As a former White House intern this past summer, a common question I fielded was what it is like to attend a liberal, selective East Coast university. The insularity of a place like Georgetown University can be cause for intrigue and distrust, thought of as an unpierceable progressive bubble by those outside. However, my experience at Georgetown has not reflected this perception. On the contrary, Georgetown, more than any other elite private school, is fertile ground for the Republican Party’s outreach to young people today exhausted with the out-of-touch lethargy in Washington, D.C. politics. There is healthy and productive political discourse on campus, most clearly displayed at the Georgetown University College Republicans (GUCR) and Georgetown University College Democrats (GUCD) Upperclassman Debate. Regardless of party affiliation, there are some things that Hoyas of all political persuasions share. They share the desire for renewal both in our nation’s standing around the world and in the dignity of our nation’s politics. It is therefore an obligation upon Hoyas, students at the most political university in the world, to discuss our shared goals pursuing a better common future without the hateful discord so common in politics today.
During the debate, GUCR and GUCD speakers frequently agreed on the underlying issues facing our country but disagreed on the appropriate solutions. For example, debating foreign policy, both the GUCD speaker and I agreed on the same goal: peace. Young people of all stripes are tired of foreign entanglements and seek a new role in the world for the United States. The route to peace, and who is better equipped to lead us there, is our source of disagreement.
It is easy to defend the second Trump administration’s foreign policy record. For the first time in years, peace is being brokered in the Middle East, and America is standing up for itself and its allies against terrorist states. And no, President Trump is not some Russian stooge. The administration’s actions show that the president is bringing peace to Ukraine without compromising the country’s sovereignty. This is in stark contrast to Democratic shortcomings in Gaza, Iran and Ukraine. Simultaneously, America’s foreign policy apparatus is evolving to be leaner, more focused and reflective of our true national interest. Those defending the administration have a clear upper hand. We’ve won so much that I am almost tired of winning.
Despite this, GUCR is on a perpetual back foot in the opinion of the Georgetown student body. According to data collected by Niche, “very conservative” and “conservative” political identities are the lowest and second lowest common, respectively, at Georgetown. I doubt any of The Hoya’s readers are surprised. And our university has a mixed record on free speech, chilling conservatives’ willingness to speak their minds out of fear of reprisal at the hands of students or administrators. GUCR has been breaking through this tendency towards silence by bringing those of differing opinions at our roundtable events, and I have been encouraged to see some of my most liberal friends be enthusiastic attendees. I would encourage any politically-minded Hoya to come to these conversations and speak their minds publicly. The mixed record on free speech is not for lack of vision by the administration and student clubs to bridge the gap, and the response of the administration to posters earlier this year celebrating the political murder of Charlie Kirk is commendable if not yet concluded. While there is a mile’s worth of effort to be crossed, these first steps are moving in the right direction.
The free speech rankings tell of work still to be done in promoting bipartisan, cross-ideological dialogue. And this does not come without hiccups and setbacks, such when I hear GUCD debaters purport that conservatives care about immigration enforcement because of racism rather than a legitimate concern for public safety. For one, Democrats should know better than to deride hawks on the border crisis given how decisively they lost the issue last year. For another, Hoyas should hold ourselves to a higher standard than bad faith. The greatest impediment to meaningful dialogue is holding on to the belief that your opponents are simply hateful. Our Georgetown community still must overcome that hurdle, clearly.
This being said, I remain optimistic. Georgetown has no place for those who celebrate division and violence. The campus reaction to the Charlie Kirk flyers, in spite of the aims of their propagators, was universal scorn. Hoyas know that political polarization is a problem, and forums like the GUCR-GUCD debate are crucial to cutting the siloed clubbiness in which derogatory stereotypes thrive. I am proud of my school and its students for investing time and effort into bridging our gaps, upholding our Jesuit value of “contemplation in action.’’ Now, more than ever, meaningful and productive dialogue is something to be cherished.
Knox Graham is a junior in the School of Foreign Service.
