Tag: Point

Media Request to Turning Point USA about Protecting Children

Turning Point USA (TPUSA) presents itself as a youth-driven organization committed to “freedom,” “family values,” and protecting young people from ideological harm. Its events, chapters, conferences, and online ecosystem actively recruit high school and college students, many of them minors. That reality alone demands scrutiny. When an organization mobilizes thousands of young people, invites them into closed social networks, overnight conferences, mentorship relationships, and ideologically intense spaces, the question of safeguarding is not optional. It is foundational.

The Higher Education Inquirer is formally requesting that Turning Point USA explain—clearly, publicly, and in detail—how it protects its juvenile members from abuse, exploitation, harassment, grooming, and radicalization.

History shows what happens when powerful institutions prioritize reputation, growth, and loyalty over the safety of children. The Boy Scouts of America concealed decades of sexual abuse. The Catholic Church systematically reassigned abusive clergy while silencing victims. In both cases, leadership claimed moral authority while “looking the other way” to preserve power and legitimacy. These failures were not accidents; they were structural. They occurred in organizations that mixed hierarchy, ideology, secrecy, and minors.

TPUSA operates in a similarly charged environment. Its chapters are often led by young adults with little training in youth protection. Its national leadership cultivates celebrity figures, informal mentorships, and a grievance-driven culture that discourages internal dissent. Its conferences place minors in proximity to adult influencers, donors, and political operatives. Yet TPUSA has not meaningfully explained what independent safeguards are in place to prevent abuse or misconduct.

This concern is heightened by TPUSA’s proximity to extremist online subcultures. The organization has repeatedly intersected with or failed to decisively distance itself from INCEL-adjacent rhetoric and Groypers—a network associated with white nationalism, misogyny, antisemitism, and harassment campaigns targeting young people, especially women and LGBTQ students. Groypers, in particular, have demonstrated an ability to infiltrate conservative youth spaces, weaponize irony, and normalize dehumanizing ideas under the guise of “just asking questions.” These are not abstract risks. They are documented dynamics in digital youth radicalization.

Young men who feel isolated, humiliated, or angry are especially vulnerable to grooming—not only sexual grooming, but ideological grooming that funnels resentment into rigid hierarchies and scapegoating narratives. When organizations valorize grievance, masculinity panic, and enemies within, they create conditions where abuse can flourish and victims are pressured into silence for the “greater cause.”

TPUSA frequently positions itself as a protector of children against educators, librarians, and public schools. That posture invites reciprocal accountability. Who conducts background checks for chapter leaders and event staff? What mandatory reporting policies exist? Are there trauma-informed procedures for handling allegations? Are minors ever placed in unsupervised housing, transportation, or digital spaces with adults? What training is provided on boundaries, consent, and power dynamics? And crucially, what independent oversight exists beyond TPUSA’s own leadership and donors?

Safeguarding cannot be reduced to slogans or moral posturing. It requires transparency, external review, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths—even when they implicate allies. Institutions that refuse such scrutiny do not protect children; they protect themselves.

The Higher Education Inquirer awaits Turning Point USA’s response. Silence, deflection, or culture-war theatrics will only deepen concern. If TPUSA truly believes in protecting young people, it should welcome this scrutiny—and prove that it has learned from the catastrophic failures of institutions that came before it.

Sources

Wikipedia, “Turning Point USA”

Wikipedia, “Boy Scouts of America sex abuse cases”

Wikipedia, “Catholic Church sexual abuse cases”

Anti-Defamation League, “Groyper Movement”

Southern Poverty Law Center, reports on white nationalist youth recruitment and online radicalization

Moonshot CVE, research on incel ideology and youth radicalization

New York Times, reporting on abuse scandals in youth-serving institutions

ProPublica, investigations into institutional cover-ups involving minors

Source link

December 21, 2025
The civic university movement at an inflection point: reflecting on the National Civic Impact Accelerator’s legacy

This blog was kindly authored by Adam Leach, Programme Director and John Fell, Policy and Partnerships Manager, at the National Civic Impact Accelerator at Sheffield Hallam University.

As the National Civic Impact Accelerator (NCIA) programme concludes this month, we find ourselves at a critical juncture for the civic university movement. After three years of intensive work gathering evidence, developing tools, and supporting universities to deepen their civic engagement, we have learnt a profound lesson: no single formula produces civic university success, but there are proven waypoints that can guide institutions through challenging terrain.

The timing could not be more important

The conclusion of the NCIA arrives at a moment of acute tension. On one hand, the Secretary of State for Education has made civic engagement one of her five top priorities for higher education reform. Bridget Phillipson’s November 2024 letter to university leaders was unequivocal: institutions must:

play a full part in both civic engagement, ensuring local communities and businesses benefit fully from your work; and in regional development, working in partnership with local government and employers.

On the other hand, many higher education institutions are facing deficit, and NCIA research has revealed the fragility of civic infrastructure within universities. Civic teams are being disbanded, staff on short-term contracts are not being renewed, and years of carefully built community partnerships are at risk. As one participant in our research observed:

If you are sitting in rooms with leaders of councils and hospitals, for that to be a junior role is a big ask, especially if it is a junior role on a temporary contract.

This paradox – increased civic responsibility amid deepening financial pressures – represents perhaps the most significant challenge facing the civic university movement.

