The fundamental mistake of Mr. Walter’s article on conservatism at Princeton is that it attempts to frame through a political lens what is essentially a cultural divide. One need not be a fan of the contemporary Republican party — and certainly not of Donald Trump — to dissent from America’s reigning ideology of “progressivism.” As a quintessential establishment institution, it is also no surprise that Princeton (and each newly admitted cohort of “first-years”) is nearly univocal in its adoption of the ideology. To put it bluntly, to dissent publicly from progressivism is to risk one’s chance at getting ahead in contemporary American life, particularly for the rising generation. Progressivism is championed by America’s universities, narrativized by its media, embraced by its HR departments, and increasingly enforced by the administrative apparatus in Washington. As Abigail Anthony attests, to question the advisability of “gender-affirming care,” racial quotas, and the University’s official sexual morality of consent and consent alone is to risk marginalization, intimidation, and worse. The current atmosphere at Princeton is as intolerable as it is unreasonable, and I applaud Professor George for fighting to create room for dissent from the odious ideologies that have come to dominate American life.
The fundamental mistake of Mr. Walter’s article on conservatism at Princeton is that it attempts to frame through a political lens what is essentially a cultural divide. One need not be a fan of the contemporary Republican party — and certainly not of Donald Trump — to dissent from America’s reigning ideology of “progressivism.” As a quintessential establishment institution, it is also no surprise that Princeton (and each newly admitted cohort of “first-years”) is nearly univocal in its adoption of the ideology. To put it bluntly, to dissent publicly from progressivism is to risk one’s chance at getting ahead in contemporary American life, particularly for the rising generation. Progressivism is championed by America’s universities, narrativized by its media, embraced by its HR departments, and increasingly enforced by the administrative apparatus in Washington. As Abigail Anthony attests, to question the advisability of “gender-affirming care,” racial quotas, and the University’s official sexual morality of consent and consent alone is to risk marginalization, intimidation, and worse. The current atmosphere at Princeton is as intolerable as it is unreasonable, and I applaud Professor George for fighting to create room for dissent from the odious ideologies that have come to dominate American life.