Why Consensus is Killing Critical Thinking at UCL
Image Credit: Steve Cadman via Wikimedia
When walking through the corridors on campus, the same buzzwords appear everywhere. “Inclusivity”. “Diversity”. “Equity”. On the surface, it seems noble. But for students like me, it can feel suffocating, especially when our ideas aren’t deemed a part of the consensus. Campus life feels less like a market place of ideas, and more like an intellectual echo chamber.
As a student here, I’ve sat in countless seminars where I’ve been afraid to speak my mind. I’m not alone. Numerous students have privately whispered to me that they’re scared to say what they truly think, for fear of being expelled - or worse, cancelled.
Research from the Policy Exchange suggests that over 50% of right-leaning students feel they must self-censor in the classroom to avoid social exclusion or academic bias, and this is also the case for right-leaning academics. We have traded the thrill of open debate for the comfort of a perceived consensus, and in doing so, we are failing the very purpose of a university education.
This is exactly why we have launched the UCL Libertarian Society. Our slogan (‘Free Speech, Free Minds, and Free Markets’) demonstrates our commitment to move past "safe spaces" and build a "brave space", an environment where students can explore classical liberal or right-leaning ideas without the toxic vibes that usually follow.
The appetite for such a space is massive. Students pay £10K a year to be taught how to think, not what to think. Critics might argue that right-leaning perspectives already have plenty of platforms. But that misses the point - university should be the ultimate training ground for critical thinking.
When we bubble-wrap ourselves in ideas we already agree with, our intellectual muscles atrophy. The irony is that by shielding students from "controversial" viewpoints, we are doing them a massive disservice once they graduate. As I recently argued in RealClearWorld, this “culture of protectionism” is turning universities into daycares where administrators treat 20-year-old adults as “institutional liabilities” to be managed rather than minds to be challenged.
In the worlds of finance, policy-making, and journalism, the ability to 'steel-man' an opposing view (to understand it so well you could argue it yourself) is a key skill. If we only produce graduates who have never had their assumptions challenged, we are sending them into the professional world unprepared.
Our society’s approach is simple: we provide a respectful, open space for political and economic debate. Whether we are discussing the situation in Iran or abortion, our goal is to create a culture where you can disagree with your peers on Monday yet grab a drink with them on Tuesday.
UCL has a long history of radical thinking. It is time we reclaim that radicalism by embracing the open, unfiltered debate as the only way to reach the truth. The link for the Home of Liberty is officially live, and whether you identify as a conservative, a classical liberal, or are just someone tired of the seminar silence, there is a seat at the table for you.
My challenge to you, whether you’re a staunch leftist or a moderate, is to step into the room. Education from a single perspective is not education at all. It’s time to stop nodding along. It’s time to be brave.