what they are taught. The second
potential outcome would be the loss of credibility of universities. Once radical politics
influence universities’ teaching to a strong enough degree, students will gradually understand
how what they are told is highly biased. Therefore, university institutions must remain
entirely unaffected by political pressure of any kind. Although universities should allow for
discussion and debate amongst students and lecturers, such dialogue should not question the
information taught to the students, but it should remain within classes dedicated to
developing students' critical thinking skills. University campuses, due to their nature as
complexes housing large amounts of young students, have shown to be sites of potentially
radical politics. Because such a role is already held by the campus, universities themselves
should not make any conscious attempt to become sites of radical politics. Universities are
recognized as reliable, objective sources of information, and to modify their structure or
teaching because of outside pressure would simply mean exploiting their respected status for
the political benefit of outside movements.

In conclusion, the purpose of universities has been to provide young adults with the
knowledge necessary to enrich themselves in their desired fields. However, recently their
role has been questioned as universities have been subject to criticism for taking part in
radical political agendas. A clear distinction must be made between the university campus
and the university itself as they represent two separate sites. University campuses are spaces
where large amounts of young, students reside. As the youth is often the backbone of political
movements, campuses are ideal for manifestations of all sorts amongst young, motivated, and
passionate young adults. University campuses also played a role in the push for
decolonization by new generations of students, as was seen in the violent 1973 campus
protest of the University of Rhodesia. This shows how university campuses are sites of
politics, and potentially of radical politics. Besides maintaining security and tranquillity,
universities should not attempt to control what unfolds amongst its students on campus, as
censoring motivated students would be impractical and ineffective. Instead, they should focus
on their original purpose, educating students. Universities must lecture the youth about any
given subject objectively. After recent social movements, some institutions of higher
education have been criticized for supporting specific agendas by offering teaching that some
considered biased and one-sided. That raises the question as to the role the institutions
themselves play. Universities should not adopt agendas brought forward by political groups
that can potentially be of radical intent. Universities are responsible for developing much of
the next generation of politicians, diplomats, and professionals of all kinds. Therefore, the
teaching should remain as unbiased as possible, providing the youth with objective
information and useful training that enables the students to think for themselves and
challenge each other. Campuses are an excellent place for discussion and an ideal
environment for the youth to voice their opinion. Such manifestations, however, should
remain outside the walls of the institutions themselves, and should not influence the
information and the structure of universities. Universities hold the status of institutions
offering reliable and objective information for students to critically evaluate. If universities
were to instil opinionated ideas onto their students, it would no longer allow scholars to
differentiate themselves and think critically in order to form their own beliefs and values.
Ultimately, universities can be sites of radical politics as is often the case on student
campuses, however, they should not make deliberate attempts to take part in any such
movements in order to maintain the integrity of their institutions.
 Works Cited

Hentschel, Klaus. (1996) Physics and National Socialism: An Anthology of Primary Sources,
Birkhäuser, Basel, Introduction.

Johnson, A. (2017). A communication approach to social justice: Midwest college campus protests.
Howard Journal of Communications, 28(2), 212-215.

Marginson, S., & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher
education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher education, 43(3), 281-309.

Mlambo, A. S. (1995). Student protest and state reaction in colonial Rhodesia: The 1973
Chimukwembe student demonstration at the University of Rhodesia. Journal of Southern African
Studies, 21(3), 473-490.

Sage, R. (2022). A New Woke Religion: Are Universities to Blame? Journal of Higher Education
Policy And Leadership Studies, 3(2), 29-51.