Unlocking Success in Higher Education: The Surprising Impact of Horseshoe Politics

Big changes are happening in higher education, especially with the political climate heating up. The Trump administration is challenging efforts around diversity and inclusion in colleges while even talking about closing the Department of Education. This situation reflects a deeper divide growing within the nation, not just in politics but also among cultural and academic leaders.

As both sides dig in, it’s crucial to step back and understand the bigger picture. Social scientists have pointed out that America is becoming more polarized, which affects how we engage in politics. Interestingly, the ideological battle is not just left versus right. There’s a theory called “horseshoe theory” that suggests extreme ends of the left and right start to resemble each other in their behavior. Both extremes often resort to using power to push their agendas.

Higher education is feeling the heat, too. On one side, you have the Progressive Establishment (PE), which is well-established on most campuses. This group usually aligns with the majority of faculty and administrators, who tend to hold progressive views. Their influence is backed by various organizations and government bodies.

The Conservative Insurgency (CI) forms the other side, mainly consisting of those who feel outside the traditional academic circles. They’re focused on enhancing civic education and sometimes advocate for dramatic changes to counter the PE’s influence. Both groups have their share of moderate voices and extremes, yet they’re often more alike than they realize.

I have engaged with both sides as a political science professor and policy professional. At events where these groups convene, discussions often revolve around shared concerns for higher education, despite differing viewpoints. Both groups express worries about the authoritarian tendencies of the opposing side. They notice when voices are silenced or when there’s manipulation to gain an upper hand, with both blaming the other for stifling debate.

Interestingly, members from both camps often complain about each other’s resources, thinking the other is better organized and funded. There’s a sense of paranoia about control over higher education, with the PE fearing Republican influence and the CI seeing a ‘deep state’ in academia.

During conversations at informal gatherings, the atmosphere sometimes changes, revealing the disdain participants have for each other. There can be mockery of those they disagree with, whether it’s conservatives deemed “ignorant” or progressives labeled as “indoctrinators.”

Another shared trait is how both sides claim to defend free speech. The PE often restricts conservative voices while portraying themselves as champions of free expression during moments of campus unrest. The CI equally criticizes progressives for censorship yet may turn a blind eye when similar protests arise against their views.

Both groups seem to underestimate the importance of the broader public’s diversity of opinions. The PE often forgets its students may not share the progressive leanings of most faculty members. Conversely, the CI believes that implementing strict policies will change campus environments without realizing their actions might only provoke backlash from the PE.

It’s clear both factions need to reflect on their approach. The real divide isn’t simply between progressives and conservatives but rather between those who are dogmatic in their beliefs and those who are willing to engage in genuine dialogue. More people are starting to see the imperative for a balanced and fair educational landscape where diverse views are respected.

The current political climate is a collective action problem; neither side wants to take a step back first, fearing disadvantage. However, there’s hope. More individuals and organizations across the ideological spectrum are aiming to strengthen higher education by promoting open inquiry and civic engagement. Their commitment is crucial for fostering an environment where all students can thrive.

While conflicts between the PE and CI are unlikely to cease, there’s a need to move beyond simply opposing each other. They must confront the illiberal ideas within their ranks and come together to support the growing number of moderates wanting reform. If higher education leaders can’t find common ground, then we might struggle to nurture the next generation of thinkers and leaders for a free society.