What the NCIA has delivered

The NCIA programme, led by Sheffield Hallam University in partnership with the National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement (NCCPE), the Institute for Community Studies, City-REDI at the University of Birmingham, and Queen Mary University of London, set out to answer a fundamental question: what works in civic engagement, for whom, and in what contexts?

Our flagship output is the Civic Field Guide, which distils three years of evidence gathering into 14 practical waypoints organised across seven terrains: People, Place, Partnership, Policy, Practice, Purpose and Process. These waypoints emerged not from theory alone but from the generous sharing of universities across England, who were honest about both their successes and setbacks. Think of our waypoints as signs on a coastal path – they help you understand where you are and what direction you are heading, but they do not walk the path for you.

Each waypoint addresses critical challenges. One focuses on embedding civic engagement as a core university mission, rather than leaving it to a few passionate individuals – what we call the ‘passion trap’. Another waypoint explores measuring civic impact through both quantitative metrics and qualitative narratives, recognising that numbers alone cannot capture how civic initiatives transform real lives. A third encourages universities to position communities as equal partners through co-design and lived experience, rather than as passive recipients of university expertise.

Beyond the Field Guide, we have created a wealth of freely accessible evidence, tools and resources. Our Action Learning Programme brought together civic practitioners from across the UK. We have funded innovative civic projects testing new approaches, and we have produced a comprehensive Civic Impact Framework identifying seven domains where universities can make a difference.

The honest answer

After three years and significant investment, have we finally cracked civic university success? No. The legacy of the NCIA will not be our outputs and guidance, but what people do with them, and how they use them to make changes in their places and communities. Civic work is highly place-responsive and context-specific. What succeeds in Sheffield may not work in Southampton. The power to change lies with practitioners and academics applying these insights to their unique contexts.

Looking ahead: policy proposals for sustainability

As the NCIA concludes, new structures are emerging to sustain the momentum. Following six years of leadership from Sheffield Hallam University, the NCCPE will steward the Civic University Network into its next phase, ensuring that NCIA resources remain accessible. The Civic 2.0 initiative establishes a consortium of UK universities with the University of Birmingham hosting a national policy hub.

Yet sustainability requires concrete policy action at institutional, regional and national levels:

For universities: Civic engagement must move from the margins to the core of institutional strategy. This means long-term budgets for civic teams, senior leadership accountability for delivering civic commitments, and treating community relationships as strategic assets, not expendable add-ons.

For Government: The devolution agenda and creation of combined authorities create opportunities to embed universities as anchor institutions in regional policy frameworks. Universities should be crucial partners in regional development strategies, with dedicated funding streams for civic infrastructure.

For funders: Research England and UK Research and Innovation should maintain dedicated civic capacity funding beyond individual programme cycles. The civic infrastructure requires sustained investment, not stop-start project funding.

The Government’s explicit political support for universities’ civic role creates opportunities that were unimaginable a decade ago. But opportunity must translate into sustainable structures. Universities that demonstrate clear local value will have stronger voices in regional and national policy discussions and stronger support during crises.

Keeping civic central

The NCIA has provided navigation tools. Universities now possess comprehensive evidence about what works, practical frameworks for action, and a growing community of civic practitioners willing to share their learning. The question facing the sector is whether institutions will commit to using them despite financial pressures.

The future of civic engagement depends on universities recognising that their purpose is about contributing meaningfully to the places they call home and the communities they serve. The civic university movement has moved from the margins to the mainstream. Now comes the hard work of keeping it there.

Source link

December 18, 2025
The Push for Viewpoint Diversity Misses the Point (opinion)

Much of the controversy around the Trump administration’s “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education” has focused on its push for viewpoint diversity and the claim that open inquiry does not exist in our classrooms. That push builds on a long-standing conservative critique that today makes hay out of the fact that the vast majority of faculty in U.S. colleges and universities lean left.

Recent data supports that claim. In elite institutions, like Duke and Harvard Universities, surveys suggest the number of faculty identifying as liberal exceeds 60 percent. The percentages differ not only by type of institution but by discipline, with the humanities and social sciences leaning more liberal than STEM. Some even claim that political bias corrupts academic disciplines.

Liberal faculty and commentators on higher education sometimes take the bait and respond defensively to what often is a politically motivated attack. In an op-ed in The Guardian, Lauren Lassabe Shepherd argued that the purpose of the conservative critique has been “to delegitimize the academy … [and] return colleges to a carefully constructed environment not to educate all, but to reproduce hierarchy.”

Whether or not she is right, you don’t have to look hard to see that institutions of higher education are feeling growing pressure to right their ships—to create campuses and classrooms where open inquiry flourishes, where students feel free to say what they think and to challenge ideas they disagree with. Colleges have responded by scrambling to incorporate more ideological diversity into their course offerings, to implement new programming and to recruit guest speakers who challenge progressive thinking.

All this misses the point and distracts us from the work that needs to be done to further improve the quality of the education students receive in American colleges and universities. Put simply, instead of fixating on who is in the classroom and whether they are liberal or conservative, we should be focused on how we are in the room.

Higher education’s greatest challenge to achieving open inquiry is not one of ideology or viewpoint diversity, but of disposition. Harvard University’s 2024 report from a working group on open inquiry gestured in this direction but did not flesh it out.

