Conservatives have scored some noteworthy victories for free speech on college campuses in recent years. But a new survey from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) shows that self-censorship is still rampant in academia, reflecting the continuing lack of ideological diversity on American college campuses.

According to FIRE’s report, faculty members at institutions of higher education in 2024 were “more likely to self-censor” than at the height of McCarthyism in the 1950s. Free speech, a cornerstone of higher education, is under siege in many of America’s colleges and universities, the survey concluded. These findings should concern anyone who values intellectual diversity and open dialogue in higher education.

The survey polled more than 6,000 faculty members from 55 four-year institutions, revealing a stark disparity in how conservative and liberal faculty experience academic life. Nearly half of conservative respondents (47 percent) admitted to self-censoring out of fear of backlash, compared to only 19 percent of their liberal counterparts. Even more troubling, 55 percent of conservative professors reported occasionally hiding their political beliefs to protect their careers, while only 17 percent of liberals felt the need to do the same.

This pervasive “free speech chill,” as Nathan Honeycutt of FIRE describes it, is not just a problem for professors—it’s a disservice to students. When conservative voices are silenced, students lose the opportunity to engage with a full spectrum of ideas. The survey’s data confirms this imbalance: only 20 percent of respondents felt a conservative individual would fit well in their department, while over 70 percent said a liberal individual would.

“The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next,” President Abraham Lincoln is credited with saying. If we take Lincoln as a guide, America has no time to waste to remedy the left-wing monoculture that dominates academia.

The issue extends beyond mere perception. A significant 87 percent of respondents reported difficulty discussing at least one politically sensitive topic on campus, such as transgender rights, racial inequality, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, abortion, or the 2024 presidential election. While the rest of America wrestles daily with these important issues, faculty felt they could not speak “openly” and “honestly” about the topics to students and fellow professors on campus.

This reluctance stifles the robust debates that are essential to a vibrant academic environment. One Texas A&M professor encapsulated this sentiment, telling FIRE, “I am starting (for the first time in my career) to censor myself out of a desire for self-preservation. I say nothing at all in faculty meetings now, if I attend at all.”

Tenure, once considered a safeguard for academic freedom, now provides little sense of security. “Even as a tenured full professor, I feel pressure to conceal certain opinions,” a professor from the University of Texas at Austin said. “The atmosphere in certain academic units can be cult-like and fascistic and I really feel I have to pick my battles.”

The survey found only marginal differences in self-censorship between tenured and non-tenured faculty. This trend reflects a broader cultural issue within academia, where fear of retribution outweighs the protection of tenure and the pursuit of knowledge.

Institutional policies also play a role. The survey revealed that 67 percent of faculty believe universities should maintain neutrality on political and social issues, a position at odds with the decades-long push for mandatory diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) pledges. “You cannot question DEI,” said a University of Michigan professor, “cannot reason against DEI, or speak about anything related to DEI.”

Conservative faculty overwhelmingly oppose these pledges (85 percent), while liberal faculty are divided, with 47 percent supporting and 35 percent opposing them. Such policies risk further alienating those who feel their views are unwelcome.

There have been some positive developments on this front in recent months. As AMAC Newsline has previously reported, Michigan has announced that it will no longer require DEI statements as part of hiring decisions and is considering a “broader shift” away from DEI policies.

Nonetheless, the implications of FIRE’s findings are profound. When faculty are afraid to speak openly, the mission of higher education—to foster critical thinking and challenge assumptions—is undermined. This culture of no dissent not only harms professors but also deprives students of the intellectual resiliency necessary for a comprehensive education.

Fortunately, President-elect Donald Trump looks set to bring a welcome breath of fresh air to free speech on campus in 2025, as he did during his first term.

Speaking at the National Archives in 2020 on Constitution Day, Trump addressed the censoring forces on campuses, media, and business: “Whether it is the mob on the street, or the cancel culture in the boardroom, the goal is the same: to silence dissent, to scare you out of speaking the truth, and to bully Americans into abandoning their values, their heritage, and their very way of life.” Trump continued, “We are here today to declare that we will never submit to tyranny. We will reclaim our history and our country for citizens of every race, color, religion, and creed.”

As FIRE’s survey reflects, fostering an environment where diverse viewpoints are respected and encouraged is not just a matter of principle, but of necessity. Colleges and universities must recommit to the ideal of free expression and take concrete steps to ensure all voices—regardless of political affiliation—can be heard without fear.

W.J. Lee has served in the White House, NASA, on multiple political campaigns, and in nearly all levels of government.