Viewpoint Diversity at Princeton

Princetonians for Free Speech
Khoa Sands ‘26

Over the past months, the response to the Israel-Hamas war in academia has triggered a necessary rethinking of what the university is for, and its proper role in society. Many scholars have advocated for the longstanding model of liberal education as the pursuit of truth as the model for the telos of the university. In this view, which I share, the goal of academia is the pursuit of truth and the preservation of the life of learning, not civic engagement or social change. Certainly, positive social change and civic engagement can come from genuine liberal education, but to center those goals within academia is to distract and compromise from the central goal of the liberal university as an institution.

Matthew Wilson
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: The eating clubs, like the University as a whole, must avoid becoming ideological echo chambers or so-called safe spaces where people go to avoid the risk of having their convictions or worldview challenged. Unfortunately, Charter’s new visitors policy — enacted to protect students from those whose ideas and mere existence they erroneously and ridiculously believe threaten their safety — does just the opposite. The new policy is intellectually indefensible and must be immediately revoked.

Howard Sereda ‘78
Princeton Alumni Weekly

Excerpt: President Eisgruber calls on Princetonians to “Speak Up for Princeton and for Higher Education” and to be “an ambassador for Princeton and for higher education” (“President’s Page,” March issue). I would reply “Yes (mostly)” to the first, but absolutely “No” to the other.

I’m grateful to Princeton for the opportunities it afforded me. But what the president misses is how deeply he and his colleagues have entered the American partisan fray and joined the combat he laments. It’s not surprising; viewed from “across the pond,” virtually every American and every American institution seems to have become engulfed in the civil war convulsing American culture and society, whilst protesting their neutrality.

Luqmaan Bamba
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: Despite ample opportunities on campus to connect across class and culture, Princeton students often cluster in groups of similar kinds of people. As a result, we often inadvertently form bubbles closed to those who do not share our identities. Less formally and in everyday campus life, a clique-centered social life can be the norm. As students, we must work harder to reach out to those who are different from us and to form a more interconnected campus community.

Abigail Rabieh
Daily Princetonian

Excerpt: When the Indian government banned TikTok almost 4 years ago, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo praised the measure as something that would “boost India’s sovereignty.” Now, the U.S. government is contemplating a bill that could do the same. Last Wednesday, the House of Representatives approved legislation that would, if it became a bill, force TikTok Inc., a U.S. company, to find a new parent company that “satisfies the U.S. government” or risk a ban in the United States.

Much of the current outrage on this bill might appeal to college students — of which 82 percent use the app — because it could block their ability to access content they find enjoyable. But they should be far more concerned by the readiness of our government to curb our First Amendment rights and impede the expression of our core democratic values.

Bill Hewitt
Tiger Roars, Substack

Editor's Note: The little-known but important Council of the Princeton University Community (CPUC), established in 1969 as “a permanent conference of the representatives of all major groups of the University," is the University's second most important governing body after the Board of Trustees. Its charter is at cpuc.princeton.edu.

Excerpt: I write you directly because my March 11 petition, filed with the CPUC
Secretary, seems not to have been distributed to the CPUC membership. This
failure happened despite my explicit request that each member receive it. Nor
have I received explanation why my request was not honored.

The agenda announced last week for tomorrow’s March 18 meeting makes
no reference to my March 11 petition. Not by coincidence, I submit, the agenda
instead includes as its second item a proposal by Provost Rexford on behalf of the
CPUC Executive Committee. This proposal is to ban any and all video recording
of CPUC meetings. Any vote on such a consequential measure should be by roll
call. A full video record best enables all interested persons themselves to study
public CPUC proceedings and to judge their conduct and substance.