��������Ƶ

The “uprising” we are seeing at numerous US university campuses deserves our attention. It is a phenomenon that should be approached in a balanced manner that does not blow these developments out of proportion. Nonetheless, we cannot overlook or fail to learn from them.
First, US higher education institutions, with their diverse backgrounds and funding, mirror the entire spectrum of US society in all of its diversity.
Second, the diversity of the US population has made educational institutions on its soil diverse and these institutions have fed on its social structure, needs and resources.
Third, the diversity of approaches to higher education in the US reflects the contradictions that have shaped the country throughout its history. This can be seen in the history of the first university, Harvard, which was founded in 1636, and the eight other universities founded before American independence. These nine universities are today known as colonial colleges.
Fourth, the evolution of education in the US is strongly tied to the knowledge revolutions of Europe, while growing local economic, developmental and technological needs also fueled this evolution. This is reflected most clearly by the Morrill Act, which was passed in the 19th century and sought to foster applied sciences by financing public institutions of higher education through “land grants.” These were granted by every American state to support practical fields of study, such as engineering, agriculture, veterinary medicine and all applied sciences.
The politicized movements in the US are more latent than newly emergent. From the very start, religious and sectarian contradictions precipitated the first academic split and the establishment of Yale University, which was founded by conservative priests who had graduated from Harvard. They rejected what they saw as the “unruliness and heretical liberalism” of their alma mater. Thus, Yale became a bastion of “conservative” Christianity that contrasted with Harvard’s “liberalism.”
American universities of different religious and sectarian affiliations emerged after that. At first, they were split along Protestant-Catholic lines, then among different Protestant denominations. Jewish universities, some religious and others secular, followed. Socially, parallel public and private education (including religious and sectarian universities) crystallized. Between the American Civil War and the end of the 19th century, the federal government recognized so-called Black universities, which had Protestant religious roots.
Just as Hollywood played a crucial role in the liberal opposition to the far-right phenomenon of McCarthyism, university campuses — particularly those in the Southern states — became arenas for pushing back against the right-wing governors and politicians of the South. This happened as the civil rights movement gained strength in the 1950s and 1960s. During this period, racist fanatics refused to allow Black students to enter predominantly white universities. Anti-racism activist Martin Luther King Jr. was among the most prominent figures of this era, as was his leading opponent, George Wallace, the governor of Alabama at the time.
Then, in the 1960s and early 1970s, the Vietnam War and the forced conscription that followed played a fundamental role in revolutionizing and radicalizing a generation of American university students. While the most famous scenes are those that came out of University of California campuses, especially Berkeley, the most heart-wrenching event of this period unfolded at Ohio’s Kent State University during the spring of 1970.

Radicals came to dominate both the Republican and the Democratic parties, eventually leading to massive swings in subsequent transfers of power.

Eyad Abu Shakra

There, four students were killed and nine others severely injured after being shot by the National Guard.
The tragedy at Kent State and the subsequent mass outrage across the country became a turning point. Not only did it transform Washington’s approach to the Indochina Wars, but it also invigorated students’ political consciousness, making American youths feel that they could influence society despite the tyranny of the establishment and the hegemony of influential lobbies that complement and work alongside it.
Moreover, the Cold War’s conclusion, with the American West defeating the Soviet East, had a profound impact on US society, as it did the rest of the world. While many leftists in Europe and Latin America felt extremely disappointed by the collapse of the Soviet socialist model, many Americans felt that Washington’s victory had affirmed the superiority of the capitalist model. Indeed, this was a victory for the hero of the hard right, Ronald Reagan, rather than any of the centrist or moderate-right politicians who tend to favor engaging in dialogue and making compromises with rivals.
It seems that the decline in the economic and living conditions in the period following the fall of the Berlin Wall quickly dispelled the collective sense of post-Cold War pride. With no enemy to fuel military spending, industries tied to the army were scaled down, some bases were closed and some weapons programs were shut down. This had negative economic and social repercussions. As a result, radicals came to dominate both the Republican and the Democratic parties, eventually leading to massive swings in subsequent transfers of power.
After moderate Republican President George H.W. Bush lost his reelection bid in 1992, radical Democrat Bill Clinton became president for eight years. Then, after the similarly radical Republican George W. Bush won in 2000, radical Democrats retook control of the White House when Barack Obama, the first African American president, won in 2008. He also remained in power for eight years.
The Obama years may have played a crucial role in the election of Donald Trump, whose radical right-wing populism represents the polar opposite of what his Democratic predecessor stood for. Then, as soon as Trump’s presidency ended, Joe Biden, Obama’s vice president and “walking shadow,” won power. Biden and Trump are set to face off again in November as the polarization between Republican right and Democratic left grows.
In light of this state of affairs, university campuses seem like flammable arid fields. Indeed, the repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic and the aggravating confusion in Washington on how to deal with Russia and China, especially regarding the Ukraine war and the future of Taiwan — and now the Gaza War, with massacres being broadcast by the international media every day — youths in the US have become more certain that the Republican and Democratic party elites are not up to par. They believe that such politicians are lacking in wisdom, responsibility and humanity.
This crisis of confidence has led young people to voice their opposition on university campuses, which is natural.
It is certainly natural when contrasted with the excessive reactions of the two sides of the ruling establishment elite, whether they are public representatives or the powerful vested-interest lobbies they are tied to.

• Eyad Abu Shakra is managing editor of Asharq Al-Awsat. X: @eyad1949