For those of us who care about viewpoint diversity on campus, Charlie Kirk’s assassination was a punch in the gut. America’s college campuses, and our democracy, are built on the aspiration of settling our political differences with words and persuasion, not violence and coercion. Our college campuses are supposed to be havens for real, substantive discussion with those we disagree with. Whatever you think of Kirk’s politics — even if you think they’re downright dangerous, or that he promoted violence himself — his murder is an affront to that aspiration.

That said, the backlash against those who criticize Kirk’s politics or celebrate his death has also been extremely disturbing. Attorney General Pam Bondi threatened to investigate and prosecute anyone who espouses “hate speech” in the wake of the assassination. Meanwhile, FCC Chair Brendan Carr issued a veiled threat of using the government’s regulatory powers against ABC after Jimmy Kimmel speculated that Kirk’s killer might actually be on team MAGA. Shortly after, ABC pulled Jimmy Kimmel from the air. He’s back on now, but the FCC’s threat looms large (especially given that it’s pulled this stunt before).

And these are just the highest-profile examples of the backlash. You can read about a litany more here and here.

It feels like our country is going ever more insane. Free speech and civil discourse are being attacked at every turn, and from actors all across the political spectrum.

As alumni of Macalester, we have an opportunity to push back against this disturbing trend. We can stridently advocate for free speech and civil discourse at our alma mater, which is already doing good work on this front. That’s a relative rarity in today’s higher ed. landscape that we shouldn’t take for granted.

Mac in the 2026 College Free Speech Rankings

This brings me to my second topic for today: Macalester’s poor performance in FIRE’s recently-released 2026 College Free Speech Rankings. Yes, Macalester is doing good work, but it’s got lots more to do.

Mac came in at 228 out of 257. That’s a pretty big downgrade from last year, when it was 184 out of 251.

I found these numbers the most troubling:

• 77% of students say shouting down a speaker to prevent them from speaking on campus is acceptable, at least in rare cases.

• 32% of students say using violence to stop someone from speaking on campus is acceptable, at least in rare cases.

This is actually a slight improvement from last year, but those numbers should be much lower, preferably 0%. Viewpoint diversity and free speech is not secure on a campus where students believe that shouting or using violence is acceptable to stop a campus speaker they disagree with.

Some other not-so-good findings:

• 25% of students said they self-censored a couple of times a week or more during conversations with peers on campus.

• 56% of students said it was difficult to have an open and honest conversation about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

• 29% of students thought it was “likely” or “very likely” that a student would report another student to the administration for saying something controversial. 31% of students said it was “likely” or “very likely” that a student would report a professor to the administration for saying something controversial. That creates a low-trust environment not very welcoming to dissenting views.

One bright spot is that 60% of students said it was “very” or “extremely clear” that the administration protects free speech on campus. That’s up from 47% last year, and credit is due to President Rivera and her administration in making their commitment to free expression clear. However, that potentially good sign is tempered by the fact that only 35% of students said that it was “very” or “extremely likely” that the administration would defend a controversial speaker’s right express their views. That’s basically the same as it was last year, when it was 34%.

What can Mac do to move the needle?

President Rivera and the administration should put their support for free expression into policy. They can adopt the Chicago Statement, which would more formally commit the school to upholding the principles of free expression. They can adopt institutional neutrality, which is a stated commitment to refrain from making statements on contested political issues of the day. And they can reform their speech policies earning FIRE’s “red” and “yellow light” ratings, which means those policies can be used to punish students over speech that would otherwise be protected by the First Amendment — including legitimate political expression.

They can also continue building Mac’s Dialogue Across Differences programs. It looks like they’re making a difference, but, as I said, there’s more work to be done.

Finally, Mac should collect its own data on the state of free expression on its campus. I know Rivera is skeptical of FIRE’s methodology, but until Mac collects its own data, FIRE’s rankings are the only data we have.

Let’s all do what we can to push for these reforms. These are the kinds of changes we need to restore open inquiry and free expression to campus. And that just might make a difference in turning the tide against rising political violence.

About 25 alums attended, and the atmosphere in the room was quite positive — many expressed their support for this work. My hope is that those who want to see more of it will consider financially supporting Mac’s Dialogue Across Differences programs.

Other topics discussed included:

• Matthew’s work founding a Heterodox Academy student chapter at Mac. This will ensure that students interested in viewpoint diversity have a campus community.

• Debates surrounding Mac for Palestine’s demand to end study away programs in Israel, and why it’s good for viewpoint diversity and global citizenship that this demand was rejected.

• How to have productive conversations about deep disagreements using tools like Nonviolent Communication.

• Minnesota Public Radio’s coverage of Mac’s work with Braver Angels, bringing together Mac students and students at the University of Northwestern — a conservative Christian college in nearby Roseville — for dialogue about politics.

In previous years, we’ve had more young alums and students attending, some of whom asked critical questions and voiced concerns about promoting viewpoint diversity. I was hoping for the same this year; it’s a great opportunity to publicly address common criticisms of our work. But unfortunately that did not happen. Fingers crossed for next year.

Overall, I really enjoyed the positive energy in the room. Thank you Jim, Matthew, Dr. Rivera, and all attendees for your contributions to the conversation!