If we are to truly commit to open inquiry, we need to step back, pause and reflect not just on what we think, but on how we acquire knowledge, how we think, whether we are interested in learning more or if we are content with what we already know.

You can decorate campuses with all the colors of the political rainbow but not make them better places to learn.

The issue is how we show up with others. Data suggests that students in our classrooms don’t feel comfortable pushing back on each other or on their professors when they disagree. They engage in what psychologists Forest Romm and Kevin Waldman call “performative virtue-signaling.”

In conversations with students at Amherst College, we have heard that they are not just constraining their expression in academic settings but in social settings, too. It seems we are afraid of each other.

It is no wonder. The academic and public squares have not proven themselves to be especially kind or generous as of late. We need look no further than the vitriolic reactions to Charlie Kirk’s murder, and the as-vitriolic reactions to the reactions to his murder. When we do, we can see that the rush to righteousness operates across the ideological spectrum.

The work of college education is to dislodge the instinct to judge and replace it with a commitment to rigorous listening. The work of college teachers is to model an approach to the world that puts empathy before criticism.

What if instead of just talking about the right to speech, we emphasized the right to listen? But we don’t just mean any kind of listening; we mean listening in a certain way. Deep listening. The kind of listening that takes in ideas in slow, big gulps and lets them settle deeply, and sometimes uncomfortably.

It is listening that seeks to catch ideas in flight and carry them further. This is a disciplined kind of listening that resists defensiveness and instead burrows into curiosity.

To foster it, we have to cultivate in ourselves and in our students a disposition to wonder. Why does someone think that way? What experiences, places, relationships, institutions and social forces have shaped their thinking? How did they get to that argument? How did they get to that feeling? How is it that they could arrive at a different perspective than I did?

This is the heart of open inquiry, and it is much harder to achieve than it is to bring more conservatives to campus. Without the disposition to wonder, doing so will produce enclaves, not engagement, on even the most ideologically diverse campus.

This kind of open inquiry would demand that we remove the stance of moral certainty and righteousness from our ways and practices of thinking. That is the real work that needs to animate our colleges and universities.

It is hard, slow work. There is no magic bullet. Teachers and their students, liberals and conservatives, have to commit to it.

While open inquiry is a social disposition, it is also about how we orient our thinking when we are alone. We need to challenge our students to wonder not just about others but about themselves.

What would happen if we all got into the habit of asking ourselves: When was the last time we changed our mind about something? When was the last time we left a conversation or finished a text and actually grappled with our orientation to a subject?

We yearn for our students to practice open inquiry not just when they are in our classrooms, but when they are in the library or in their dorm room with a book to read, an equation to solve, a painting to finish.

The promise of this type of inquiry is exhilarating, freeing. And it opens up great possibilities of seeing the world differently or in more complicated ways.

At the end of the day, the literary scholar Peter Brooks gets it right when he says, “To honor, even only nominally, the call for ‘viewpoint diversity’ is to succumb to a logic that is at its heart hostile to the academic enterprise.” At the heart of that enterprise is a belief that viewpoint diversity is not the same thing as open inquiry. That belief requires changing the culture of learning on our campuses.

Maybe the shift does not seem responsive to the political clamor of the moment. Maybe it sounds like it demands too much and will be hard to assess.

But whatever the case, it feels revolutionary to us.

Austin Sarat is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College.

Leah Schmalzbauer is the Clarence Francis 1910 Professor in the Social Sciences and associate provost and associate dean of the faculty at Amherst College.

Source link

November 4, 2025
U of Md. Criticized for Charging Turning Point Security Fee

University officials said the fee is routine and that they have required the same of other student organizations.

Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post via Getty Images

University of Maryland officials are facing backlash for requiring the campus chapter of a conservative student organization to pay what chapter leaders called a “viewpoint discriminatory” security fee for an event on Wednesday, CBS News reported.

While university police staffed the event free of charge, officials required the chapter to hire its own security to conduct entrance screenings. The event, titled Fighting Like Charlie, featured Daily Wire senior editor Cabot Phillips and was held just over a month after Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, was shot and killed during an event at Utah Valley University.

“It’s basically saying anybody, if they want to threaten our chapter or threaten us because of our viewpoints and our speech, then the university, in turn, is going to impose financial burdens on us, or else we can’t have our events,” University of Maryland senior Connor Clayton, communications chair for the campus Turning Point USA chapter, told CBS News. “That is a very dangerous precedent to put on a Turning Point chapter.”

University officials said the fee is routine and that they have required the same of other student organizations that host similar guest speaker events on campus, regardless of the speaker or message.

The Leadership Institute, a Virginia-based nonprofit that trains conservative activists and leaders, ultimately paid the fee—which amounted to $148—on behalf of the chapter. The event proceeded as planned, according to posts on the chapter’s Instagram account.

Source link

October 24, 2025
Higher Education Inquirer covered Charlie Kirk and Turning Point for nearly a decade

For almost a decade, the Higher Education Inquirer investigated right wing influencer Charlie Kirk and his Turning Point Empire. Kirk was groomed by Bill Montgomery (a surrogate for Richard Nixon in Florida for Nixon’s Reelection Campaign) and Steve Bannon when Bannon was at Breitbart. Kirk quickly learned the dirty tricks of the Nixon-Reagan era and the dog whistles of white supremacy and misogyny. He also quickly gained funding from right wing billionaire Foster Freiss.

