How lack of discourse inadvertently contributes to young students joining the far-right
Lack of discourse in colleges and disenfranchisement of conservative opinion could lead to increased popularity in the far-right.
Since the events of Charlottesville, all forms of media have covered the rise of the ‘alt-right’ and neo-nazi groups. However, these groups have been prevalent on the internet for some time, especially around college campuses. These sites and trends have a profound effect on students who feel disenfranchised on college campuses. Often the modern outlay of the far-right is young white men, who are well educated, from middle-income families and appear to be an ‘everyday joe’.
Sites such as the Daily Stormer (now removed from the internet) have normalised elements of the far-right in meme culture and through ‘trolling’. Whilst, many partake in these activities simply to troll, there are still a number of students which end up becoming adherents of far-right ideology. This is not to excuse people who prescribe to ideologies of the far-right, but importance comes from understanding how people convert to counteract future conversions.

It is no secret that colleges around the world lean more to the left and celebrate more liberal views, which is fine. However, the accommodation of other views in modern society is another question. Within college campuses, the rise of activism and social media, has likely made some administrations of colleges cautious of how they address certain issues. A clear cut example is that of Dr Jordan Peterson in the case of legislating the use pronouns for non-binary people in Canada, where Dr Peterson was harassed for not expressing his personal belief that the government should legislate how he chose to address someone.
Now more than ever, college administrations are coerced to a lack of intervention and discourse due to a mob mentality that would seek to damage the reputation of colleges that disagree with their doctrine.
In Australia the main political group which disseminates doctrine on campus is the Socialist Alternative. The Socialist Alternative will hold rallies, have stalls, host events and speak before a lecture begins, which they are entitled to. However, there are no other groups that express their view on the world. Now this is not to advocate the ‘nationalist socialist club’, rather just a group that has a moderate opposing view or somewhere else on the political spectrum(this argument is more clearly expressed in this article).
The amount of students who hold conservative political ideology can be a hard statistic to find, but to give the general picture, out of students who attend college in Cambridge, MA (home of Harvard and MIT) 57.61% are registered Democrats, whilst only 4.28% are registered Republicans. While this disparity is fine, many students feel powerless to express their opinion as often institutions do not provide the framework for rational discourse and debate. Although, the stereotypical demographic of these students (white) may not often be marginalised in wider society, this does not mean their political ideas should be suppressed — so long as they are not bigoted, and not in the ‘conform to my opinion’ sense.
This lack of discourse can often turn young students to more extreme ideals, contributing to the implosion of the political spectrum (especially in the US). Which has seen both far-right and far-left ideology consume people who are conservative, liberal and in the centre, due to the divisive nature of political opinion in the modern world.
Colleges should be held responsible to stand for free speech where necessary to ensure students are not disenfranchised. The only way to stop another Charlottesville is to ensure the majority of youth in the world are not members of the far-right. This can be achieved through discourse and rational discussion in college years.
Sources used:
