Amid the aftermath of far-right activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, the Trump administration and its allies have praised him as a champion of free speech. At the same time, the administration has framed the “radical left” as the origin of all political violence, using that claim to justify the suppression of organizations and people who oppose them.
GDS teaches us to engage in civil discourse and to have respectful disagreements; the administration’s actions stand in clear contrast to these ideals. The Trump administration models the opposite of what GDS teaches us—it relies on intimidation, threats and the persecution of opponents to shut down conversation and control the narrative. Civil discourse cannot prosper in an environment where people are afraid to voice their opinions.
On Sept. 22, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that designated Antifa—a loosely connected, decentralized movement of anti-fascist activists who organize locally and independently—as a terrorist organization. Antifa’s lack of membership, hierarchy or central command makes it impossible for members to coordinate nationwide violence, which the executive order claims it does. Belonging to an ideological group is not a crime and designating groups as domestic terrorists can infringe on the First Amendment, which was established to protect against the administration’s actions: persecuting speech that opposes the government. The federal government also has no legal authority to designate domestic organizations or movements as terrorist groups.
The executive order exaggerates the threat posed by a decentralized activist organization, and it sets a dangerous precedent of the government blatantly violating federal laws to label political opponents as terrorists.
Trump said his administration will use the order to investigate “wealthy people” who fund “anarchists and agitators,” and he mentioned liberal billionaire George Soros as an example. Soros is the founder of the Open Society Foundations, an organization that gives grants to promote “democratic practice, human rights, equity, and justice,” according to their website. The Justice Department has pushed prosecutors to draft plans to investigate Soros and the foundation.
The Trump administration is attacking organizations based on their political affiliation, not their actions—this limits conflicting points of view and stifles public discourse. As students who are still forming our opinions and learning how to navigate the political climate, hearing from an array of perspectives is vital to developing our critical thinking skills and challenging our biases. Trump’s suppression of political opponents attempts to curb dissent, thus discouraging the vital exchange of perspectives that we, as students, need.
Additionally, the Trump administration has targeted universities, using federal funding as leverage to impose its political agenda. Weaponizing funds to manipulate universities is just one example of Trump’s administration threatening institutions to conform to his will. The administration’s efforts to coerce universities to adopt conservative policies harm diversity of thought and undermine academic independence.
As someone who will go to college during the Trump Administration, I don’t want the federal government to intervene in my education—learning from people with different perspectives and lived experiences is invaluable to a comprehensive education. Trump wants to limit the number of international students attending universities. After growing up attending a school where people have largely homogenous beliefs and experiences, I want to be exposed to peers with a variety of backgrounds when I attend college.
In a time when the federal government is openly suppressing free speech, it is more important than ever to continue to engage in dialogue, ask questions and challenge ideas respectfully. The GDS community should come together and be more inclusive of viewpoints we would usually dismiss. We should foster an environment where people with differing opinions feel comfortable speaking their minds.
We have a responsibility to stay informed and critically engaged—seeking out diverse perspectives, questioning narratives from all sides and refusing to accept silencing tactics as a legitimate political strategy are critical to preserve free speech. It is crucial not to alienate opposing perspectives—rather, you should learn from them to help yourself develop a more well-rounded worldview. In creating an ideologically inclusive environment, we not only protect our ability to speak freely but also uphold our democratic and shared values.