In mid-2016, we communicated our concerns with Michael Vasquez at Politico, who later moved on to the Chronicle of Higher Education (CHE). CHE later reported that Kirk created a plan to win student elections using outside (illegal) money. We also contacted the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League who both listed TPUSA as a hate group.

For nearly a decade and a half, Kirk and Turning Point USA incited violence on campus and on social media through its playbook of dirty tricks, racist and sexist agitation, and surveillance. That’s why we warned folks not to engage with TPUSA before this semester started.

As we reported in 2018:

Charlie Kirk, with no evidence whatsoever, alleged that a less qualified woman of color took his slot at West Point.

Source link

September 13, 2025
UW-Stevens Point partners with community college to shore up struggling branch
Dive Brief:
- The University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point is teaming up with a community college to share space, offer joint programming and develop transfer pathways between the institutions.
- Under the partnership, UW-Stevens Point’s Wausau branch will relocate to nearby Northcentral Technical College’s campus in the city beginning in fall 2026.
- Through the partnership, the university plans to increase degree programs in Wausau in high-demand fields like healthcare and business. For example, the two institutions are discussing collaborating on a surgical technician program, they said.
Dive Insight:

The partnership between UW-Stevens Point and NTC comes after years of steep enrollment decline at the university’s Wausau location and questions about the branch’s viability.

Between fall 2011 and fall 2023, full-time equivalent enrollment at UW-Stevens Point’s Wausau campus fell by a vertiginous 78.5% to just 232 students, according to institutional evaluations of the Universities of Wisconsin system by Deloitte last year.

The university’s Marshfield campus suffered a similar decline. Deloitte’s assessment of both campuses was that the sharp enrollment drop-offs “threaten the future viability” of those locations.

It also added pressure to the university as a whole. Without making operational changes, Deloitte forecast UW-Stevens Point would face mounting deficits in the years ahead.

NTC has also seen declines in recent years. Between 2018 and 2023, fall headcount declined 8.7% to 5,838 students at the technical college, per federal data.

The institutions hope that joining forces can help play to their strengths while offering students new reasons to attend each college. The UW-Stevens Point branch will offer bachelor’s and master’s degrees while NTC offers associate degrees and certificates.

“Students will have a seamless connection between UWSP and NTC,” Miranda Gentry-Siegel, executive of UW-Stevens Point’s Wausau campus. “Advisers from both schools will work together to find options that fit students’ interest and finances.”

The institutions also pointed to the potential for joint programs, collaboration between faculties on program design, combined student support services, and cost savings by reducing duplicated programs and services.

Faculty from UW-Stevens Point will stay employees of the university upon moving to teach at NTC’s campus, according to a FAQ page. It also signaled the possibility that some staff positions could be cut, noting that those who lose their positions will be “given the opportunity” to pursue jobs elsewhere in UW-Stevens Point or in the county government.

The university is working with Marathon County to determine future use of its current campus, which is about two miles from NTC.

After the move to NTC’s facilities, UW-Stevens Point will end its varsity sports programs in men’s basketball and women’s volleyball through the Wisconsin Competitive Sports League, the university said.

Several branch campuses within the Universities of Wisconsin system have shuttered in recent years. UW-Milwaukee closed its campus in Washington County in 2024 and its Waukesha campus this summer. However, the university is opening a center at Waukesha County Technical College to offer bachelor’s and graduate programs.

Additionally, UW-Platteville closed its Richland campus in 2023, and UW-Oshkosh shuttered its Fond du Lac branch in 2024.
Source link
September 12, 2025
Turning Point USA Founder Kirk Killed at Utah Valley U

Charlie Kirk, the young founder of Turning Point USA, a campus-focused conservative organization that rose to general prominence on the right, died Wednesday after he was shot during one of his group’s events at Utah Valley University in Orem.

Kirk, 31, leaves behind a wife and two children. He first rose to prominence in 2012 after creating Turning Point and speaking out about the need to reform higher education. In recent years, he became a close ally of Donald Trump.

Kirk died doing what he had become known and drawn protests for: visiting college campuses and sharing his right-wing views. He was at Utah Valley kicking off Turning Point’s The American Comeback Tour, which planned at least 10 stops on college campuses across the country. Some had urged the university to cancel his appearance. More than 3,000 people attended the event, Utah officials said.

Kirk, wearing a white shirt that said “freedom,” handed out red Make America Great Again hats and then sat under his signature “Prove Me Wrong” tent in the courtyard in the middle of campus to take questions from the audience. According to The Deseret News, Kirk had said there were “too many” mass shooters who were transgender and then fielded another question on the issue when he was shot.

“I want to be very clear this is a political assassination,” said Utah governor Spencer Cox at a press conference Wednesday evening.

Matthew Boedy, author of a forthcoming book on Kirk and head of the Georgia state conference of the American Association of University Professors, said Kirk’s death “could be compared to the second assassination [attempt] on President Trump. Assassination attempts—you would think they would unite us, but as we’ve seen, they have divided us even more so.”