Looking Ahead

I have a few ideas for what the Mac Mods could work on in the coming months and year that I wanted to share with you all.

Bringing conservative voices to campus. I would love for the Mac Mods to help host an event that brings speakers with diverse views to campus. There are a lot of really interesting conservative and heterodox thinkers out there that I think Mac students simply aren’t aware of — people who write for publications like Persuasion and The Dispatch, or who work for organizations like Heterodox Academy and Braver Angels.

Advocate for institutional neutrality. When a school commits to institutional neutrality, it’s promising to avoid putting out position statements on partisan political issues. These statements put a thumb on the scale of the campus debate and discourage dissenting views. Rivera has expressed some interest in this, and I know that there have been campus conservations on the topic, but Mac has yet to adopt a formal commitment. The Mac Mods could help push for this. Read more here.

Encourage training on civil discourse and free speech for students. Mac should provide training to its students on the importance of viewpoint diversity in a liberal arts education. This could be at orientation (an example orientation program from FIRE is found here) or through some kind of mandatory course. Perhaps the Mac Mods can be a voice in favor of such training.

I’d love to hear from you on what you’re interested in. Leave your thoughts in the comments or shoot me an email (charlie.birge@gmail.com).

Happy summer.

In September, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression — the free speech advocacy group I work for — released its 2025 College Free Speech Rankings, a comprehensive comparison of the student experience of free speech on 251 campuses nationwide. FIRE ranks these schools based on a survey of more than 58,000 students, along with an analysis of school speech policies and the conduct of administrators when dealing with speech controversies.

The Rankings included Macalester, which ranked #184 — a pretty poor showing. 98 Mac students were surveyed, a representative sample. You can dig into the rankings here (where you can see the full report and methodology) and here (where you can explore the findings for individual schools, including Mac).

I've spoken with President Rivera about the Rankings before, and she is skeptical of them because they’re based on an online survey, and no one creating them spends time on Mac’s campus. That’s a fair point, but I'd push back and say that, until Mac starts collecting this kind of data itself, this is the best information we have as outsiders on the overall climate for free speech and viewpoint diversity at Mac.

And whatever you think of the ranking methodology, the survey findings suggest there are significant problems among student attitudes and experiences related to free expression.

To start, students don't seem confident that Mac's administration will defend controversial speech. For example, FIRE's survey asks "If a controversy over offensive speech were to occur on your campus, how likely is it that the administration would defend the speaker’s right to express their views?" Only 34% of students responded "very" or "extremely likely." 36% said "somewhat likely" and 29% said "not very" or "not at all likely."

Students also feel discomfort discussing challenging ideas in class. When asked "How comfortable would you feel expressing your views on a controversial political topic during an in-class discussion?", 17% of student respondents said "very uncomfortable" and 23% said "somewhat uncomfortable." Testing our views on controversial topics in class is core to a liberal arts education. It’s not a good sign when 40% of students feel uncomfortable doing so.

And it gets worse when it comes to social media. When asked "How comfortable would you feel expressing an unpopular political opinion to your fellow students on a social media account tied to your name?", 42% answered "very uncomfortable" and 29% answered "somewhat uncomfortable."

Students also show too much willingness to engage in illiberal forms of protest that silence, rather than promote, discussion. When asked "How acceptable would you say it is for students to shout down a speaker to prevent them from speaking on campus?", only 14% of respondents said "never." Almost half said it was "sometimes acceptable," with 26% saying it was "rarely acceptable" and 12% saying it was "never acceptable." Meanwhile, 65% said it was "rarely," "sometimes," or "always" acceptable to block other students from attending a campus speech, and 45% said it was "rarely," "sometimes," or "always" acceptable to use violence to stop a campus speech. These numbers should all be much lower.

What can Macalester do to improve these numbers?

To be clear, these numbers aren’t solely the College’s fault. Students pick up these attitudes from their pre-college education and the wider culture. But, if Mac is serious about promoting rigorous discussion across lines of difference, something that Pres. Rivera has stressed, it has a responsibility to work on improving them.

Thankfully, Mac is already doing many things that should push them in the right direction. The Dialogue Across Differences initiative offers a host of programs to help students learn how to have civil conversations with those they disagree with, and to carefully consider the strengths and weaknesses of views across the ideological spectrum.

But there's more to be done. I'd love to see Macalester officially commit to institutional neutrality, which would mean that the institution would refrain from making statements on contested political issues. President Rivera has already signaled her interest in this (and to my knowledge the College hasn’t issued any such statements recently, though I may be out of the loop on this), but I'd love to see the College formally adopt this stance. 

Second, Macalester should reform some of its policies governing student expressive conduct, many of which could easily be used to silence unpopular or controversial ideas. Although I'm not aware of any instances in which these policies have been used to censor, publicly reforming the policy would be a great way for Mac to show that it’s serious about free expression and viewpoint diversity.

Update — Oct. 25, 2024: The rankings also show possible good signs!

I decided to check how Mac's performance in the Rankings this year compared with previous years, and found some interesting, encouraging findings.

