This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire.
By Kenin M. Spivak
Real Clear Wire
Columbia University’s commencement demonstrates the far left ideology of its faculty, but suggests that for students, much of this is performative.
Last week, I attended my nephew’s graduation from Columbia College, Columbia’s Ivy League undergraduate division. As an alumnus of the college, as well as of Columbia’s business and law schools, I found the ceremony and left-leaning speeches familiar. As a conservative, even then, I was often verbally attacked by other students. On successive April Fools days, Columbia Daily Spectator even lampooned me as Kevin Spewak, spokesman for the fictional “Columbia Students in Opulence.”
Despite Columbia’s long-time liberal bent, including what we now refer to as “wokeness,” its students generally embraced core principles of American exceptionalism, worked hard, and pursued traditional careers. Ironically, given today’s problems, one of my classmates, David Friedman, became U.S. ambassador to Israel, and another, Michael Oren, became Israel’s ambassador to the U.S.
When I attended the college, it admitted only men. Women were welcome at the engineering school, and Columbia’s affiliate, Barnard College. Last year, 51% of Columbia’s undergraduates were women (63%, including Barnard). Comparable to my class, about 15% of the graduating seniors were foreigners. Unlike my class, 63% of the Americans were minority students. That is a direct result of DEI.
At the graduation ceremony, nearly every award was presented to a student pursuing studies in a woke subject, such as sustainable development or African-American studies (neither of which existed when I was a student), and most were engaged in progressive activities, such as interning with Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a hate group that advances Hamas’ objectives in the United States, or campaigning for tenants’ rights.
The students gave a warm welcome to the college’s dean, Josef Sorett, a professor who focuses on African-American sexual politics and social justice, and who chaired Columbia’s Inclusive Public Safety Advisory Committee. Sorett was one of four Columbia deans who exchanged disparaging texts about Jews last year during a forum on antisemitism. He defended their prejudice by criticizing publication of their texts as an invasion of privacy. Only in a woke, antisemitic administration would Sorett have retained his job.
The university’s acting president, former ABC anchor Claire Shipman did not receive as warm a welcome. A meaningful percentage of the seniors, and some guests, heckled her and broke into chants demanding freedom for Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia graduate student facing deportation for his role as an agent provocateur for Hamas. Shipman responded with humor and grace, and the heckling subsided after a few minutes.
Two days later, the Civil Rights Office of the Department of Health and Human Services found Columbia in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by “acting with deliberate indifference towards student-on-student harassment of Jewish students from October 7, 2023, through the present.”
Still, the substance and brevity of the protest shows both the misguided priorities of students and the performative shallowness of their concerns. Students ended the demonstration so they could receive their diplomas, giving short shrift to Khalil and those who objected to Shipman’s bringing in the police to evict pro-Palestinian demonstrators from Butler Library.
That pragmatism is consistent with the majors selected by the vast majority of Columbia’s students. While the awards went to students adopting the progressive mantra, more than 96% of the majors and concentrations selected by seniors fell into traditional disciplines such as history, political science, computer science, math, and literature. Just 70 of 1,708 majors and concentrations were in sustainable development, human rights, ethnicity and race studies, or the like.
Relatively few students attended the separate graduation ceremonies for Asian, black, “Lavender” (LGBTQIA+), native, and other “affinity groups.” There was little interest in what New York Times reporter Jodi Kantor (best known for her concerns about flags flown by the wives of Supreme Court justices) had to say. On the other hand, while just 4% of Hispanics support the use of “Latinx,” that is how they are labeled at Columbia. It also seemed that every student lauded from the stage was a dual major who studied at the “intersection” of something of progressive significance. I had a dual major when I attended Columbia. I didn’t realize that made me intersectional.
When a university promotes intersectional, oppressor dogma, approves of antisemitic tweets, and bestows praise only on the tiny minority of its students who exemplify progressive ideology, the result is a boot camp for DEI, open borders, social justice for criminals, antisemitism, and a liberal rules-based order.
But, a look under the keffiyeh shows that the indoctrination may not endure, and the substantial majority of students of all races and national origins may soon enough refocus on traditional careers and success. For true converts, if they shun violence, the beauty of America is the right of citizens to hold and advocate misguided views. I doubt Columbia credits American exceptionalism for that liberty.
This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.
Read the full article here