Kirk’s group galvanized conservative activism on campuses nationwide and fueled criticisms of higher ed that are now shared by the White House and the Republicans who control Congress. As higher ed itself became a national political issue, Kirk transcended from a campus presence to a national conservative figure, speaking at the Republican National Conventions in 2020 and 2024, the Conservative Political Action Conference, and on other big stages. He had more than 5.4 million followers on X, where right-leaning profiles are prominent.

Turning Point’s website claims to have “a presence on over 3,500 high school and college campuses nationwide, over 250,000 student members, and over 450 full- and part-time staff all across the country.” And the group’s own events drew national political figures: Donald Trump Jr., Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, Tulsi Gabbard, Kristi Noem and others attended the Student Action Summit in July, Times Higher Education reported. Among other things, Kirk said at the event in Tampa, Fla., that no foreigners should be allowed to own homes or get jobs before U.S. citizens.

“This is the greatest generational realignment since Woodstock,” Kirk said. “We have never seen a generation move so quickly and so fast, and you guys are making all the liberals confused.”

Kirk expanded on his views in several books, which include Campus Battlefield: How Conservatives Can WIN the Battle on Campus and Why It Matters and The College Scam: How America’s Universities Are Bankrupting and Brainwashing Away the Future of America’s Youth.

In a statement on X Wednesday, Turning Point confirmed his death and said, “May he be received into the merciful arms of our loving Savior, who suffered and died for Charlie.” Leading Republicans and Democrats issued statements mourning his passing, which President Trump announced himself on Truth Social.

“The Great, and even Legendary, Charlie Kirk, is dead,” Trump wrote. “No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie. He was loved and admired by ALL, especially me, and now, he is no longer with us.”

Trump ordered U.S. flags to be lowered to half-staff.

Former president Obama posted on X that “we don’t yet know what motivated the person who shot and killed Charlie Kirk, but this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy. Michelle and I will be praying for Charlie’s family tonight, especially his wife Erika and their two young children.”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon called Kirk “a friend and an invaluable adviser” in a social media post.

“He loved America with every part of his being,” she added. “My heart is broken for his family and friends who loved him, and for the millions of young Americans whom he inspired.”

California governor Gavin Newsom, a potential Democratic presidential candidate who had Kirk on his podcast earlier this year, posted, “The attack on Charlie Kirk is disgusting, vile, and reprehensible. In the United States of America, we must reject political violence in EVERY form.”

Local, state and federal law enforcement are investigating the shooting.

Utah Valley closed campus and canceled classes until Sept. 14. Authorities searched the grounds for the shooter, and officials said in the evening that a person of interest was in custody.

Ellen Treanor, a university spokesperson, said Kirk was shot around 12:15 p.m. local time Wednesday, and that police believe the shot came from the Losee Center, about 200 yards away.

Treanor said Kirk’s private security took him immediately to a hospital, where he underwent surgery.

University police quickly arrested a person, who was later released when the officers determined he wasn’t the shooter, said Scott Trotter, another university spokesperson. The Utah governor’s office, the FBI and other agencies are coordinating with the university police department in investigating, Trotter said. (Utah law allows individuals to carry firearms on campuses.)

UVU officials said in a statement that they were “shocked and saddened” by Kirk’s death.

“We firmly believe that UVU is a place to share ideas and to debate openly and respectfully,” the statement said. “Any attempt to infringe on those rights has no place here.”

At the Wednesday press conference, Jeff Long, the UVU police chief, said that what happened was a “police chief’s nightmare.” Six officers were working the event alongside Kirk’s security team.

“You try to get your bases covered, and unfortunately, today, we didn’t,” he said. “Because of that, we have this tragic incident.”

Charlie Kirk was kicking off his “American Comeback Tour” at Utah Valley University.

Photo by Trent Nelson/The Salt Lake Tribune/Getty Images

Turning Point, headquartered in Phoenix, has been at the center of several controversies over the years. About a decade ago, it launched its Professor Watchlist, which has resulted in academics being the targets of vitriol and threats for their alleged views. Last year, two Turning Point workers admitted to charges from an October 2023 incident in which they followed and filmed a queer Arizona State University instructor on campus, with one of them eventually pushing the instructor face-first onto the concrete.

Boedy said Wednesday that Kirk was the most influential person who doesn’t work in the White House.

“He has made Turning Point into an indispensable organization for conservative causes,” he said. “He’s become the new face of Christian nationalism, which is a growing trend in America. And of course, he has, I would say, changed college campuses.”

He added that campus events like Wednesday’s were his “bread and butter.”

“He is very smart,” he said. “He was one of the pioneers of the ‘prove me wrong’ mantra.”

Emma Whitford contributed to this report.

Source link

September 10, 2025
Chinese officials force censorship of Thai gallery’s art exhibit about authoritarianism (proving the exhibit’s point)
Last year, FIRE launched the Free Speech Dispatch, a regular series covering new and continuing censorship trends and challenges around the world. Our goal is to help readers better understand the global context of free expression. Want to make sure you don’t miss an update? Sign up for our newsletter.

Exhibit on authoritarianism censored by authoritarians

These days, repressive regimes are not content with just censoring their critics within their own borders. They also think they have the authority to determine what the rest of the world can see, hear, and say, which is how we wind up with news like the latest out of Thailand.

