The Dangerous Evolution of Cancel Culture

Academic boycotts targeting ideas, individuals, and institutions deemed problematic are no longer just in vogue for faculty. This illiberal and anti-intellectual tactic has now been adopted by students—presumably taking a cue from faculty and administrators—to cancel faculty who hold views they disagree with.

I encountered this personally during the most recent course interview week at Sarah Lawrence College, during which I learned that several groups—like the Sarah Lawrence Socialist Coalition and the Sarah Lawrence Review—decided that because I support Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself, my lectures will be corrupted and therefore should be boycotted.

During interview week, professors hold Zoom sessions to discuss their course plans and engage with prospective students—a course-shopping practice that started during the pandemic. This year, several leftist students, intent on canceling me and boycotting my courses—I’m teaching classes on Polarization and Presidential Leadership—resorted to privately messaging many of the prospective students in my Zoom room. These factually inaccurate and deliberately provocative messages went unnoticed by me during the session, as I was focused on sharing syllabi and other course-related information. It wasn’t until after the session that one of the students who received a message showed it to me, and I became aware of the situation. The next day, my classes, which are typically oversubscribed with waitlists, were not full—a stark contrast, especially during an election year. The message—posted below—which falsely stated that I tweeted a comment conflating “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) advocates with Nazis, read:

Screenshot of the message obtained by Minding the Campus

Cancel culture, as we know it, mostly occurs through social media, which anyone with an internet connection can view. While that’s bad enough, this tactic of directly messaging students is a chilling evolution of cancel culture that threatens speech, expression, learning, and open inquiry.

The culture of vocal, organized, and illiberal forces is now driving students away from courses these groups find objectionable. Unlike larger, more diffuse schools like Pace University or New York University, smaller residential schools like Sarah Lawrence College—where everyone knows everyone and reputations are critical—face amplified risks. When students are directly messaged about a boycott, it clearly signals that enrolling in my class could be risky. Such a culture is the antithesis of a true collegiate education. It is nearly impossible to stand against a mob that has declared someone persona non grata. While protesting a professor in the public sphere is one thing, directly targeting and approaching students through multiple channels raises the stakes, significantly increasing the intimidation for those who refuse to fall in line.

These dynamics of coercion and forced behavior at a small college like Sarah Lawrence were painfully laid out by Interfaith leader Eboo Patel, who recounted the power and problem of groupthink in his experience at a 2019 “Difference in Dialogue” program on our campus. A student group called the Diaspora Coalition deliberately disrupted his event. Patel recalled, “Sixty students stood up as a collective, raised their fists in the air, and declared that they were taking over the space. One by one, they began reading statements of protest from their smartphones. Each statement followed the same formula.”

Patel spoke with some students after the disrupted program and documented a far too common trend, particularly on the left: a tendency to demand ideological purity, forcing the community into conformity and self-censorship. One student protestor told Patel that the Diaspora Coalition did not fully represent her in both substance and style and that in her attempts to support minority identities, she had been led to take part in “things that violate [her] own identity, including rudeness to teachers and other educational leaders.”

When Patel asked her why a student would support the Diaspora Coalition’s manifesto even if they did not feel correctly represented, the student said there “was a strong culture of talking about minority identities on campus … but only in ways that emphasized one’s marginalization. And there was a palpable fear of breaking the mold.” Moreover, students who challenged or questioned the approach “risked being ‘Sarah Lawrenced’ — a particular form of cancellation on the college campus.”

It’s hard to imagine a clearer sign of a broken campus culture than simply using the college’s name to refer to efforts to cancel and silence students. Yet Patel’s chronicle of the fear of cancellation is not unique to Sarah Lawrence.

Numerous reports have found that students are afraid to challenge their peers due to reputational consequences, and these dynamics are being exploited by the Socialist Coalition at Sarah Lawrence. What is notable, too, is that while this case is on the ideological left, it’s not just conservative students who feel compelled to keep quiet, either. Leftists and moderates also feel bullied and threatened into silence. Students of all persuasions censor themselves out of concern not just for their reputation but their grades as well.

Another powerful and devastating illustration of these forces was just revealed at Haverford College. As a prospective student explained: ‘First, [I] had some great conversations with other students, but when they hear that I went to Jewish Day School and am a Jew, I get asked almost immediately if I support Israel, and if I’m Zionist, I either get blocked or ridiculed by other Haverford students who I barely even know.’

The social dynamics at Haverford are almost identical to that of Sarah Lawrence, where a professor described the situation on the Haverford campus as follows:

‘The social pressures on students here are just tremendous. And to hear stories from students, where people they thought were their friends, telling them that because they are Zionist, which means believing, just believing, in Israel’s right to exist, is a huge part of our identity… [they say] ‘I will not be your friend. We cannot be in connection. You got to reject that part of your identity.’ Now imagine if that kind of pressure on gays [or] students of color. However, that [antisemitism] seems to be completely socially acceptable among the students.’

After the tragic events of October 7^th and the brutal killing and kidnapping by Hamas of many Israelis—some of whom remain in captivity—Sarah Lawrence College president  Cristle Collins Judd did state that “there is not, nor can there be, any place for antisemitism or hate speech of any kind on our campus.” Despite this pronouncement by the head of the College, almost nothing has been done institutionally to address the hatred toward Jews, and the school is consequently facing a federal Title VI case involving its  “persistent and pervasive” anti-Semitism. The ‘pervasive’ anti-Semitism at Sarah Lawrence is once again on full display, with students attempting to boycott me for my personal views about Israel—views that are deeply rooted in my faith and heritage. These actions not only harm students by stifling their ability to ask questions but also diminish their overall educational experience. All the while, such attacks and views among those on the Sarah Lawrence campus are not shared by many elsewhere.

A majority of Americans support Israel’s right to self-defense. Vice President Kamala Harris announced that she “will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself and … will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself,” noting that Israelis should “never again” go through the horror and “unspeakable” attacks of October 7^th. Former President Trump likewise has supported Israel’s fight against Hamas.

Despite the misguided and extreme views held by the students who attempted to cancel me for being a Zionist Jew, what has occurred at Sarah Lawrence represents a serious threat to college students and to the broader concept of viewpoint diversity.

Students can inflict actual harm on their peers by depriving them of opportunities to learn and explore and by destroying their chances of gaining a liberal education. This will be a real challenge to combat and will be harder to address than simply breaking up illegal demonstrations and stopping organized violence. It requires changing the hearts and minds of students through a cultural shift towards real tolerance that may be impossible given the political activism and anti-Semitism preferred by so many faculty and administrators, permeating everything from dining halls to dorms along with campus centers and faculty offices.

However, higher education must take this challenge seriously if it is to survive and fulfill its liberal mission of helping all students find the truth, explore openly, and question without fear or threat.

Reprinted with permission from AEI by Samuel J. Abrams.

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of AMAC or AMAC Action.