To start, here's the year-to-year comparison:

• 2022-23 Rankings - ranked 192 out of 203 ranked

• 2023-24 Rankings - ranked 211 out of 248 ranked

• 2024-25 Rankings - ranked 184 out of 251 ranked

So there was some improvement from last year to this year, which made me want to dig into the data to see why. In particular, I was interested in student perceptions of the administration — did students have more confidence this year that the administration would respect free speech? Because if so, that would suggest that Rivera's statements and the Dialogue Across Differences initiatives could be making a difference in how students perceived the climate for free speech at Mac.

What I found was encouraging. The number of students reporting that it was clear that the administration protects free speech increased significantly from last year to this year. So too did the number of students reporting that it was likely that the administration would defend a controversial speaker's right to express their views. Here’s a breakdown of the actual data:

Of course, this doesn't prove the efficacy of Mac's programs and Rivera's statements — correlation is not causation — but it is encouraging, and Mac's programs and Rivera's statements are certainly a plausible explanation for the College's improved rank and survey responses.

By Jeff Garcia

First Published on February 9 2023 by FIRE

On the heels of a national controversy over blasphemy and art at nearby Hamline College, now St. Paul, Minnesota’s Macalester College is mired in its own dispute over artistic imagery and religious offense, complete with a “content warning” and black curtains temporarily censoring artwork.

On Jan. 27, an exhibit by Iranian-American artist Taravat Talepasand opened at the college’s Law Warschaw Gallery, the culmination of conversations taking place between Talepasand and the college since 2019. The exhibit, TARAVAT, comments on a range of issues related to gender and religious and political power. 

The works include a neon light display of “Woman, Life, Freedom,” a reference to the protests taking place in Iran since the death of Mahsa Amini at the hands of the country’s morality police as well as other works showing a man beheading two women, and a teddy bear referencing a blasphemy case in Sudan. 

After TARAVAT causes “deep pain,” administrators hide it behind curtains

A series of images, titled Blasphemy X and Blasphemy IX, and sculptures depicting niqab and hijab-clad women with exposed body parts or visible lingerie especially caused a stir. Students decried these “overtly sexualized” images in a petition shared after the installation of the exhibit. 

“Though we respect the principle of academic freedom, we are also simultaneously aware that freedom, like art, does not simply exist in a vacuum. The decision to display and continue to display this exhibition despite the harm it perpetuates is a deeply problematic issue. It is targeting and harming an already small community that exists on this campus,” students wrote. “The lack of action on the part of the administration is unacceptable, but unfortunately not surprising. The administration’s decisions continue to ignore the deep pain felt by many of their students.”

Ikran Noor, the Macalester student who started the petition, said “a lot of it is really proactive and really supportive of the Iranian women’s movement that’s happening,” but she believed “the ones that are particularly depicting hijabi women and niqabi women, I think those should be put down.”

At a community meeting held to discuss complaints about the art, some Iranian students reportedly shared their support of their exhibition despite their peers’ objections. 

Nevertheless, after the meeting to discuss student opposition to the exhibition, the college temporarily closed it, and covered windows with large black curtains to obscure all of the art. 

Obstructed glass and “non-consensual” art

In an email sent to the campus this week, the college announced the reopening of the gallery — with some caveats. During the shutdown, Macalester wrote, “we had several conversations with students, faculty, and staff to consider multiple perspectives from Muslim communities on campus, worked with the artist, and supported gallery staff. We also prepared the gallery to prevent unintentional or non-consensual viewing of certain works and added a content warning.”

That’s right: obscured windows to prevent “unintentional,” “non-consensual” glimpses of works of art. In an American campus art gallery. 

Citing “the value and importance of artistic expression, including provocative art used in protest and social activism,” Macalester wrote that the “exhibit will remain open,” but the college recognizes the “harm to members of our Muslim community” from the works. 

The gallery’s door is now blocked by a large sheet of purple construction paper to obscure the art from passersby, a warning of “upsetting or unacceptable” images, and a sheet of paper encouraging students to sign the petition objecting to the display. Talepasand agreed to the content warning on the door but objected to the black curtains that covered the images, rightfully calling it out as “censorship” and opposed the presence of the petition against the works being posted on the door. 

And as the continuing fallout from the Hamline debacle has illustrated, colleges like Macalester should remember that when they grant some student complaints to censor or obstruct artwork, they may unintentionally be choosing sides in political or religious fights much larger than the presence of some images on campus. 

Small liberal arts colleges in St. Paul, Minnesota aren’t the only campuses that have sought to tamp down on a controversy by temporarily censoring art, a lamentable tradition FIRE detailed in its report on art censorship, “One Man’s Vulgarity,” and it’s not even the first time one has used black curtains to shield students’ eyes from the offending works. Salem State University employed a similar method in 2016 after students objected to Ku Klux Klan and other historical imagery used in artist Garry D. Harley’s exhibit critical of Donald Trump. 

It is to FIRE’s knowledge, however, the first time a college has employed the curious phrase “non-consensual viewing of certain works.” It’s, frankly, a rather sinister way to define controversial imagery: not just as something that could offend or upset, but as something that violates an accidental viewer’s consent. It’s a comically bad lesson to teach students that they should expect the words and images they encounter through the course of their lives to be understood as an exercise of their own consent, and not another’s right to free expression. That it’s employed for a show that in part protests the violation of women’s rights is an added layer of absurdity. 

