Exactly what do the Columbia University College Republicans stand to gain from inviting Ann Coulter to speak next Monday? A higher profile on campus? A greater awareness of conservative viewpoints among students? Perhaps, but the negative effects are almost certain to outweigh any positive ones. The invitation of the controversial conservative author and commentator sends a polarizing message to the Columbia political environment. More importantly, Miss Coulter’s brusque manner of debate and her penchant for making sweeping accusations of her opponents do nothing but damage the image of conservatives at Columbia. Her adulterated form of conservatism, far from attracting students or inciting intelligent political debate, only serves to vindicate the assumptions of many Columbia students that conservatives are a fringe group on campus that is not to be taken seriously.
I approach this issue as a conservative—a conservative who, amazingly enough, first became attracted to the ideas of the right at Columbia. When I arrived in Morningside Heights in the fall of 2005, I actually considered myself to be a liberal—at least by the standards of my high school back home in Virginia. My own political conversion took over two years, and it was my experience at Columbia that solidified my political identity. The conservatism I
discovered—whether through the writings of Burke in Contemporary Civilization or through studies of free trade and its effects on global development—appealed to me. It was a refreshing and practical alternative to the anarchic and irrational leftist demonstrations and confrontational rhetoric of liberal speakers that appeared to dominate political discourse on this campus.
As I moved further to the right, however, I understood that I was entering a philosophical no-man’s-land. To many students at this University, conservatism is a scarlet letter, a curious and backward school of thought marked by the bigoted fatuity of talk radio hosts and uneducated rural voters or the callous greed of Wall Street bankers. I soon found in classes and discussion sections that I could lose all credibility by identifying myself as a conservative. No matter how outspoken the left is at Columbia, students are always quick to write off the right as hateful, ignorant, and discredited. The state of political views on this campus is decidedly one-sided.
Although I had decided to cross the proverbial aisle, I avoided associating myself with the College Republicans. For most of my time at Columbia, the College Republicans have enjoyed a reputation for provocative stunts, such as staging an affirmative action bake sale or inviting Minuteman leader Jim Gilchrist, rather than promoting intelligent discourse from a conservative perspective. Last semester gave me hope that the organization had at last begun to foster a healthy political dialogue on campus, having co-sponsored a national security discussion panel and inviting maverick Republican Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel to speak.
The invitation of Ann Coulter to Morningside Heights, however, sets the organization’s improving reputation back. Whatever your political views, there is no doubt that Miss Coulter is a controversial figure, whose statements range from anti-Arab slurs to accusing 9/11 widows of exploiting their husbands’ deaths for financial gain. The desire of the College Republicans to invite conservative speakers to campus is perfectly understandable, and indeed it is to be encouraged. But to be identified solely by controversy severely weakens the conservative brand at Columbia, as the College Republicans risk becoming so marginalized in the minds of students that any contribution they offer to the campus political discourse is immediately dismissed.
A campus political atmosphere dominated by only one side of the political spectrum is never a good thing, especially since there are indeed credible conservative counter-arguments to be made. After one of the worst defeats for conservative candidates in recent memory, one would think that the best way to improve our appeal would be to field speakers who are willing to put forward conservative solutions to the financial crisis, global warming, energy security, and other major issues of the day. Instead, it seems that the leadership of the College Republicans, like much of the national party, is more content to retreat into the shell of a disgruntled minority and instead invite speakers to this University who offer nothing but inflammatory remarks against liberals, leftists, gays, or whichever other groups they feel deserve a diatribe. In doing so, not only do they hurt themselves but they prevent the emergence of a truly balanced political forum at Columbia.
When Republican author Christopher Buckley reflected on why he was crossing over to vote for Barack Obama in 2008, he lamented the state of the current conservative movement. He recalled that his father, the great conservative writer William F. Buckley, Jr., once said to him, “You know, I’ve spent my entire life time separating the Right from the kooks.” Unfortunately, we’ve reached a point where much of the country, not to mention the Columbia campus, now cannot see conservatism beyond the extremists. The conservative movement is in desperate need of new ideas and should be working to offer the American people more than an angry rant about the left. Conservative leaders of the future must recognize the faults of the past and work towards engaging the problems we face today in an intelligent manner. Columbia Republicans, take note.
The author is a Columbia College senior majoring in history. He is a managing editor of the Columbia Political Review.