In late July, staff from China’s embassy visited the Bangkok Arts and Cultural Centre, along with local city officials to demand the censorship of the exhibition “Constellation of Complicity: Visualising the Global Machinery of Authoritarian Solidarity.” The gallery granted their demands and “removed pieces included Tibetan and Uyghur flags and postcards featuring Chinese President Xi Jinping, as well as a postcard depicting links between China and Israel.” Words including “Hong Kong,” “Tibet,” and “Uyghur” were redacted. But even this was not enough for the Chinese embassy, whose staff returned to seek further redactions and “reminded the gallery to comply with the One China policy.”

In a statement, China’s foreign ministry said Thailand’s quick action to pressure the gallery to censor “shows that the promotion of the fallacies of ‘Tibetan independence,’ ‘East Turkestan Islamic Movement,’ and ‘Hong Kong independence’ has no market internationally and is unpopular.” What it actually shows, though, is that the Chinese government often throws its weight around on the global scale — and gets its way. Authoritarians in the Academy, my new book out this month, documents precisely how China has attempted to enforce this kind of censorship in global higher education.

The co-curators of the show, a married couple, have since fled Thailand, citing fears of retaliation by Thai authorities. They plan to seek asylum in the UK.

Palestine Action, internet speech, and the disastrous Online Safety Act rollout

As I explained in the last Dispatch, UK police are enacting a widespread crackdown on protests surrounding Palestine Action, a group banned under anti-terrorism legislation for damaging military planes in a protest. They’re not just arresting the group’s activists, but also any and all members of the public who express “support” for the group. That even includes a man who held up a sign of a political cartoon — one legally printed and available for sale in a Private Eye edition — that criticized the ban on Palestine Action, as well as an 80-year-old woman who was held for 27 hours for attending a protest.

Pro-Palestinian activists protest outside the Royal Courts of Justice as a judge hears a challenge to the proscription of Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act. (Pete Speller / Shutterstock.com)

These arrests were just drops in the bucket. Police arrested 532 protesters over one weekend this month, with all but 10 being arrested for words or signs “supporting” the banned group. “We have significant resources deployed to this operation,” Metropolitan Police posted on X. “It will take time but we will arrest anyone expressing support for Palestine Action.” Northern Ireland police also warned protesters that they could face prosecution.

That’s not even the only troubling free speech scandal from UK police these past weeks.

Carmen Lau, a Hong Kong activist now living in the UK and still a target of censorship from the Chinese government, says Thames Valley police asked her to sign an agreement that she would “cease any activity that is likely to put you at risk” and “avoid attending” protests to limit the likelihood of overseas repression. Then a magistrate court overturned a gag order placed on a firefighter, suggesting that police officers were attempting to enforce a “police state.” Police raided the home of Robert Moss, a firefighter who won a wrongful termination challenge in 2023, over Facebook comments he’d posted about Staffordshire’s fire department, and then told him he must not only stay silent about leadership of the fire department, but was also not permitted to even discuss the investigation itself.

Meanwhile, overzealous police are far from the only problems facing internet speech in the UK. Looming even larger is the Online Safety Act, now in effect and wreaking havoc on the UK’s internet users and the companies and platforms they engage with online. A useful collection from Reason’s Elizabeth Nolan Brown shows how requirements that sites verify age for material “harmful to children” created some absurd fallout. Age-gated content has included an X post with the famous painting Saturn Devouring His Son, news about Ukraine and Gaza, and a thread about material being restricted under the act.

The Wikimedia Foundation’s challenge to certain regulations of the law failed this month, meaning many of its concerns about the act’s threats to the privacy of Wikipedia’s anonymous editors remain. But now, the message board site 4chan is pushing back, refusing to pay a fine already doled out for its noncompliance with the law. “American businesses do not surrender their First Amendment rights because a foreign bureaucrat sends them an email,” the site’s lawyers wrote in a statement.

And to the UK citizens who understandably are uncomfortable with the burdensome and privacy-threatening process of age-verification just to use the internet, Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology Peter Kyle warns: Don’t look for a workaround. Bizarrely, Kyle claimed adults verifying their age “keeps a child safe,” as if an adult’s VPN use somehow poses a risk to some child, somewhere.

Two women sentenced to a decade for printing anti-Hugo Chávez shirts

In what certainly looks like a case of entrapment, two Venezuelan women who run a T-shirt printing business were recently sentenced to 10 years in prison on charges of incitement to hatred, treason, and terrorism. They had accepted an order to print shirts featuring a photo of a protester destroying a statue of late Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. The women were initially wary of taking the order — apparently, for good reason — but eventually accepted it from the insistent customer. While delivering the order, they were arrested by police, who also confiscated their equipment and inventory.