It’s also a lesson that’s sharply contrasted by the Supreme Court decision that inspired FIRE’s report, “One Man’s Vulgarity.” In the case, Cohen v. California, the Court overturned the conviction of a man arrested for wearing a jacket with the words “Fuck the Draft” in a Los Angeles courthouse. 

Though the words were deeply upsetting to some during the unrest of the Vietnam War, Justice John Harlan did not argue that Cohen should be expected to cover his jacket nor receive permission from viewers who may have to see it. Instead, he wrote for the Court that those who wished to avoid seeing it should accomplish it “simply by averting their eyes,” rather than by expecting censorship. Macalester is a private university and therefore is not bound by the First Amendment; however, it would do well to absorb this lesson. 

Students should be free to choose whether or not to view the works, rather than having their peers choose for them. Those who don’t wish to see the images have another option than censorship: averting their eyes.  

This is Macalester Alumni of Moderation. Macalester Alumni of Moderation believe a liberal arts education is enhanced by differing points of view shared freely on campus. That includes moderate and conservative political views too. What we see in Macalester’s various publications indicates Macalester has a bias toward leftist views on socio-political issues, and that moderate or conservative students feel the heat of that bias. Please join the Mac Mods in our almost 20 year quest to protect free expression at Macalester College.

Subscribe now

First Published on September 9 2011 by The James G. Smith Center of Academic Renewal

This year, my school, Macalester College, made the number one spot in the “Most Liberal Students” category of the Princeton Review’s 2011 college rankings. Many of my classmates are delighted, but I’m not.

Relatively few Americans have ever heard of Macalester and probably have a hard time understanding how this small college in St. Paul, Minnesota could beat out all the well-known contenders for this dubious honor. I’ll try to explain.

I am starting my sophomore year. As a freshman, I learned that Macalester’s liberalism is a fact of life at our school, pervasive in student culture and attitudes. It also spills over into academics, affecting the quality of every student’s education by keeping “right” ideas out of course offerings at the school.

The history department, where I plan to major, offers courses on socialism; feminism; environmental issues, and “Comparative Freedom Movements.” Instead of teaching objective historical inquiry, some of the department’s professors are known for flaunting their leftist beliefs in class through jokes or direct attacks on students and political figures. In philosophy courses, reading lists are devoid of figures such as Aquinas, Disraeli, and Heidegger; the readings are interpreted through the postmodern lens, and everything is inevitably deconstructed by students only to point out the prejudices of dead white men. The imbalance certainly hurts liberal students more than the few conservatives on campus. I see it in my liberal friends. One of them, an avowed Democrat, says she misses healthy debate with her peers in class. Others dislike hearing professors use disparaging terms like “Rethuglican”and “teabagger” when discussing people and ideas they disagree with. Others lament not having professors challenge their views. College should broaden your thinking, not just reinforce your existing beliefs.

When first going into my classes, I was surprised at the bullying I received for my center-right views. My high school background, which did not include much philosophy or social teaching beyond Catholic thought, was often put down as inferior by my classmates. That was true even in English classes. I could see how little those liberal students know about contemporary right-wing thought.

Students are often made to believe by their professors and classmates that the “conservative” is an anachronistic figure, whose ideas are not worth studying. On the other hand, conservative students, often keeping their views to themselves, learn a great deal about what liberals believe, and many are thus drawn into the study of public policy. Because of this, we have become a small but vocal minority.

This institutional bias has caused some notable incidents, one of which involved a political science professor and a conservative Mormon upperclassman. When asking a professor in class for religious leave to attend General Conference in Utah, the professor laughed, told him he was “wasting his time,” and went on about his being caught in an “oppressive system.” When the student later went to the administration about people with different points of view not getting fair treatment in class, this is what he was told: “That’s just the culture Macalester tries to pursue: places like BYU have their way, we have our way.” That, in a nutshell, is Macalester’s problem.

This was not the last incident involving my friend. He later approached a dean about creating a gun rights advocacy group on campus. Instead of being advised on the process of creating such a group, he was made to meet with a residence hall director, the dean, and a counselor, who told him Macalester might not be the place for a student with his views. They even went so far as to offer to write recommendations and help him search out a new school. Both incidents were an affront to his right, guaranteed in the school constitution, to pursue his education and express views without discrimination.

I need to add that courses that give opposing viewpoints equal time are not completely absent. The Economics Department is known to be relatively moderate and non-political compared to the rest of campus. Besides its analysis courses, the department offers courses such as “Adam Smith and Karl Marx,” which delves into both capitalist and socialist writings from their greatest exponents. The Political Science Department offers a foundations course that traces development of political thought in the West and boasts a course that promotes analysis of opposing arguments.

In general, though, Macalester’s academic heads have created an environment in which courses on conservative issues and thought are extremely hard to come by. At the same time, courses that shouldn’t have any slant frequently do.

