Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Silent Onlookers: The Moral Failure to Protect Higher Education

Opinion

Silent Onlookers: The Moral Failure to Protect Higher Education

Students in a college classroom.

Getty Images, Klaus Vedfelt

One of my favorite stories is The Butterfly and the Tank, a powerful novella written by Nobel Prize-winning author Ernest Hemingway. First published in Esquire magazine in November 1938, the piece is based on Hemingway’s experiences in the Spanish Civil War. In it, Hemingway exposes a chilling truth about human nature: the greatest tragedies aren’t just caused by brute force but by the silence of those who stand by and do nothing. One of the story’s images—a delicate butterfly on a collision course with an unstoppable tank—serves as a stark metaphor for the senseless destruction of war and the failure of bystanders to intervene.

Today, as the Department of Education faces dismantlement, American higher education stands at a similar crossroads: an invaluable institution threatened by a relentless political project. If we allow funding cuts and policy rollbacks to continue unchecked, we risk crushing a higher education system that has long been a pillar of opportunity, innovation, and democratic engagement.


As a professor who studies leadership in higher education, I believe we must think deeply about what our inaction will cost us—not just in this moment, but for generations to come. The question remains: Will we fight to protect higher education, or will we become the silent onlookers whom Hemingway warned us about?

Just as in this story, where a butterfly represents beauty, innocence, and fragility, American colleges and universities—especially public institutions—embody some of our most important ideas like intellectual freedom, critical inquiry, and democratic access to the body of knowledge. These higher education institutions need to be tended to with regular investments, public support, and protections to thrive. When these pillars are withdrawn, academic programming, research initiatives, and student access diminish, leaving the entire enterprise of post-secondary education susceptible to annihilation.

The tank image in Hemingway’s story symbolizes the overpowering, impersonal force of war, crushing anything in its path. Today, that force manifests as the intentional, aggressive withdrawal of funding from higher education, the growing influence of political projects over academic freedom, and the effort to dismantle essential societal institutions, such as the Department of Education. This movement threatens to destroy the very important idea of providing access to higher education, giving rise to privatization, where market-driven models take priority over the public good.

One of the most important features of the story is the passive role of onlookers—bystanders who fail to act as the devastation unfolds. Similarly, in our country right now, many policymakers, institutional leaders, and the public are watching the dismantling of our nation’s higher education system and the obliteration of the post-secondary landscape without taking action to mediate the crisis. Just as in the story, where Hemingway warns of the moral failure to act, the slow but deliberate destruction of higher education is proceeding, not just because of aggressive administrative measures, but because too many people are standing by instead of advocating for the preservation of key societal institutions.

The depiction of war in Hemingway’s story seems to point out how even those removed from the horrific battlefield—like the butterfly—can become victims of its destruction. The same can be said of higher education: while there are those who think that the dismantling of the higher education system through funding cuts and policy changes won’t impact their lives, the long-term impacts are unavoidable. When higher education is undermined, economic mobility declines, research efforts are diminished, and the tapestry of democracy becomes ragged as fewer people have access to critical thinking and evidence-based dialogue.

Hemingway’s “The Butterfly and the Tank” critiques apathy in the face of destruction. Similarly, the crisis in higher education demands that we not remain passive. The question is: will we let American universities be crushed, or will we step in before it’s too late?

Yet, even in the face of destruction, history reminds us that resistance and renewal are possible. The fight for higher education is not just about preventing loss—it is about reclaiming a vision of education as a social force for good. Hope in dark times often begins with access to education. Throughout history, learning has been a tool of resistance—freedom schools in apartheid South Africa kept students informed, while enslaved people in the U.S. risked their lives to become literate, knowing education was key to liberation.

Mutual support has also sustained communities through hardship. During the Great Depression, cooperative food exchanges emerged, and during COVID-19, grassroots networks provided food, medicine, and financial aid, reinforcing that survival is a shared responsibility.

Social movements—from the U.S. Civil Rights Movement to global pro-democracy protests—demonstrate that hope is active, not passive. Organizing, protesting, and demanding change in the face of injustice are acts of defiance that shape history.

Cultural traditions, storytelling, and spirituality provide deep sources of strength. Spirituals and oral histories have helped people navigate hardship and preserve identity, showing that resilience is often rooted in cultural and spiritual foundations.

Leadership at all levels—grassroots organizers, community elders, and political figures—has guided people through crises. Figures like Nelson Mandela, Harriet Tubman, and Václav Havel inspired collective action and a commitment to justice.

Hope is also found in simple acts of kindness—sharing resources, checking on neighbors, and offering emotional support. These gestures affirm that no one is alone and that care is a powerful force.

Ultimately, however, hope is more than just a feeling—it is a force for change. History demonstrates that through belief, collective strength, and unwavering advocacy, people not only endure but rise, resist, and thrive.

Dr. Anthony Hernandez, a member of the Teaching Faculty in the Educational Policy Studies Department at the University of Wisconsin—Madison, won a research award from the National Academy of Education/Spencer Foundation for his study of leadership in higher education and has received four teaching awards from UW-Madison.