It’s not just in Venezuela. More censorship of political speech, protest, and journalism globally:
- Ugandan authorities disappeared a student for weeks, and when public outcry finally forced them to explain his whereabouts, he “resurfaced” at a police station and was charged with “offensive communication” for intent “to ridicule, demean and incite hostility against the president” on TikTok.
- Moroccan feminist activist Ibtissam Lachgar was arrested this month for posting a photo of herself wearing a shirt with the message, “Allah is Lesbian.” A public prosecutor cited her “offensive expressions towards God” and post “containing an offense to the Islamic religion.”
- An Argentine legislator is being prosecuted for social media posts comparing Israel to the Nazi regime and calling it a “genocide state.” In 2020, Argentina adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism. (FIRE has repeatedly expressed concerns about codification of the IHRA definition and the likelihood it will censor or chill protected political speech.)
- Belarusian authorities arrested dozens of activists and critics who took part in anti-government protests outside Belarus, in countries including the U.S. and UK.
- Russian journalist Olga Komleva was sentenced to 12 years on “extremism” charges for her ties to the late Alexei Navalny and for spreading alleged fake news about the Ukraine invasion.
- Cities across Canada have withdrawn permits for performances by Sean Feucht, a right-wing Christian singer and vocal supporter of President Trump, with one Montreal church facing a $2,500 fine for going forward with his concert. Montreal mayor Valérie Plante said, “This show runs counter to the values of inclusion, solidarity, and respect that are championed in Montreal. Freedom of expression is one of our fundamental values, but hateful and discriminatory speech is not acceptable in Montreal.”
- Indonesian authorities are warning about the country’s regulations on flag desecration and respect for state symbols in response to a trend of citizens posting the Jolly Roger flag from the manga One Piece as a form of protest.
- Six journalists, including four with Al Jazeera, were killed by an Israeli airstrike. The Israeli military accused one of the journalists, Anas al-Sharif, of being a Hamas cell leader, but the Committee to Protect Journalists says it “has made no claims that any of the other journalists were terrorists.”
- A 34-year-old Thai security guard, originally sentenced to 15 years, will spend seven years in prison for Computer Crimes Act and lese-majeste violations for insulting the monarchy on social media.
- A statement from the U.S. and a number of European nations accused Iranian intelligence authorities of widespread plots “to kill, kidnap, and harass people in Europe and North America in clear violation of our sovereignty.”
- Chinese officials in eastern Zhejiang province issued warnings to performers about material on gender relations in response to a comedian’s viral set about her abusive husband. “Criticism is obviously fine, but it should be … constructive rather than revolve around gender opposition for the sake of being funny,” the warning read.
Book banning abroad

Arundhati Roy walking on village the road at Dwaraka, Kerala, India (Paulose NK / Shutterstock.com)

Under the criminal code of 2023, Indian authorities in Kashmir banned over two dozen books, including those by novelist Arundhati Roy and historian Sumantra Bose. The books allegedly promote “false narratives” and “secessionism.” Selling or even just owning these books can result in prison time.

This ban follows raids by Russian authorities of bookshops carrying titles from a list of 48 banned books, often those with LGBT themes.

Tech and the law
- In enforcing its under-16 ban for social media, Australia reversed course and now will include YouTube in the group of platforms subject to the country’s age-gate ban.
- French prosecutors are investigating Elon Musk’s X to see if the platform’s algorithm or data extraction policies violated the country’s laws.
- Indian media outlets are disappearing past reporting amid “growing pressure from the Indian government to limit reporting critical of its policies.” One journalist told Index on Censorship that “404 journalism” is “becoming a new genre of journalism in India — stories that once were, but are now memory.”
- A new law in Kyrgyzstan bans online porn to “protect moral and ethical values” in the country and “requires internet providers to block websites based on decisions by the ministry of culture”
- Starting this autumn, Meta will no longer allow political or social issue ads on its apps within the EU, citing “significant operational challenges and legal uncertainties” from the forthcoming Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising rules.
- Qatar approved an amendment to a cybercrime law that criminalizes publishing or circulating images or videos of people in public places without their consent, raising an outcry from press freedom advocates. Offenders can face up to one year in prison and/or a fine of up to 100,000 Qatari riyals (about $27,500).
More suppression in and outside Hong Kong, as Jimmy Lai’s trial nears its end

Readers of the Free Speech Dispatch are likely aware of how grim the situation for free expression in Hong Kong has become in the past few years, and there are no improvements in sight. It even reaches globally. Late last month, officials issued arrest warrants for overseas activists, including those based in the U.S., for alleged national security law violations.

In recent weeks within the city, eight of Hong Kong’s public universities signed an agreement announcing their intent to comply with Xi Jinping’s and mainland China’s governance, another conspicuous sign of academic freedom’s decline in the city. The Hong Kong International Film Festival cut a Taiwanese film from its schedule for failing to receive a “certificate of approval” from the city’s film censors. Then a teenager was arrested by national security police for writing “seditious” words in a public toilet. Police said the messages “provoked hatred, contempt or disaffection against” Hong Kong’s government.

And the trial of Jimmy Lai, the 77-year-old media tycoon and founder of dissenting newspaper Apple Daily, is now reaching its conclusion. Lai, who is in poor health, has pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy to collude with foreign forces and conspiracy to publish seditious material in Apple Daily.

In a troubling incident in an already disturbing case, a judge overseeing the case cited speech suppression in the U.S. to justify the prosecution of Lai. “People who were freely expressing their views on Palestine, they were arrested in England… [and] in the US,” Judge Esther Toh said in court last week. “It’s easy to say ‘la-di-da, it’s not illegal,’ but it’s not an absolute. Each country’s government has a different limit on freedom of expression.”

It should be a warning sign to Americans when our government’s actions are cited abroad in favor of, not against, censorship.
Source link
August 25, 2025
Has Canada reached a “turning point” in study permit approvals?
After months of high study permit refusal rates, stakeholders welcome a more successful second quarter of 2025.

But concerns remain about the overall volume of approvals – especially as students from key market India continue to struggle to secure study permits.

