Philosophical Shift in Academia

For years, those at the helm of education have pushed the idea of “neutrality” in discussions about existential topics. Questions like the existence of God, the nature of the highest good, and how to live morally were at the forefront. However, this so-called neutrality has often masked deeper issues. It’s a facade—essentially, a cave.

In Los Angeles recently, protests turned into chaos, with groups vandalizing police cars and waving foreign flags, while some officials dubbed the actions as those of “peaceful demonstrators.” This isn’t merely an isolated incident; it represents a broader trend fueled by a philosophy that’s been growing on campuses, largely funded by taxpayers.

The concept of neutrality is, perhaps, merely a myth. The true nature of these movements is becoming clearer; the wolves are showing their true colors.

This recent unrest isn’t without context. It stems from years of nurturing a toxic ideology that has thrived under the guise of silence against dissenting views. This isn’t a new development; it’s been evolving for decades.

Challenges to American Values

Take Arizona State University, for instance. As the largest public university in the U.S., it reflects a nationwide crisis. There’s a pervasive worldview there, one that brings in professors from prestigious programs, while sidelining activist alumni and casting the U.S. as an irrevocable evil.

Examining ASU’s student organizations reveals troubling support for groups like Mecha, which claims its mission is deeply political.

They say, “Our liberation hinges on the dismantling of colonial legacies, anti-black racism, heteronormativity, borders, and the prison system.” 

Recently, ASU suspended its local chapter of Mecha after the group made inflammatory statements, including calls for violence against both Israel and America. Yet, surprisingly, they still maintain their status as an active campus organization and continue to garner faculty endorsements.

This isn’t just a matter of adjusting curricula or replacing canonical authors. The push for “decolonization of the curriculum” conceals a larger ambition: revolution. This coalition includes extremists ranging from communists to pro-Mexican nationalists, and anti-Semitic advocates of “free Palestine.”

Nevertheless, there are those who still believe in the rhetoric of these movements. They talk about community, empathy, and love—virtues historically associated with Christianity. But it feels like these ideals are being weaponized to serve a darker agenda. They present themselves as benign while hiding their true intentions.

The desire to reshape government isn’t about reform, but rather about total upheaval. Their goals involve not just equality but a radical redistribution of power to an ambiguous idea of utopia.

That might seem outrageous—and it is. After all, to suggest that violent revolutions are the answer is absurd. Yet, revolutions often thrive on such contradictions, driven by the frustrations of disillusioned individuals.

What we need now is clarity in our moral convictions. This journey must begin by rejecting the myth of neutrality.

The False Notion of Neutral Education

Neutral education doesn’t exist. Every curriculum is built on an underlying philosophy of what constitutes a “good life.” Professors inherently teach from a perspective that reflects their views on humanity. When universities shifted away from traditional wisdom and virtue, they didn’t create an unbiased space; instead, they left a hole for radicals to exploit.

As someone within academia, I’ve witnessed how some scholars use their positions as shields and weapons, arguing that “free speech” protects those who attack the very systems upholding rights. Yet, taxpayers shouldn’t have to fund such incendiary rhetoric. Nothing compels universities to hire educators advocating against the very fabric of the nation.

This isn’t about censorship. Individuals are free to hold their beliefs. However, it’s unreasonable for taxpayers to finance a narrative that paints their nation as fundamentally flawed.

If educators wish to advocate for the end of the United States, they should have the courage to present that openly in their syllabi, and should forgo public funding. Let’s stop this pretense of neutrality.

A touch of honesty could go a long way. Imagine the difference if we implemented basic reforms.

• Preparation: Professors should provide accurate teachings about God, virtue, and the value of the Constitution. Those who dismiss these essential lessons shouldn’t be teaching at taxpayer-funded institutions.
• Transparency: State-funded professors must disclose the political leanings of their courses and whether they promote ideologies contrary to foundational principles.
• Accountability: Public funding should align with the values of the taxpayers, ensuring respect for law and foundational rights.
• Reform: Restore universities’ commitment to teaching that recognizes God as the creator and that understanding Him is the ultimate pursuit of life.

This suggestion might sound overly idealistic, but it’s more grounded than the utopian ideologies propagating under the guise of education. It respects human nature and acknowledges our need for moral growth.

It’s crucial for students, parents, educators, and community leaders to grasp the significance of recent unrest. It’s not solely about political chaos; it reflects a philosophical breakdown. The myths of neutrality are fading, and the wolves are becoming evident, right outside classrooms and in fervent demonstrations.

The moment for reform is now.