Read More

How the Unprecedented Redistricting War Is Harming Election Officials, Politicians, and Voters

The Indiana State House is the site of the latest political fight over new congressional maps for the 2026 election.

Lee Klafczynski for Chalkbeat

How the Unprecedented Redistricting War Is Harming Election Officials, Politicians, and Voters

The redrawing of states’ congressional districts typically happens only once per decade, following the release of new U.S. Census data. But we’re now up to six states that have enacted new congressional maps for the 2026 midterms; that’s more than in any election cycle not immediately following a census since 1983-84. Even more are expected to join the fray before voters head to the polls next year. Ultimately, more than a third of districts nationwide could be redrawn, threatening to confuse and disenfranchise voters.

The truly unusual thing, though, is that four of those states passed new maps totally voluntarily. Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina all redrew their districts after President Donald Trump urged them to create more safe seats for Republicans to help the GOP maintain control of the House of Representatives next year, and California did so in order to push back against Trump and create more safe seats for Democrats. (The other two states redrew for more anodyne reasons: Utah’s old map was thrown out in court, and Ohio’s was always set to expire after the 2024 election.) To put that in perspective, only two states voluntarily redistricted in total in the 52 years from 1973 to 2024, according to the Pew Research Center.

Keep ReadingShow less
Crowd waving flags
Crowd waving flags
(Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

For the People, By the People

Democracy was once America’s proudest legacy — the last best hope on earth, a torch that lit the path for nations worldwide. Today, dysfunction grips all three branches of government: Congress abandons its duty to the people, the President exploits power for retribution, and the Supreme Court fails to enforce accountability. This betrayal of trust places our republic at risk. Americans must reclaim democracy from dysfunction and abuse of power.

The United States is both a participatory democracy — by the people, for the people — and a constitutional republic. Power lies with the people, and elected officials are entrusted to serve them. The President enforces the laws, Congress checks executive power, and the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution. These checks and balances are designed to prevent abuse of power, yet Congress and the Court have abandoned their duty (U.S. Constitution).

Keep ReadingShow less
Framing "Freedom"

hands holding a sign that reads "FREEDOM"

Photo Credit: gpointstudio

Framing "Freedom"

The idea of “freedom” is important to Americans. It’s a value that resonates with a lot of people, and consistently ranks among the most important. It’s a uniquely powerful motivator, with broad appeal across the political spectrum. No wonder, then, that we as communicators often appeal to the value of freedom when making a case for change.

But too often, I see people understand values as magic words that can be dropped into our communications and work exactly the way we want them to. Don’t get me wrong: “freedom” is a powerful word. But simply mentioning freedom doesn’t automatically lead everyone to support the policies we want or behave the way we’d like.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands resting on another.

Amid headlines about Epstein, survivors’ voices remain overlooked. This piece explores how restorative justice offers CSA survivors healing and choice.

Getty Images, PeopleImages

What Do Epstein’s Victims Need?

Jeffrey Epstein is all over the news, along with anyone who may have known about, enabled, or participated in his systematic child sexual abuse. Yet there is significantly less information and coverage on the perspectives, stories and named needs of these survivors themselves. This is almost always the case for any type of coverage on incidences of sexual violence – we first ask “how should we punish the offender?”, before ever asking “what does the survivor want?” For way too long, survivors of sexual violence, particularly of childhood sexual abuse (CSA), have been cast to the wayside, treated like witnesses to crimes committed against the state, rather than the victims of individuals that have caused them enormous harm. This de-emphasis on direct survivors of CSA is often presented as a form of “protection” or “respect for their privacy” and while keeping survivors safe is of the utmost importance, so is the centering and meeting of their needs, even when doing so means going against the grain of what the general public or criminal legal system think are conventional or acceptable responses to violence. Restorative justice (RJ) is one of those “unconventional” responses to CSA and yet there is a growing number of survivors who are naming it as a form of meeting their needs for justice and accountability. But what is restorative justice and why would a CSA survivor ever want it?

“You’re the most powerful person I’ve ever known and you did not deserve what I did to you.” These words were spoken toward the end of a “victim offender dialogue”, a restorative justice process in which an adult survivor of childhood sexual abuse had elected to meet face-to-face for a facilitated conversation with the person that had harmed her. This phrase was said by the man who had violently sexually abused her in her youth, as he sat directly across from her, now an adult woman. As these two people looked at each other at that moment, the shift in power became tangible, as did a dissolvement of shame in both parties. Despite having gone through a formal court process, this survivor needed more…more space to ask questions, to name the impacts this violence had and continues to have in her life, to speak her truth directly to the person that had harmed her more than anyone else, and to reclaim her power. We often talk about the effects of restorative justice in the abstract, generally ineffable and far too personal to be classifiable; but in that instant, it was a felt sense, it was a moment of undeniable healing for all those involved and a form of justice and accountability that this survivor had sought for a long time, yet had not received until that instance.

Keep ReadingShow less