Academic bias at Macalester must end for the good of the school. It cheats students out of a more substantial understanding of the world, leads to bad behavior from professors, and affects the perception of our community. Prominent alumni refuse to give, feeling that the school is run by left-wing ideologues. Knowing they would just be ridiculed, Republican candidates make no effort to reach out within the “Macalester Mile.”

Student political groups have made some strides in promoting dialogue and debate within the student body. “Build a Better Mac,” a coalition formed this year to break up cliques and open minds around our school, has hosted events toward this end. Communal spring break meals, lunch mixers that introduce students to people they would normally not see, and a speaking engagement by conservative journalist Reihan Salam about the importance of political debate (which ended with open discussion) have been some of the coalition’s accomplishments.

We students can only do so much, however. The most important reforms will need to come from the top, especially department chairmen who insist that professors teach their subjects rather than their personal beliefs.

This is Macalester Alumni of Moderation. Macalester Alumni of Moderation believe a liberal arts education is enhanced by differing points of view shared freely on campus. That includes moderate and conservative political views too. What we see in Macalester’s various publications indicates Macalester has a bias toward leftist views on socio-political issues, and that moderate or conservative students feel the heat of that bias. Please join the Mac Mods in our almost 20 year quest to protect free expression at Macalester College.

Subscribe now

First Published on October 28 2022 by The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal

Macalester College is a small (2,000-plus students), highly regarded, and very selective liberal arts college in St. Paul, Minnesota. It is proud of its liberal reputation and international outlook, and touts as past faculty vice presidents Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale, as well as undergraduate Kofi Anan, previous head of the United Nations. Macalester boasts a student to faculty ratio of 10:1, an average class size of 17, and ranks 26th-best among liberal arts colleges according to U.S. News and World Report.

Yet on a recent visit to the school, this Macalester alum discovered troubling evidence that should challenge that ranking.

Like many colleges, Macalester holds an “Alumni Weekend” in the first few days of June, where alumni are welcomed back to campus to renew friendships, hear inspirational news of their alma mater, and perhaps step up their donations. Among the many speeches, seminars, and discussions was one on political correctness, in which I was scheduled to participate. But first I had to examine the “PC” culture at the college so I would have a sound basis for my remarks.

I have long suspected Macalester had abandoned the “western civ” ideals we were taught in favor of multiculturalism, identity politics, and social justice, however defined. But I needed proof. Although we often witness leftist abuses at colleges similar to Macalester, I needed empirical evidence specific to Macalester.

How does one discover the intellectual climate at a college from a distant state—Arizona in my case—without spending a whole week on campus interviewing students, faculty, and administrators?

I found that it can be done, and I invite the reader to examine his own alma mater in the four areas I investigated at Macalester.

First, course offerings, course descriptions, and faculty bios are all available online by entering the college name. At Macalester, it quickly became apparent that social justice issues have a toehold in many departments, and it appears that learning objectives have been pushed aside by viewpoint objectives.

For example, American Studies students are required to partake in a “civic engagement component, (which) creates a place to engage with…racial and ethnic differences, inequality and social justice.” To do that, “students will discuss books, articles, and films on schools, prisons, and racial inequality by such authors as Angela Davis, Leonard Peltier, Joy James, and Jonathan Kozol.” Angela Davis is an avowed communist, Leonard Peltier is an American Indian activist, Joy James is a black feminist, and Jonathan Kozol is a public education radical who fiercely opposes school vouchers which are favored by 72 percent of inner-city black parents. Completely missing is any hint that students grapple with ideas that dissent from the leftist party line.

Second, look online at the student newspaper for a view of student thinking and writing. Editorials, letters to the editor, even news items in The Mac Weekly revealed a clear left-leaning bias. That is not surprising. But what’s alarming is that not once in four months of reading the paper did I see any expression of conservative or libertarian dissent from the dominant orthodoxy. One wonders if conservatives at Macalester are similarly cowed into silence in the classroom.

Third, outside speakers invited to a campus can introduce new ideas and insights to students. The list of paid, recent speakers at Macalester for the past two years totaled 14. Excluding five who were non-ideological, nine of the speakers leaned left, including Angela Davis, former official of the Communist Party, and not one leaned right. Interestingly, nine of the 14 were black, and none were white males. For a college that prides itself on diversity and inclusion, the list of speakers shows the opposite.

Fourth, what kind of clubs and organizations exist for students to join? Macalester has approximately 100, and they range from sports to politics to clubs related to each major. Of those that can be classified ideologically, 12 clearly lean left. The single one leaning right is the GOP club.

One club is titled “Feminists in Action/Students Together Against Rape and Sexual Assault.” Footnote: The entering class of 2023 was 63 percent female, and Macalester is ranked 18th in the nation for “Best LGBT Colleges by College Choice.”

The discussion group that I led, with alumni attendees of widely varying political leanings, were in general agreement that yes, Macalester students, faculty, and administrators are, and always have been, “progressive.” The evidence I presented of a leftist monoculture was not challenged, but its insidious impact was eloquently articulated by one person in particular.

