This past weekend, we were met with yet another alarming instance of political violence—the attempted assassination of a president. The individual accused isn’t exactly what one might expect; rather than being a societal outlier, they were an award-winning teacher. It’s a turn of events that, once ironic, now feels somewhat expected.
The report noted a history of professional accolades and community involvement linked to the individual, suggesting a left-leaning ideological influence, which is often a point of discussion nowadays.
One doesn’t need to dig deep for explanations of these events; they often follow a familiar pattern. We hear it’s an isolated case and are cautioned against politicizing it. Yet, those who urge caution in this context tend to broadly condemn entire groups when it aligns with their narrative.
It begs the question: “How often must I notice this repeating pattern before it is acknowledged?”
It’s as if there’s a hidden agenda, teaching younger generations to dislike their country, themselves, and their faith. Ironically, the worst outcome seems to be that taxpayers fund this education.
Have we created institutions that mold young minds not just to critique but to resent? The answer, I think, is yes.
Universities as places for moral re-education
As someone with a conservative background in academia, I’ve long raised alarms about campus dynamics.
Earlier this month, my own university, Arizona State University, adopted an official policy recognizing Native American land, which, while portrayed as a gesture of historical consciousness, actually challenges the validity of American land ownership.
What appears to be a benign statement serves a different purpose, casting judgment rather than encouraging inquiry.
Teachers, meanwhile, are urged to “decolonize” their curricula. This phrase may sound harmless, but its implications are far-reaching, indicating a belief that Western civilization, particularly in the U.S., is not just flawed, but fundamentally unjust and rooted in “white supremacy.”
And if systems are deemed fundamentally illegitimate, then what are the recommended next steps?
History tells us that those in power don’t simply transform flawed systems; rather, they are dismantled entirely. We already see some professors at ASU advocating for armed rebellion against the U.S.
From theory to rhetoric to action
This isn’t mere speculation; it’s evident in our current reality.
- Professors openly defend political violence as a form of “resistance,” suggesting that if intersectionality defines you as “oppressed,” violence might be justified.
- University departments label America as intrinsically oppressive while celebrating movements aimed at its reform.
- K-12 educators use class time to promote ideologies that portray students and their backgrounds as sources of moral guilt.
Let’s look at a broader pattern.
- At institutions like Harvard and Columbia, student groups and faculty responses to international conflicts have included rhetoric many recognize as a moral distortion, justifying violence as resistance.
- Diversity, equity, and inclusion programs at major universities often frame American history as oppressive while discouraging dissent as harmful.
- The push for “decolonization” increasingly rejects objective truth and reason, framing them as tools of dominance.
This leads to a disturbing cycle.
Step 1: Instruct young people that both America and Christianity are fundamentally evil.
Step 2: Teach them dismantling structures is a form of justice.
Step 3: Act surprised when someone takes it a step further.
Step 4: Collect your paycheck as a state employee.
What about oversight?
This brings up some unavoidable questions: What role does Arizona’s Board of Regents play? Are they simply a symbolic body, or do they actually oversee the institutions they represent?
Public universities should not operate as private ideological playgrounds. They are funded by taxpayers to educate, not to indoctrinate or enforce orthodoxy.
In Arizona, faculty sign agreements not to infringe on constitutional values. Yet, when they promote ideas contrary to the constitutional framework of their employment, the response is often silence, or worse, complicity.
Those who express concern frequently face scrutiny, marginalization, or even punitive measures.
What are we really paying for?
American families invest significantly to send their children to universities like ASU, often spending tens of thousands of dollars annually after accounting for various fees.
What do they hope to receive in return? A genuine education, critical reasoning skills, a sense of responsibility as citizens, perhaps even a measure of wisdom. Yet what they often encounter is dissatisfaction and indoctrination—a curriculum steeped in jealousy and instruction to mistrust family and heritage. Ideological division flourishes, and some professors even call for violent upheaval funded by state taxes.
A modest proposal
For those seeking clarity about what’s happening in our country, the answer is straightforward.
This is happening in most universities, funded by the taxes of the very nation these professors often criticize. Many parents remain unaware of the depths of this issue but continue shelling out tuition for what can resemble ideological training camps.
And while it’s uncomfortable to acknowledge, it’s time to demand change. No more national funding for institutions breeding contempt for America. If educators wish to teach such ideas, they’re free to establish their own private universities.
These troubling trends have been documented extensively, and we’ll continue to shed light on them. If someone asks, “What’s happening in America?” a simple response could be: “Look at the institutions shaping the next generation.”
