Okay, just thinking through this real quick. On one hand, I think you're playing into the old trope of pointing to the extremities as proof of a larger consensus. That is, you're taking the most extremes and are suggesting they are the norms.
For example, a third saying hate speech should be criminalized or that violence is acceptable to stop hate is an extreme — it's also far from the mean. (One thing I take exception to is the suggestion that shouting down invited speaker is inherently wrong: it's an expression of free speech itself and the free speech rights of the first speaker don't override those of anyone else.)
For your third paragraph — and I cannot emphasize this enough — every. single. word. applies to Hillsdale College as well. This unwillingness to grapple with difficult conversations is not something born out of Marxism, but is likely more to do with tribalism and power dynamics.
Fully agreed with fourth graph.
Agreed with fifth graph with the addendum that: well, they're not wrong. Markets and our system of government *have* failed to provide a safety net. That they're open to a system that isn't great and has a long history of failure and oppression isn't ideal, but at a quick glance I'd say it's not much different than what we have now.
I'm not sure the sixth graph follows out of "we don't like hate speech." I also suspect the first sentence is an extension of taking the extremes as norms.
Seventh graph: I mean, I think that's just trying to damn all of society, man. I also think it's a caricature of higher education.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment Michael. I think the part that *most* gets to me is the people who agree that violence is an appropriate response. Personally, seeing any of that, even if it's just some %, is a massive red flag and a reason to comment about this topic in the first place.
I don't think we can be surprised that a bunch of young people, whose future prospects for owning homes, having kids, and living normal comfortable lives have been fucked by greedmongers and the people who enable them, are amenable to a system and at least purports to be more just economically. I own a home and live a pretty great life, but watching as criminal fiance people get constantly get bailed out by the taxpayers (as opposed to home owners who were given predatory loans by those same finance people) really takes a toll on one's belief in capitalism. Even if the version of it we have isn't the best, it's still what's being sold as the justification for exploiting people and resources just to make a buck.
Communist systems are grossly inefficient and it's also worth noting that all the major communist/socialist figures died very rich men, so I'm not sure socialism is as different from capitalism in terms of result as people want to believe. There are winners and losers, but I can understand why young people would gravitate to that believing that at least they might have a better chance of being one of the winners.
Yes lots of bad policy def also contributes to kids embracing the "screw it, let's burn everything down" mindset. However that is not really a good approach either. It's so much easier to fix our existing institutions, build more housing, etc. And it's possible if we want to do it and put in the work.
The other option besides "burn it all down" is, "wait for the people in power to die off and hope there aren't younger people coming up behind them to prop up the same system." It's easy to say we could fix things if we wanted to, but what about the people who have a vested interest, financial or otherwise, in keeping them broken? If it were truly that easy to fix them, wouldn't we have done it already?
I used to argue with all my teachers ad nauseam about this: "If one reads a typical college or even high school history syllabus today, the great villains of the twentieth century appear to be almost exclusively Nazi."
My favorite argument was how it reinforced a Eurocentric worldview.
I really dislike the comparison of North and South Korea as some ideologic divide between capitalism and Marxism. North Korea is a totalitarian pariah state, embargoed by most every nation except China and Russia, rather than some backward communist country.
In that same photograph you can likely see the lights of Shenyang, capital and largest city of Liaoning Province. Huge industrial, economic, and transportation hub. How does that exist in an authoritarian communist state? I thought a centrally managed economy wasn't possible? (the kids will ask)
What is conflated is the economic policy and the social policies of China. The social credit system alone is enough to frighten anyone who's read a dystopian futurism novel. If you think being canceled by the left or the right is bad, wait until you get "canceled" by the central government and sent off to a reeducation camp. Social credit score too low? Welp can't bank or ride the subway.
Those are the mechanisms that young people today believe are necessary. They have grown up in algorithmic echo chambers believing that everything is an existential crisis and that their political leaders are too slow to action. They want change, haven't the time, and are justified in using violence to get there quicker.
I have heard these opinions direct from the mouths of otherwise mainstream young people in HIGH SCHOOL. These are not fringe incels, these are kids who feel hopeless and that the system has failed them. It should scare the hell out of all of us.
The college I taught at definitely had a heavy ideological bias to the left. I had to be very diplomatic about how I presented material, which was something the other professors did not have to deal with. The political economy classes I took as a PhD were heavily one-sided, as you highlight. There was a lot of Marx and a dearth of Hyack. While we studied Smith, we also were also given class material to read that criticized his ideas. There were no readings that criticized Marx, Lenin or Engels or the tragic results of the experiments their ideas resulted in.
I've heard the same thing from so many people now we're just being gaslit by the "it's not happening" people (or maybe they want to ignore it). Eventually they'll get to the "it's happening but it's a good thing" phase (https://x.com/robkhenderson/status/1404374397868199938?lang=en)
Okay, just thinking through this real quick. On one hand, I think you're playing into the old trope of pointing to the extremities as proof of a larger consensus. That is, you're taking the most extremes and are suggesting they are the norms.
