In the age of Trump, Columbia University and American higher education are in crisis. That crisis is a familiar one to Italy. Today, the United States is confronting something in higher education that Italy confronted decades ago when its university system birthed an era of unrest, mayhem, murder, and terrorism in the form of the Red Brigades (Brigate Rosse). Columbia University’s commitment to race-based “diversity, equity, and inclusion” politics, ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), faculty with ties to terrorism and Iran, and its rabid anti-Semitism should all serve as warnings for what universities can produce. The Trump administration’s actions against the New York campus are less of a cause for concern than the problem it is trying to solve before it is too late.
Ideas sometimes have far-reaching consequences. In 1969, an American diplomat named Charles K. Johnson stationed in Milan noted that Italian university students were the first part of Italian society to be radicalized into Marxist ideology. Robert Barbour, another U.S. diplomat in Rome, observed that Italian universities “were hotbeds of political extremism; the students were students in name only, their degrees were not worth anything.” Professors at universities like Trento and Padua offered Italian students who were frustrated with a lack of social mobility an ideological justification for revolution. One student, Renato Curcio, formed the Red Brigades and ushered in years of Italian unrest.
In Italy, Red Brigade attacks were at first largely symbolic and included arson attacks on cars believed to be owned by “neo-fascists.” These attacks built up to kidnapping for ransom and assassinations of public officials and businesspeople. The group burned factories of the car company Fiat, robbed banks, kidnapped an American general, and murdered former Italian prime minister Aldo Moro. In 1983, Italy sentenced 32 members of the Red Brigades to life sentences for murder and terrorism. History does not repeat, but it does rhyme. Columbia University’s faculty are the ideological cousins of those at Trento.
Some Columbia faculty espouse anti-Semitism and support terrorism. One tenured professor of comparative literature, Hamid Dabashi, blamed Israel for “every dirty, treacherous, ugly, and pernicious act happening in the world.” Columbia neuropsychologist Jennifer J. Manly, who has received over $100 million in taxpayer-funded grants, marched in support of Hamas and was part of a “human blockade” shielding student protestors at a pro-Palestine encampment. Joseph Massad, a Columbia professor of Modern Arab Politics, described the Hamas attacks on October 7 as “awesome.” Massad’s anti-Semitism is not isolated but is condoned by the university’s actions. Columbia approved Massad to teach a course titled “History of the Jewish Enlightenment in 19th Century Europe.”
Columbia was a focal point of the founding of the anti-Semitic Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement and it was Columbia’s former president, Minouche Shafik, who resigned after a disastrous Congressional testimony on the university’s failure to protect Jewish students. Columbia students are already showing signs of violence, demonstrated by the takeover of the school’s Hamilton Hall, the assault and intimidation of Jewish students, and the assault on campus custodial staff. Columbia’s problems are not isolated to anti-Semitism alone.
The CCP enjoys preferential treatment at Columbia, in part due to Beijing’s largesse at the school. Columbia once received $1 million from China to host a Confucius Institute program, and it continues to work with Tsinghua University on dual-degree programs and work on climate change policy. Tsinghua is deeply embedded in China’s efforts to achieve civil-military fusion and is involved in China’s defense research in the areas of nuclear weapons, electronic weapons systems, and espionage. Tsinghua has been involved in developing technology involved in human rights abuses in Xinjiang. Columbia also works alongside Tsinghua in promoting climate change action through the Global Alliance of Universities on Climate, where multiple administrators from New York University work to advance a common environmental agenda with Beijing.
Columbia’s actions are culminations of a longstanding march to the left that began long ago. In 1932, Columbia’s “Social Problems Club” was founded on the campus as an offshoot of the Communist Party. In the 1960s, Columbia’s Students for a Democratic Society took over school buildings in protest of the Vietnam War, demanding that the school end ties to the U.S. intelligence community and its involvement in defense-related research. Over the decades, Columbia ushered Uncle Sam out the door as it welcomed Beijing in.
For now, much of Columbia’s actions still pale in comparison to what the Red Brigades did in Italy in the 1970s and 80s; however, the warning signs are there. Last year, a manifesto titled “National Liberation Struggles” was found on campus, and it encourages students to look beyond the campus to “the larger struggle for the liberation of all the oppressed people everywhere.” This month, a “manual” for radicals was found circulating among students at Columbia about how to form “autonomous cells,” pick “targets,” sabotage buildings, and engage in breaking and entering. History only rhymes if you let the rhyme finish.
The Trump administration’s actions in curtailing Columbia’s funding and demanding changes to administrative policies are part of something larger. Trump may be attempting to “break” Columbia and make it an example to higher education. Columbia was great once, but it needs to be broken before it can be rebuilt.
***
Ian Oxnevad is the Senior Fellow for Foreign Affairs and Security Studies at the National Association of Scholars.
Start the discussion at community.amgreatness.com