Law Student Faces Reeducation Training for Liking Trump
Openly sharing that you like Trump at a liberal law school might get you reported and referred to “reeducation training.” Sounds Orwellian but that’s what happened to my friend, let’s call him Kevin.
Kevin, a 1L student, was on a road trip with fellow law club leaders and, during a discussion about American politics, he dared to say “I actually like Trump.” This was enough to get him in trouble. He had to meet with two student body representatives on two consecutive weeks, extend an apology for saying the unsayable, and vow not to do that ever again.
Their rationale? It is inappropriate to openly share political preferences while serving as a university club leader. Yet that is not a principle the club stands by at all. Kevin told me that other student leaders often share their thoughts on political candidates and that there is no provision prohibiting such expression in the club’s bylaws, nor is the club politically or ideologically affiliated. In fact, one of the other club leaders started the very conversation that got him in trouble, a discussion that happened in a car, not even an official club meeting.
As a socially conservative young person, I know the challenges that come with being openly conservative. Depending on the extent to which you express your views, some might call it social suicide. Yet, people have the freedom to dislike what you say and not be your friend.
What is troubling about this story is that it shows the extent to which the left uses institutional mechanisms to silence people they disagree with. While they often overuse the word “systemic” and tie it to any injustice that exists or does not exist under the sun, it is quite clear that they are not advocating for a system that treats everyone equally but for a system that they have full control over.
In Kevin’s case, the students who brought the complaints knew they would get their way. How could that not be so? They ideologically owned many levels within the school hierarchy and knew that, as a result, the school administration and student government would be on their side. Were it not the case, they would not have had the confidence to bring such a ridiculous case against Kevin.
Kevin worked hard to get into law school and shared that pushing against their complaints was not worth it to him. He did not want to face further repercussions, as often is the case, and perhaps be kicked out of the university altogether. While I wish he did something to challenge it, pushing back against this nonsense is no easy task and comes with a price.
Yet, not speaking up might come with a significantly bigger price. I attended this Jordan Peterson talk a couple of months ago in New York and he talked at length about the danger of staying silent. As he often puts it “When you have something to say, staying silent is lying.”
The truth is, it will never get easier. There will always be something we prize that might be jeopardized by speaking up and the more time passes by, the more complacent we might become into sustaining a persona that is fundamentally misaligned with our core beliefs.
By staying silent, we are encouraging the left to continue these charades undermining our freedom of speech, taking it from us little by little, one unchallenged micro-cancellation at a time.
