Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Violent campus protests are not about freedom

UCLA encampment

Police enter a pro-Palestinian encampment on May 2 after a dispersal order was given at the University of California at Los Angeles.

Qian Weizhong/VCG via Getty Images

Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.

There’s a grand and important tradition of anti-war protest in America. And, when peaceful, these can be a useful and impactful mechanism to advocate for change.

Sadly, what’s happening on our college campuses right now is making a mockery of that grand tradition and civil right.


Over the past few weeks, pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University, UCLA, the University of Wisconsin, University of North Carolina and others have disrupted classes and campus life, held administrators hostage to impossible and unserious demands, and resulted in the mass arrests of students and faculty, with some even turning violent.

Worse, they’ve exposed some shocking and disturbing episodes of rabid antisemitism and calls for violence.

A Columbia student and self-proclaimed leader of the pro-Palestinian movement there, Khymani James, was finally suspended for saying that “Zionists don’t deserve to live.”

“I think that taking someone’s life in certain case scenarios is necessary and better for the overall world,” he said matter of factly. “Be glad, be grateful that I’m not just going out and murdering Zionists…. So yes, I feel very comfortable calling for those people to die.” It only took four months to suspend James — “temporarily” — after he posted the disgusting video publicly.

At UCLA, pro-Palestinian students prohibited a Jewish student from entering campus to attend classes. Another Jewish student was asked if he was “a Zionist” before being blocked from entering the library.

At George Washington University protesters held signs advocating for a “FINAL SOLUTION” — a grotesque callback to Hitler’s plan for exterminating Jews.

And on campuses all over the country protesters have been spotted wearing Hamas headbands, calling for “ Intifada,” proudly flying Hezbollah terror flags, and shouting “We are Hamas!” and “Go back to Poland!”

It’s ugly stuff, and hard to wrap your mind around how these supposedly well-educated, enlightened, college students ended up on what is so clearly the wrong side of history.

I don’t blame them, entirely. Even smart kids can be naïve, idealistic, and vulnerable to propaganda disguised as revolution. Rebellion can be fun — more fun than going to class. Yelling petulantly about complex global problems is a lot easier than trying to fix them through policy.

But where are the adults to tell them that what they are doing is stupid, dangerous, and misguided, and in no way helping their cause?

Where are the parents to tell their kids that camping out in tents for Hamas and refusing to go to class isn’t what they intended their $80,000 in annual tuition for?

Where are the administrators to tell protestors that prohibiting other students from going to class, threatening other students’ lives and breaking into buildings will not be tolerated so don’t even try it?

Most importantly, where are the educators to tell students that Hamas and Hezbollah are violent terror groups antithetical to their supposed values — that the regime they align with murders gay people, rapes women, and muzzles free speech? Or, contrary to what a fifth of young Americans shockingly believe, the Holocaust was not “a myth”?

If anything, we’ve seen the opposite guidance from the adults.

We’ve seen university presidents at Harvard and University of Pennsylvania struggle to answer basic questions about whether calling for the genocide of Jews is a violation of campus policy.

We’ve seen some professors describe the Hamas terrorist attacks as “ exhilarating ” and “ awesome,” while one posted proudly, “I’m with Hamas & Hezbollah & Islamic Jihad.”

And we’ve seen some professors blocking students who don’t support the encampments from entering.

We’ve seen politicians come to campus in solidarity with pro-Hamas protesters. Rep. Ilhan Omar embraced Khymani James, who called for Zionists to be killed, and she described Jewish students as “pro-genocide.”

And we know that professional protesters, including “ protest consultants ” have infiltrated campuses to exploit students, heighten tensions, foil negotiations and exacerbate situations for their financial and personal gain.

Protesting war and violence, advocating for peace, and sympathizing with the plight of innocent Palestinians are noble causes worth expressing and commending. And there are campuses where this is happening.

But adults who know better should be telling the misguided faux revolutionaries at Columbia and elsewhere that hate speech isn’t the same thing as free speech, that there’s a difference between being antisemitic and anti-war, that calling for violence isn’t peaceful protest.

