Naïve liberalism all too common in college

By Justin Manger

They walk through Benson with no shoes on a rainy day. They wear anti-war slogans on their sleeves and backpacks. They speak up loudly in many classes, eager to voice their enthusiastic college liberalism. Others aren't so outwardly obvious with their liberality, but believe in it nonetheless. Especially at a college like Santa Clara, does this not seem somewhat hypocritical?

Don't get me wrong: I think that college kids gaining the ability to see outside of the socioeconomic strata in which they were born and raised is an important part in becoming a well-rounded, empathetic person.

In fact, history has repeatedly proven that human beings can quickly degenerate into violent animals if either unwilling or unable to understand another person's or group's perspective on something, especially if it does not agree with their own. Active awareness of and interest in the goings-on of the global community around us denotes the kind of compassion which would make the author(s) of the Santa Clara mission statement smile from ear to ear.

Yet college liberalism often leaves much to be desired, for a couple of reasons. First, I personally find it difficult to get fired up about human rights violations and world suffering when someone who lacks real-world perspective on a given problem is discussing it.

I've read a number of student writings on the war on Iraq, world hunger, politics and religion, human rights violations and so on. While a number of these articles make certain valid points, knowing that someone who lives in the absolute zenith of earthly luxury is behind them makes me question their level of genuineness. After listening to someone condemn the U.S. as an oppressor of foreign people or a super-warmongering machine of exclusion and exploitation, I always notice that, despite all of these terrible things the person believes the U.S. does, he or she is still willing to be considered a citizen and resident of this "terrible" country.

When I ask these people why they still live in the U.S. if they truly believe what they just said, the discussion always comes down to them saying something along the lines of "the U.S. is still a better country to live in," which then entirely debases all of their complaining.

Secondly, and far more importantly, is that as college students, few of us have the kind of real-world experience and/or understanding that adults do. When we see an unsolved problem, many people seem to arrogantly believe that the greater whole of humanity has overlooked it or has either not made the effort or not known how to fix it. Perhaps because of the nature of academic education itself (which is rooted in theory and its application), a student understandably thinks that once a problem is discovered, a following solution should be quickly devised and implemented.

In an academic environment, this kind of problem-solving works incredibly well. Yet in the real world, by both virtue and vice of our imperfections, human execution of anything becomes a highly unpredictable wildcard. While theory has given us potentially workable solutions to problems of world hunger (more efficient resource distribution), despotic regimes (capitalism), homelessness (government housing projects) and even social inequality (communism), humanity still suffers from them all.

I strongly urge students to think deeply about the following question: if the world's brightest minds have arrived upon feasible solutions to many widespread problems of humanity, how is it that they continue to exist?