Turning Point USA Doesn’t Belong in Claremont

Provocative political posturing has no place on campuses committed to constructive dialogue.

Credit: Bryan Myrick, Idaho Press

Conservatives represent a small minority of the student body at CMC, and an even smaller minority across the Claremont Colleges. CMC’s 2024 Political Attitudes Survey found that 18.8% of respondents identify as Republicans, up from 6% in 2022. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) affirms this result, reporting that CMC has a liberal-to-conservative ratio of 4:1. The ratios for the other colleges are more stark: 30:1 for Pomona, 34:1 for Scripps, 26:1 for Pitzer, and 39:1 for Harvey Mudd. While all of these surveys rely on a limited sample size of each college’s student body and may have a substantial margin of error, they reflect an uncontroversial fact: conservative students are significantly  outnumbered in Claremont.

In fact, the problem may be worse than it seems. Fear of social and academic repercussions leads conservative students to censor themselves both within and outside of the classroom. All of the Claremont Colleges earned grades of D or lower for “Self-Censorship” according to FIRE. Given this campus climate — and the strong leftward lean of Claremont faculty — conservative viewpoints on campus are being expressed even more rarely than the demographics of the student body imply.

CMC’s chapter of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) seeks to remedy this problem by empowering conservative student voices. Charlie Kirk, TPUSA’s founder, traveled to college campuses across the country to promote the organization’s views. His signature approach was sitting at a table with a sign boldly proclaiming “Prove Me Wrong.” He was known for engaging in fiery debates with students, often dropping provocative one-liners that got widespread attention — both positive and negative — on social media.

Kirk warned of “Blacks prowling the streets to go harass whites,” claimed that “anti-whiteness has been largely financed by Jewish donors,” referred to President Biden as “a bumbling dementia-filled Alzheimer’s corrupt tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty,” and used a slur for transgender people. He advocated conservative principles, but he also engaged in rage-baiting through intentionally inflammatory comments.

TPUSA’s “nearly 800+ college chapters” follow Charlie Kirk’s model. Turning Point proclaims that its mission is “to identify, educate, train, and organize students to promote the principles of fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government.” But when this mission fuels incivility, political polarization, and the villainization of alternative viewpoints, it ends up harming our colleges and our country.

Claremont McKenna College champions the principles of free expression, viewpoint diversity, and constructive dialogue. In 2018, the college founded the Open Academy as “[a] response to the educational imperative of our time: overcoming what divides us to solve the world’s most challenging problems.” Turning Point USA aims to broadcast their political agenda at all costs, embracing combative discourse to do so. These tactics are antithetical to CMC’s core principles.

America is incredibly polarized right now. 80% of adults believe that Republican and Democratic voters disagree not only on plans and policies, but also on basic facts. Worse, we are struggling to have respectful, constructive dialogue across political differences. 84% of Americans believe that political debate in the U.S. has become less respectful and fact-based in recent years. 57% say that disagreements between Republicans and Democrats receive too much attention, and 78% say that too little attention is paid to important issues facing the country. 

In light of the current national political climate, CMC’s nonpartisan and campus wide Open Academy initiative is laudable. By teaching future leaders and professionals the value of civil discourse, colleges like CMC open the door to healing America’s polarization problem. 

The solution to Claremont’s viewpoint diversity problem and America’s polarization isn’t platforming provocative and combative dialogue. Instead, conservative students should focus on opportunities to present their ideas in respectful, intellectual ways that open doors for further conversations. Many students come to the Claremont Colleges with little-to-no exposure to conservative viewpoints. Oftentimes, students perceive Republicans as angry, hateful, or bigoted. By promoting thoughtful conservative arguments in a civil manner, right-leaning students can challenge this perception, allowing their peers to see the American right for what it is: a diverse political movement with a rich history and a strong intellectual backing. Organizations like Turning Point USA simply reinforce the preconceived stereotypes about Republicans, fueling division while hurting the conservative movement.

Representation is powerful. When students  interact with peers different from themselves — whether in identity, experience, or ideology — they become less prejudiced. Conservative students can help their peers consider new political perspectives while healing political polarization. However, this only works if we focus on building bridges rather than tearing them down. Turning Point USA’s combative approach to dialogue undermines the credibility of conservative students by associating their beliefs with harassment and incivility.

A core tenet of conservatism is that change is slow. Edmund Burke, the intellectual founder of conservatism, wrote that “Time is required to produce that union of minds which alone can produce all the good we aim at.” Lasting and stable social change is driven by consensus-building efforts, not by yelling louder than your opponents. Yet Turning Point USA has abandoned this principle, prioritizing clicks over progress. Claremont conservatives who want to be heard should embrace civil discourse and turn away from Turning Point.