They should be warning them that “going viral” for being an ignorant antisemite isn’t going to help them get a job, and that getting thrown out of school for breaking and entering isn’t noble or righteous, but criminal and dumb.

And they should be explaining that sympathizing with barbaric terrorists is hurting their cause and dampening their message.

Clearly, the kids are not alright. But neither are the adults.

©2024 S.E. Cupp. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Read More

Two speech bubbles overlapping each other.

Democrats can reclaim America’s founding principles, rebuild the rural economy, and restore democracy by redefining the political battle Trump began.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

Defining the Democrat v. Republican Battle

Winning elections is, in large part, a question of which Party is able to define the battle and define the actors. Trump has so far defined the battle and effectively defined Democrats for his supporters as the enemy of making America great again.

For Democrats to win the 2026 midterm and 2028 presidential elections, they must take the offensive and show just the opposite–that it is they who are true to core American principles and they who will make America great again, while Trump is the Founders' nightmare come alive.

Keep ReadingShow less
Mirror, Mirror On the Wall, Who's the Most Patriotic of All?

Trump and the MAGA movement have twisted the meaning of patriotism. It’s time we collectively reclaim America’s founding ideals and the Pledge’s promise.

Getty Images, LeoPatrizi

Mirror, Mirror On the Wall, Who's the Most Patriotic of All?

Republicans have always claimed to be the patriotic party, the party of "America, right or wrong," the party willing to use force to protect American national interests abroad, the party of a strong military. In response, Democrats have not really contested this perspective since Vietnam, basically ceding the patriotic badge to the Republicans.

But with the advent of Donald Trump, the Republican claim to patriotism has gotten broader and more troubling. Republicans now claim to be the party that is true to our founding principles. And it is not just the politicians; they have support from far-right scholars at the Heritage Foundation, such as Matthew Spalding. The Democratic Party has done nothing to counter these claims.

Keep ReadingShow less
Communication concept with multi colored abstract people icons.

Research shows that emotional, cognitive, and social mechanisms drive both direct and indirect contact, offering scalable ways to reduce political polarization.

Getty Images, Eoneren

“Direct” and “Indirect” Contact Methods Likely Work in Similar Ways, so They Should Both Be Effective

In a previous article, we argued that efforts to improve the political environment should reach Americans as media consumers, in addition to seeking public participation. Reaching Americans as media consumers uses media like film, TV, and social media to change what Americans see and hear about fellow Americans across the political spectrum. Participant-based efforts include dialogues and community-based activities that require active involvement.

In this article, we show that the mechanisms underlying each type of approach are quite similar. The categories of mechanisms we cover are emotional, cognitive, relational, and repetitive. We use the terms from the academic literature, “direct” and “indirect” contact, which are fairly similar to participant and media consumer approaches, respectively.

Keep ReadingShow less
The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

As political violence threatens democracy, defending free speech, limiting government overreach, and embracing pluralism matters is critical right now.

Getty Images, Javier Zayas Photography

The American Experiment Requires Robust Debate, Not Government Crackdowns

The assassinations of conservative leader Charlie Kirk and Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota have triggered endorsements of violence and even calls for literal war on both the far right and far left. Fortunately, an overwhelming majority of Americans reject political violence, but all of us are in a fight to keep our diverse and boisterous brand of democracy alive. Doing so requires a renewed commitment to pluralism and a clear-headed recognition of the limits of government, especially when proposals entail using the criminal justice system to punish speech.

Pluralism has been called the lifeblood of a democracy like ours, in which being an American is not defined by race or religion. It requires learning about and accepting our differences, and embracing the principle that, regardless of them, every person is entitled to be protected by our Constitution and have a voice in how we’re governed. In contrast, many perpetrators of political violence rationalize their acts by denying the basic humanity of those with whom they disagree. They are willing to face the death penalty or life in prison in an attempt to force everyone to conform to their views.

Keep ReadingShow less