Jed graduated in May and studied economics/political science. He grew up on a farm, played sports at Macalester, and graduated with honors. He said many students are afraid to speak freely in class to express conservative views and the few who do have experienced “put downs” by the majority in class discussions. Some are afraid their grades will be affected by revealing such views. As a result, free and open debate is stifled. He also stated some acquaintances “defriended” him once they learned he voted Republican.

As a Macalester graduate who treasures the classical liberal arts education I received, I despair at this lack of free and open inquiry. In my 23 years of teaching college economics, including controversial issues, teaching without bias was the assumed norm. My favorite compliment came when a student said, upon turning in his final exam, “I still can’t figure out whether you are liberal or conservative.”

College should be a time of intellectual exploration where alternative and diverse ideologies are sought out and welcomed, leading to a lifetime of open-minded learning. Instead, the elite students at Macalester seem to be encased for four years in a bubble of like-minded social justice advocacy that does not tolerate dissent. They will emerge untested, fragile, and unable to confront a post-college world of intellectual diversity.

This is Macalester Alumni of Moderation. Macalester Alumni of Moderation believe a liberal arts education is enhanced by differing points of view shared freely on campus. That includes moderate and conservative political views too. What we see in Macalester’s various publications indicates Macalester has a bias toward leftist views on socio-political issues, and that moderate or conservative students feel the heat of that bias. Please join the Mac Mods in our almost 20 year quest to protect free expression at Macalester College.

Subscribe now

First Published on April 27 2019 by The Mac Weekly

Colleges and universities can be relentless in pursuing their graduates for donations. They publish alumni magazines with glowing accounts of their faculty, students, and alumni, sponsor “Alumni Weekends” to show off new buildings and hear success stories, and of course, mail out regular solicitations with convenient return envelopes for donations.

Although I have donated in the past to my alma mater, Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota, a thorough investigation of its intellectual climate has made me reconsider. You all may choose to look beyond the self-congratulatory praise of your Alumni Office.

An obvious place to start is the college catalog, nowadays conveniently available online by simply entering the name of the college. There you can find descriptions of the programs, campus life, faculty, courses of study, etc. An interesting exercise is to look up the courses, and course descriptions now taught in your particular major and see how they differ from the courses you took. At Macalester, it is quickly apparent that social justice issues have a toehold in many departments, and learning objectives have been replaced with viewpoint objectives.

Next, go to the student newspaper to get a feel for students’ views and opinions. At The Mac Weekly, news and opinion pieces reveal a preoccupation with left-wing and anti-American issues. Sample opinion piece: “Make Capitalists Frightened Again.” The content in many issues tends toward liberal shibboleths and shallow platitudes that could easily be countered in a real debate. But notably missing is any dissenting opinion against the relentless obsession with America’s racism, sexism, classism, and environmental doom. Are conservatives at Macalester, if they exist, intimidated into silence? One wonders how dissent from the dominant orthodoxy is treated in Macalester classrooms.

What kind of outside speakers does Macalester invite to campus? A list of recent speakers for the current and recent years totals fourteen. Excluding those that are non-ideological reveal eight that lean left and none that lean right. Angela Davis, the former Black Panther, and member of the Communist Party of USA was paid $5,000 to speak. That’s fine since she is an important historical figure. But why not follow her up with a Ben Shapiro, or another balancing figure to give students, you know, some intellectual diversity?

What kind of clubs and organizations can Macalester students join? Approximately one hundred exist and range widely from sports to acapella to politics. Of those that can be classified as ideological, twelve clearly lean left. None lean right or libertarian, although the once-defunct GOP club is being revived. Fraternities and sororities are banned.

Based on some metrics, Macalester is blessed. Classes average 17 students each, the student to faculty ratio is 10:1 and U.S. News and World Report ranks it as 26th best liberal arts college in the country. A large endowment of some $800 million covers about one-third of its annual budget. Three-fourths of its entering freshmen are in the top ten percent of their high school class. If there is a contest to pick the “Harvard of the Midwest,” Macalester is a contender.

What worries this alum, as well as many others I talk to at the three-day alumni weekends in June of each year, is that Macalester’s obvious political correctness today is the antithesis of our experience there. Our own exposure to the liberal arts opened our minds to differing opinions and challenged us to begin a lifetime of learning. We learned to value the scientific method, trust empirical evidence, detect bias, and yes, challenge authority.

In contrast, the elite students at Macalester and other prestigious “liberal arts” colleges seem to be encased for four years in a bubble of like-minded social justice advocacy that does not tolerate dissent. Identity group politics seem pervasive in clubs, publications, curricula, and perhaps classrooms. How can the graduates of such a cloistered environment cope with a world of starkly different and competing ideologies?

I’m sorry Macalester. I’ll contribute again when viewpoint diversity and intellectual integrity return to the campus.

This is Macalester Alumni of Moderation. Macalester Alumni of Moderation believe a liberal arts education is enhanced by differing points of view shared freely on campus. That includes moderate and conservative political views too. What we see in Macalester’s various publications indicates Macalester has a bias toward leftist views on socio-political issues, and that moderate or conservative students feel the heat of that bias. Please join the Mac Mods in our almost 20 year quest to protect free expression at Macalester College.

