Your Cart is Empty
Tal Fortgang ‘17
When Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber spoke at Harvard on November 5, 2025, he expressed what to his detractors may have sounded like an epiphany. “There’s a genuine civic crisis in America,” he said, noting how polarization and social-media amplification have made civil discourse uniquely difficult. Amid that crisis, he concluded, colleges must retain “clear time, place, and manner rules” for protest, and when protesters violate those rules, the university must refuse to negotiate. As he warned: “If you cede ground to those who break the rules … you encourage more rule-breaking, and you betray the students and scholars who depend on this university to function.”
Collin Binkley
Associated Press
Some of the country’s most prestigious colleges are enrolling record numbers of low-income students — a growing admissions priority in the absence of affirmative action.
At Princeton University, this year’s freshman class has more low-income students than ever. One in four are eligible for federal Pell grants, which are scholarships reserved for students with the most significant financial need. That’s a leap from two decades ago, when fewer than 1 in 10 were eligible. “The only way to increase socioeconomic diversity is to be intentional about it,” Princeton President ChristopherEisgruber said in a statement. “Socioeconomic diversity will increase if and only if college presidents make it a priority.”
Angela Smith
Princetonians for Free Speech
In the basement of Robertson Hall on a crisp December evening, I had the privilege of attending a remarkable student-led event at Princeton University—a panel hosted by the Princeton Open Campus Coalition (POCC) and supported by Princetonians for Free Speech (PFS). The December 3 discussion centered on Fizz, an anonymous social media app for Princetonians that serves as a hub for commentary, debates and memes about campus life.
From my vantage point as Executive Director of PFS, the significance of this gathering extended well beyond its specific topic. What unfolded that evening represented one of the largest—and one of the most politically diverse—assemblies of student free-speech advocates in recent memory. Roughly forty Princetonians filled the room, not to hear a Supreme Court Justice or renowned author, but to engage sincerely with one another about speech, anonymity, and responsibility.
Gideon Steinbach
February 13, 2024
The excellent discussion by Christie Davis serves as strong evidence for why universities must adopt political and ideological neutrality. The scholarly discussion resorts to inflammatory politics to either support or counter scholarly statements. For instance it provides the “DeSantis” response to DEI, rather than the scientific response, rigorously presented by groups of scientists, such as: Abbot et al, https://journalofcontroversialideas.org/article/3/1/236. Academic neutrality on political issues, protects students, faculty, and the public from indoctrination, which is the intrusion of political ideologies into scholarly discourse. As referred in the discussion, we in the Northeast are not intimidated by DeSantis, and we in the South are not intimidated by Biden. Neutrality keeps us focused on scientific rather than ideological methods for pursuing knowledge. As an aside. let’s also glimpse at the historical perspective. During the anti-Vietnam-war demonstrations, we were starved for information and listened to the speakers to find out the facts. The demonstration leaders were few and publicly accountable. Today, students have the responsibility to perform the rigorous research prior to the demonstration, and the responsibility to critically appraise what they hear. The days of blindly cheering the leader are gone.
Gideon Steinbach, MD PhD