These days many Americans seem to think that education should be focused entirely on workforce development. They define the “good of the individual” as making a living, not working with others to figure out how to live a good life. It’s understandable. In these days of economic disparities, social polarization and hyperpartisanship, it is certainly challenging to talk with one’s neighbors about what we want from our lives in common. But that is the core of political discussion. From JD Vance’s call to support large families to Tim Walz’s “mind your own damned business,” there are many visions of how best to live in community. Protests are part of the competition, but only its glossy edge. Demonstrations shouldn’t just entice you to come up with rhyming chants; they should push you to inquire about how different groups of people think about complex issues. And protests should lead to more discussion, not shut it down in favor of ever louder chanting.
Education can prepare people for this kind of true political engagement, and true political engagement can prepare people for the highest goals of education. Across the political spectrum, people have noted that the liberal or neoliberal consensus is breaking down and that the appeal to free markets as a solution to all problems is less tenable than ever. What will emerge in its wake? Some see authoritarianism and nationalism as an answer to free trade and porous borders, while others see more democracy and cosmopolitanism as the antidote to inequality and despair. Faculties are in a crucial position to guide these discussions. Professors aren’t in classrooms to entice students to share their ideology; they are there to challenge students to grapple with how much more there is to learn about any issue that really matters.
These discussions, like all authentic learning, depend on freedom of inquiry and freedom of expression. They also involve deep listening — thinking for ourselves in the company of others. The classical liberal approach to freedom of expression underscores that discussions are valuable only when people are able to disagree, listen to opposing views, change their minds.
To strengthen our democracy and the educational institutions that depend on it, we must learn to practice freedom better. This fall we can all learn to be better students and better citizens, by collaborating with others, being open to experimentation, calling for inclusion rather than segregation — and participating in the electoral process. As for those loud voices in the political sphere who are afraid of these experiments, who want to retreat to silos of like-mindedness, we can set an example of how to learn from people whose views are unlike our own.
And that is my greatest hope for the fall: that we will cultivate our ability to pay attention, to talk to one another across our differences. And then we get to make choices on Election Day. I don’t expect agreement, but I do trust that our disagreements can lead to learning. It will be an exciting semester.
Michael S. Roth is the president of Wesleyan University. His most recent books are “The Student: A Short History” and “Safe Enough Spaces: A Pragmatist’s Approach to Inclusion, Free Speech, and Political Correctness on College Campuses.” This article originally appeared in the New York Times.
