Concerns Over Universities’ Focus on International Students

It’s striking to see universities, often vocal about America’s systemic racism, now insist that international students are essential for their survival. It’s a bit disheartening, really.

Recently, President Trump sparked some discussion among conservatives. Right before a meeting with the South Korean president, he suggested that trade talks with China might allow 600,000 Chinese students to attend U.S. universities.

The thought here seems to be that instead of fostering a sense of national unity, universities are, in a way, promoting American self-doubt. One wonders, why should taxpayers be responsible for funding this?

I’ve learned not to rush to conclusions when it comes to Trump’s negotiations. He often uses bold claims as leverage, tossing out outrageous ideas to provoke reactions. Strangely enough, it often seems to work for him. That said, we ought to take a closer look at this situation.

The Vulnerability of Higher Education

As a professor at Arizona State University, the largest public university in the U.S., I witness firsthand the fragility of higher education today. Institutions increasingly hinge their budgets on the influx of international students. They adjust their offerings and communications to prioritize these students over local ones, aiming to make foreign students feel at home.

ASU has around 195,000 students, yet when the semester started, there was a noticeable emphasis on welcoming international students rather than local Arizona citizens. My own welcome email echoed this sentiment, effectively sidelining the taxpayers funding the institution.

Administrators often justify these changes by highlighting the financial contributions and the diversity that international students bring. But local students, including many of my acquaintances from Arizona, feel overlooked. The underlying message is quite clear: tuition dollars from international students seem to carry more weight than the contributions of local citizens. ASU might label itself as a “new American university,” but it increasingly feels as if it’s drifting away from being an American university altogether.

The Dependence on International Tuition

Many U.S. universities appear unable to sustain themselves without international tuition revenue.

Even Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick acknowledged on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show that the bottom 15% of American universities might close without that income. It’s almost like a Ponzi scheme, relying on the illusion that enrollment will continue to grow indefinitely. However, as American students grow weary of radical ideologies promoted on campus, enrollment dips, and so do budgets.

As it stands, the U.S. hosts around 270,000 Chinese students, and that doesn’t account for the thousands from countries like India and South Korea. At ASU, the number of international students rose from 16,000 to 18,000 just last year. If Trump’s proposal goes through, we could see the number of Chinese students more than double almost overnight.

What Education Will They Receive?

Even if we accept the economic rationale, there’s a pressing question: What kind of education will these 600,000 students be receiving?

We have the chance to showcase the achievements of American culture and the fundamental truths of Western civilization. Ideally, we could share profound ideas with students who may not have encountered them before. That would be a truly valuable exchange.

However, this is not the reality on most campuses. Rather than being introduced to the richness of American thought, these students often find themselves immersed in courses saturated with anti-racism rhetoric, identity politics, and critiques of the West. Instead of fostering understanding, universities risk exporting a sense of American self-hatred, potentially turning these foreign students into critics rather than ambassadors.

Why should U.S. taxpayers support this approach?

Rethinking Educational Priorities

Institutions like ASU are caught in a cycle, prioritizing international students while obscuring financial mismanagement. They market curricula that cast a negative shadow over America and Western civilization.

Yet, this arrangement doesn’t offer a viable economic solution; its drawbacks are significant.

• Universities must recognize the damage caused by their divisive anti-American narratives.
• They need to move away from corrosive identity politics and similar ideologies.
• American students – the local taxpayers – must be valued and prioritized.
• Higher education should be realigned to focus on the residents and communities that built these institutions.
• It’s crucial to reaffirm foundational beliefs in equality, truth, goodness, and beauty.

Only then can we have a more meaningful discussion about attracting international students. Until that point, it’s somewhat ironic that the very institutions criticizing American values now depend on international students for their survival.