For example, a third saying hate speech should be criminalized or that violence is acceptable to stop hate is an extreme — it's also far from the mean. (One thing I take exception to is the suggestion that shouting down invited speaker is inherently wrong: it's an expression of free speech itself and the free speech rights of the first speaker don't override those of anyone else.)
Here's an exceptionally good essay from someone I hold in high regard on the issues confronting "free speech culture." I think you'd find what they have to say interesting: https://www.popehat.com/p/how-free-speech-culture-is-killing-free-speech-part-one
For your third paragraph — and I cannot emphasize this enough — every. single. word. applies to Hillsdale College as well. This unwillingness to grapple with difficult conversations is not something born out of Marxism, but is likely more to do with tribalism and power dynamics.
Fully agreed with fourth graph.
Agreed with fifth graph with the addendum that: well, they're not wrong. Markets and our system of government *have* failed to provide a safety net. That they're open to a system that isn't great and has a long history of failure and oppression isn't ideal, but at a quick glance I'd say it's not much different than what we have now.
I'm not sure the sixth graph follows out of "we don't like hate speech." I also suspect the first sentence is an extension of taking the extremes as norms.
Seventh graph: I mean, I think that's just trying to damn all of society, man. I also think it's a caricature of higher education.
Completely agreed on last graph.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment Michael. I think the part that *most* gets to me is the people who agree that violence is an appropriate response. Personally, seeing any of that, even if it's just some %, is a massive red flag and a reason to comment about this topic in the first place.
I don't think we can be surprised that a bunch of young people, whose future prospects for owning homes, having kids, and living normal comfortable lives have been fucked by greedmongers and the people who enable them, are amenable to a system and at least purports to be more just economically. I own a home and live a pretty great life, but watching as criminal fiance people get constantly get bailed out by the taxpayers (as opposed to home owners who were given predatory loans by those same finance people) really takes a toll on one's belief in capitalism. Even if the version of it we have isn't the best, it's still what's being sold as the justification for exploiting people and resources just to make a buck.
Communist systems are grossly inefficient and it's also worth noting that all the major communist/socialist figures died very rich men, so I'm not sure socialism is as different from capitalism in terms of result as people want to believe. There are winners and losers, but I can understand why young people would gravitate to that believing that at least they might have a better chance of being one of the winners.
Yes lots of bad policy def also contributes to kids embracing the "screw it, let's burn everything down" mindset. However that is not really a good approach either. It's so much easier to fix our existing institutions, build more housing, etc. And it's possible if we want to do it and put in the work.
The other option besides "burn it all down" is, "wait for the people in power to die off and hope there aren't younger people coming up behind them to prop up the same system." It's easy to say we could fix things if we wanted to, but what about the people who have a vested interest, financial or otherwise, in keeping them broken? If it were truly that easy to fix them, wouldn't we have done it already?
Well we need more of this, I genuinely think the younger cohorts will do better: https://www.hottakes.space/p/die-helping-not-clutching-the-levers
Agree totally
I used to argue with all my teachers ad nauseam about this: "If one reads a typical college or even high school history syllabus today, the great villains of the twentieth century appear to be almost exclusively Nazi."
My favorite argument was how it reinforced a Eurocentric worldview.
I really dislike the comparison of North and South Korea as some ideologic divide between capitalism and Marxism. North Korea is a totalitarian pariah state, embargoed by most every nation except China and Russia, rather than some backward communist country.
In that same photograph you can likely see the lights of Shenyang, capital and largest city of Liaoning Province. Huge industrial, economic, and transportation hub. How does that exist in an authoritarian communist state? I thought a centrally managed economy wasn't possible? (the kids will ask)
What is conflated is the economic policy and the social policies of China. The social credit system alone is enough to frighten anyone who's read a dystopian futurism novel. If you think being canceled by the left or the right is bad, wait until you get "canceled" by the central government and sent off to a reeducation camp. Social credit score too low? Welp can't bank or ride the subway.
Those are the mechanisms that young people today believe are necessary. They have grown up in algorithmic echo chambers believing that everything is an existential crisis and that their political leaders are too slow to action. They want change, haven't the time, and are justified in using violence to get there quicker.
I have heard these opinions direct from the mouths of otherwise mainstream young people in HIGH SCHOOL. These are not fringe incels, these are kids who feel hopeless and that the system has failed them. It should scare the hell out of all of us.
Agreed - the social credit score stuff is dystopian AF
This is excellent and represents what I saw as an adjunct at a state college.
The college I taught at definitely had a heavy ideological bias to the left. I had to be very diplomatic about how I presented material, which was something the other professors did not have to deal with. The political economy classes I took as a PhD were heavily one-sided, as you highlight. There was a lot of Marx and a dearth of Hyack. While we studied Smith, we also were also given class material to read that criticized his ideas. There were no readings that criticized Marx, Lenin or Engels or the tragic results of the experiments their ideas resulted in.
I've heard the same thing from so many people now we're just being gaslit by the "it's not happening" people (or maybe they want to ignore it). Eventually they'll get to the "it's happening but it's a good thing" phase (https://x.com/robkhenderson/status/1404374397868199938?lang=en)
It is likely going to result in more federal defunding of colleges and campus violence before that happens.