Subscribe now

First Published on November 7 2019 by The Mac Weekly

As a Mac grad and past donor to Macalester, I read The Mac Weekly regularly to learn about the intellectual climate at the college. It was dismaying to learn that some students were able to prevent “The Green Sheik” from speaking because he is from the United Arab Emirates, despite his bona fides as an environmentalist and humanitarian. It also appears that demonstrators were prepared to disrupt his talk, thus exercising the “heckler’s veto.”

Students were thus deprived of the opportunity to hear the viewpoint of someone who might have disagreed with them on a range of issues. We can’t have that now, can we?

Is Macalester still a true liberal arts college, or a monoculture of like-minded, politically correct social justice warriors, intolerant of viewpoint diversity? Based upon my conversations with students and faculty, participation in Alumni Weekends for many years and regular reading of The Mac Weekly, Macalester has abandoned its liberal arts mission.

Evidence? Macalester has approximately 100 recognized student clubs and groups. I counted 14 that were political or ideological. Thirteen leaned left, and one — MacGOP — leaned right. Outside paid speakers in recent years totaled 14. Of the eight speakers that were political or ideological, all eight were left of center, none right. The Mac Weekly, in describing events and developments on campus reflects a social justice atmosphere in its editorials and news reporting with nary a dissent from conservative or libertarian students. The latter do exist, however. One told me he keeps his head down in class discussions so as not to hurt his grade or alarm others. Such self-censorship by some should not exist in an institution that claims to be about liberal arts.

As a retired economics professor, I worry about the financial future of Macalester for several reasons. It has long been blessed by a relatively large endowment, thanks mostly to a long-ago gift from the founder of Reader’s Digest — a conservative magazine, by the way. The endowment has benefited from stock market holdings that are four times higher (Dow Jones Average) from their low point 10 years ago. Such gains have also prompted wealthy alumni to contribute. But it has been over 10 years since our last recession — the longest recovery in history. If a “reversion to the mean” occurs, how will Macalester’s endowment fare? Other looming problems are the decline in the college-age population, a rise in large corporations seeking to hire non-degreed applicants who can prove competencies by means other than a college degree, and the election of any of the leading Democratic Party candidates promising free college for all (which would have to exempt, by law, private colleges). But the biggest financial blow to Macalester may be the decline in donations from alumni who learn their alma mater no longer delivers the education they benefited from.

From what I know about the United Arab Emirates, there is much to dislike. We don’t know whether “the Green Sheik” is an apologist for the actions of the UAE or a genuine reformer trying to improve its policies. Students won’t be able to challenge him with tough questions or seek to learn if the UAE is reforming. Viewpoint diversity is not tolerated at Macalester.

College should be a time of intellectual exploration that welcomes differing points of views, not a closed society of like-minded students, faculty and administrators afraid to engage in constructive disagreement. Instead, Macalester students seem to marinate in an atmosphere of political correctness where the party line must be adhered to. They will emerge after four years unchallenged in their ideologies, sheltered in their safe space from developing critical thinking skills and unable to cope with a world full of competing viewpoints.

This is Macalester Alumni of Moderation. Macalester Alumni of Moderation believe a liberal arts education is enhanced by differing points of view shared freely on campus. That includes moderate and conservative political views too. What we see in Macalester’s various publications indicates Macalester has a bias toward leftist views on socio-political issues, and that moderate or conservative students feel the heat of that bias. Please join the Mac Mods in our almost 20 year quest to protect free expression at Macalester College.

Subscribe now

First Published on August 18 2009 by the James G. Martin Center

I graduated from Macalester in 1967. The liberal arts college located in St. Paul, Minnesota, has long been known for political activism, but has sadly sunk into a pit of political correctness and leftist silliness. Rather than address that issue, however, Macalester President Brian Rosenberg and his alumni director have circled the wagons.

After noticing many protesting letters to our alumni magazine in recent years, I founded the Macalester Alumni of Moderation, or Mac Mods, a group of liberals, conservatives, and moderates concerned with the school’s leftist drift. (I was a classic Minnesota liberal in the 60s, serving as vice chairman of the Minnesota Young Democrats. Now I’m an independent.) The alumni office had started a group they named the Macalester Alumni of Color. Stick with the naming convention, I thought.

Each year the alumni office hosts separate events for the Alumni of Color. Of course, in the 60s, it was different. Many of my fellow students returned from summers in the South with welts on their skulls having tried to integrate people of color with, well, people of non-color, I guess. Integration has apparently lost its appeal at Macalester as it returns to separate but equal festivities.

But I digress.

Our Mac Mod statement of purpose seems non-threatening, not the kind that you’d think would prompt any liberal arts college to push back:

Macalester Alumni of Moderation believe a liberal arts education is enhanced by differing points of view shared freely on campus. That includes moderate and conservative political views. What we see in Macalester’s various publications indicates Macalester has a bias toward leftist views on socio-political issues, and that moderate or conservative students feel the heat of that bias.

During Reunion Weekend, we want to meet with other alumni who share our concern.

We are few compared to the larger body of alumni. That’s due to Macalester’s refusal to give us access to campus media. If we had access to campus media, I have no doubt that we would grow swiftly.

