Your Cart is Empty
Amelia Freund
Princetonians for Free Speech
My name is Amelia Freund and I am honored to be serving as President of the Princeton Open Campus Coalition (POCC) this year. An Army brat hailing from the DC-Maryland-Virginia area, I am a member of the great class of 2028, the Butler College Class Council, and the Politics Department. In high school I read On Liberty by John Stuart Mill several times over in my philosophy courses, each time I found it engaging and inspirational. I was particularly drawn in by Mill’s defense of free speech. He believed that for an idea to be true, it must be continuously discussed and debated, requiring broad protections for civic discourse. His argument resonated with me a great deal, and has carried me to countless engagements with freedom of speech since then, both in and out of the classroom.
Last fall I was a wide-eyed freshman looking for anything related to free speech I could find on campus, so I was delighted to stumble into a POCC’s Biden v. SCOTUS debate about whether or not the Supreme Court should be restructured. After immensely enjoying the event, I soon found myself on the Executive Committee and starting POCC’s Instagram account (@princetonocc). This past summer I officially took the reins as president.
For those of you new to POCC, we were founded in the fall of 2015 by an ideologically diverse group to promote and protect a culture of open civil discourse on campus after noticing anti-free speech sentiments increasing among students on campus. Guided by principles of academic freedom and truth seeking, POCC has been led by many different students, holding a wide variety of opinions on political and other matters, but has always maintained its commitment to engaging in conversation guided by tools of logical reasoning and assuming the best in each other. Over the years POCC has spoken out against speech-chilling policies or incidents such as the occupation of President Eisgruber’s office, released open letters to the administration on cultural competency training for faculty, and facilitated the inclusion of a free expression event during first-year orientation. As POCC nears our ten year anniversary, we continue to be reminded of why our mission matters in 2025.
Earlier this month, POCC hosted Robert Corn-Revere, Chief Counsel of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) at our first event of the year, From Anthony Comstock to South Park: America and The Culture of Free Expression. An accomplished First Amendment lawyer, Corn-Revere lectured on the topic of his most recent book: The Mind of the Censor and the Eye of the Beholder. Beginning with tactics of the infamous Anthony Comstock, Corn-Revere detailed the cycles of cultural censorship history in the United States leading us all the way up to the present with the recent South Park controversy. He presented a compelling argument that similar stories of suppression repeat themselves about every ten years, although the subjects change with the times. We cannot thank him enough for leading such an engaging and relevant discussion with our students.
We know that free speech is not easy or comfortable. As Ambrose Redmoon put it, “courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgement that something else is more important.” In this day and age, it increasingly requires an enormous amount of courage in both the speaker and the listener. POCC believes that academic freedom and truth-seeking are worth the price. To further our work, this year we are moving towards a more regular presence on campus by hosting events all year. Announcements for our next fall event should be out soon. We cannot wait to see you there!
Editor’s note: Princetonians for Free Speech defends free speech for all. We aim to support all student organizations that protect free thought and expression, and promote a better culture for wide open discourse and free inquiry at Princeton. Aligned student groups are encouraged to contact PFS (updates@princetonfs.org) to discuss ways to connect and partner.
Comments will be approved before showing up.
Prestigious universities and leading state schools across the nation have embraced viewpoint diversity by building new institutions—civic education centers and the like—which are simultaneously on yet apart from the campus. Harvard has quietly taken a different tack. Over the past several months, the university’s top brass have been asking major donors for $10 million gifts to endow new professorships under the banner of “viewpoint diversity.” Provost John Manning, a scholar often associated with the conservative legal movement, has led the effort, aiming to place between 20 and 30 new faculty across schools and departments rather than siloed in a standalone institute.
Why Harvard would need additional funding for this is an open question, but putting that partly aside, we ought to ask what to make of this unique initiative. It stands a chance of being either the most consequential reform attempt in elite higher education this decade, or a sophisticated piece of reputation management serving double duty as a clever fundraiser. Which one it turns out to be depends on whether Harvard has thought carefully about what viewpoint diversity means, and whether it intends to execute in line with a considered answer.
Are some schools better at fostering intellectual diversity than others? The study clearly reveals that the most elite universities are among those with the least ideological diversity. Princeton is ranked 13 out of the 55 in the study, with its faculty slightly more ideologically diverse than, for instance, UC Berkeley, Brown, Dartmouth and Harvard, and slightly less diverse than Stanford, Cornell, UCLA or Georgetown.
There is little doubt that this study provides another opening for politicians and critics to attack higher education, perhaps in unfair ways. Princeton could help neutralize this by joining those reform-minded university leaders in the now burgeoning effort to regain the public’s trust in higher education.
A federal judge ruled last month that the National Endowment for the Humanities’ (NEH) termination of more than 1,400 grants in April 2025 had violated the Constitution on several counts. Princeton researchers await the effects of the verdict, which ordered that the NEH must rescind its termination notices.