Our campaign for political diversity and balance started in 2006. We requested a room during the annual June alumni weekend.

At the alumni director’s request, we submitted a profile that stated we were “liberal, conservative, and moderate alumni” concerned about Macalester’s lack of political diversity. She revised our profile: we were just conservatives. That upset our liberals, who are equally concerned with students acquiring an impartial education.

A senior at that first event told of professors castigating him for his conservative leanings. He was called the usual names leftists use whenever anyone questions them. Back in my days at Macalester, the school had a legendary professor, Ted Mitau, who insisted on balanced discussion. No professors berated students for their opinions, but students were expected to present a logical, well-reasoned defense of their positions, too. Professors now seem chosen not for their broad and balanced view of the world, but rather their narrow and far-left view devoid of common sense.

In 2007, we again asked for a room. This time we invited Katherine Kersten, a columnist from the Minneapolis Star Tribune. Her presence was unknown to the college. She described some of the social science courses and their obvious biases, and recounted the respect shown to Barry Goldwater when he spoke at the college in 1964. Her editorial sizzled the Internet for weeks, with alumni rushing to clog her blog.

We requested participation in the 2008 alumni weekend. No, came the reply, stating that the college did not host separate alumni groups apart from the main.

Oh?

In 2009, they denied us again, still upset over the publicity from the 2007 event. More Mac Mods became disillusioned. Unhappy alums tend to donate money elsewhere. Can you see those dollars fluttering away?

So what’s a bunch of political activists who learned their skills at Macalester to do? This June we held an old-fashioned ‘60s sit-in on campus. Instead of “Power to the People,” our signs said, “Mac Mods are Mac Alumni.”

Not one campus official greeted Bob Spaulding and Jim Burho, the two alums who organized the sit-in. Many alumni stopped by. None criticized us. Several professors encouraged us.

Jim Burho, class of ’70, an author and one of the Mac Mods at the sit-in, later arranged a telephone call with President Rosenberg. He passed the call to his vice president for development, who complained that Mac Mods were “baiting” the college. The development officer did, however, raise a glimmer of hope by suggesting that Mac Mods might be invited to participate in some alumni conferences. The local sit-in publicity was obviously effective.

Bob Spaulding, class of ’64 and a former San Diego State economics instructor, sent a gracious letter to President Rosenberg outlining our concerns about the politicization of the school. Rosenberg’s reply noted that a left-wing magazine charged Macalester was drifting too far to the right, and “so it goes in the life of a college president,” Rosenberg lamented.

Macalester’s political environment is so severe that one professor told me in 2007 that it was suggested he or she should “get with the program” if he or she wanted tenure. I won’t say which department … but does it matter?

You get a sense of that environment when you consider Macalester’s history courses. You’ll find no survey course on American history. But students can take “Captivity and slavery in the making of early American society” for a more balanced view of our heritage. One professor offered a course on race theory solely for non-white students to provide them a “safe haven” on campus. One white student wanted in. The professor fought her until the administration, to its credit, overruled him.

Or consider the recent proposal that urged removing gender signs from group restrooms. The rationale: You shouldn’t have to declare your gender to use a toilet and such labels imply your consent to “heteronormative” standards. Many students, uncomfortable with being in a stall next to the other sex, were nonetheless fearful of protesting this nonsense.

One daring student wrote an essay calling Macalester’s intolerance a “reign of terror.” She slammed into a raft of criticism from other students. She isn’t alone. In 2006, two-thirds of political science students surveyed believed that Macalester students were intolerant of opposing views. A student editorial questioned Macalester’s commitment to intellectual diversity.

Nothing reveals more about the political climate at Macalester than the fact that it has a Dean of Race and Ethnicity. A few years ago she participated in an event praising the Black Panthers in Oakland. I received an invitation because I live in nearby Sacramento. But having seen Panther terrorism when I lived in Oakland, I decided to sort my sock drawer instead. Why does a liberal arts college of 1,900 students need such a dean? Do alumni write checks for such functions … or for core needs

Mac Mods are politically diverse and opinionated. It is tough to keep them focused: returning Macalester to the balanced, liberal arts college of decades ago. Many have stopped contributing to Macalester. Some are giving to other colleges.

Broader questions arise. How solid is a history education that replaces inquiry with anger or a sociology education that replaces survey research with politics? Do employers want illogical and emotional students who master only ad hominem arguments? The direction Macalester and other liberal arts colleges are going implies that such naivete is deep-seated among cloistered professors who have a highly romantic notion of the world beyond the campus.

What is the future of a liberal education if “liberal arts” colleges no longer value a liberal and balanced preparation for the world into which we send graduates? Rosenberg once suggested the liberal in liberal arts refers to personal politics, not the type of school Macalester is. Or was.

This is Macalester Alumni of Moderation. Macalester Alumni of Moderation believe a liberal arts education is enhanced by differing points of view shared freely on campus. That includes moderate and conservative political views too. What we see in Macalester’s various publications indicates Macalester has a bias toward leftist views on socio-political issues, and that moderate or conservative students feel the heat of that bias. Please join the Mac Mods in our almost 20 year quest to protect free expression at Macalester College.

Subscribe now