Meanwhile, approvals from Ghana surge over 200% compared to Q1 of 2025.
The IRCC data, compiled by BorderPass, showed that while Canadian study permit applications dipped in Q2 2025, the number of approvals increased by 4,450 – leading to a 10% increase in the overall approval rating.

“The encouraging sign is that June saw the highest approval rate of the year at 39%, which could point to a modest improvement in the second half of the year,” Jonathan Sherman, vice-president of sales & partnerships at BorderPass told The PIE News.

After record low approval ratings in Q1, stakeholders have welcomed the rise in approvals, though serious concerns remain about overall volumes.

“Just 31,580 permits were approved in the first half of 2025. IRCC’s published target for the year is about 300,000, which means at the current pace we will only reach around 20% of the goal unless there is a dramatic shift,” warned Sherman.

After Canada’s implementation of the study permit cap in 2024, the approval rate dropped from 67% in 2023 to 45% in 2024. So far in 2025, approvals for new study permits (excluding extensions) are tracking at 31%.

One of the most striking trends is India’s continued decline, with data showing study permit approvals falling another 7% in Q2 to just 20%, reflecting a “fundamental shift in how IRCC is assessing these applications”, said Sherman.

This stands in sharp contrast to the more than 80% approval rates for Indian students just a few years ago, “reflecting a fundamental shift in how IRCC is assessing these applications”, said Sherman.

The widening gap between universities and colleges also stood out in the data, a difference that Sherman said was “reshaping the international education market in Canada”.

Among the top 20 institutions by volume, university approvals have dropped from 63% in 2024 to 53% so far in 2025, but colleges have seen a steeper fall from 60% to 28%.

Colleges have felt the heaviest impact of federal policy changes, including the study permit cap and the new field of study restrictions for post-graduation work permits.

Despite a major win for the college sector in March this year when PGWP eligibility was expanded for degree students at colleges, these institutions have still been the hardest hit by the changes, with many of their programs no longer eligible for a work permit.

“That said, colleges that are focusing on programs with clear labour market outcomes such as health, technology, and skilled trades are showing better results,” noted Sherman.

“The institutions that carefully vet applicants for immigration quality and program alignment are also proving more resilient,” he advised.

At the current pace we will only reach around 20% of IRCC’s published target unless there is a dramatic shift

Jonathan Sherman, BorderPass

Alongside students from India, Iranian students also experienced volatility, with the country’s approval rating falling by more than 50% from Q1. In contrast, Ghana saw its approval rating surge by 225% on the previous quarter.

The approval rating for Chinese students – who make up Canada’s second largest international student cohort – saw stable growth, surpassing 65% approval, and South Korea remained a consistent top performer with approvals at more than 85%.

“Smaller markets like Vietnam, Nepal and Nigeria are also moving – some positively, some unpredictably – creating both new opportunities and risk. For many DLIs, this means rethinking region-based strategies in real time,” advised the BorderPass report.

As well as seeing variations across institution type and source market, a large number of IRCC officers were hired and trained in the first half of 2025, which Sherman said had “introduced some inconsistency in decision making as new processing are applied”.

“On this note, we are hearing that processing backlogs may get worse before they get better,” he warned.

Overall: “It is clear that IRCC is applying far greater scrutiny to new applications,” said Sherman, with the gap between high- and low-performing institutions becoming ever wider.

Specifically, by investing in application intelligence, thoroughly reviewing documents, confirming travel readiness and working with legally backed partners, some institutions have seen approval rates more than double the national average, according to Sherman.
Source link
August 21, 2025
Was Turning Point USA inflitrated by a Russian informant?

In the murky world of political nonprofits and student organizations, foreign influence is often subtle—but sometimes the signs are hard to ignore. Turning Point USA (TPUSA), the high-profile conservative nonprofit mobilizing students across the United States, has come under our scrutiny for potential infiltration by individuals with Kremlin connections.

Central to this story is Alexandra Hollenbeck, a former student journalist and TPUSA associate whose activities raise questions about Russian influence in American student politics. While much of the information has been scrubbed from the Internet, we still hold considerable evidence.

Hollenbeck’s Background and Unusual Affiliations

Alexandra Hollenbeck has contributed to conservative publications such as The Post Millennial, Washington Examiner, and TurningPoint.News. Her work includes coverage of pro-Trump narratives, student activism, and international affairs.

In a 2017 article for TPUSA’s Student Action Summit, Hollenbeck reported on former Trump strategist Sebastian Gorka’s speech, highlighting his devotion to combating jihadists and supporting Trump’s agenda. Gorka’s talk drew historical parallels, beginning with the story of Paul, a 15-year-old boy walking through post-war Budapest, emphasizing that “liberty is as precious as it is fragile.”

Hollenbeck’s prominence within TPUSA circles became more conspicuous after she was photographed at the Kremlin during a pro-Putin rally—a rare and striking connection for a U.S.-based political journalist.

Attempts at Federal Oversight and Silence

Inquiries to the FBI regarding Hollenbeck’s activities yielded no response. TPUSA also never responded to our questions.

Why TPUSA Could Be Vulnerable

TPUSA operates extensive student networks and organizes high-profile events that attract donors, media, and political figures. While the organization is influential within U.S. conservative circles, its internal vetting procedures for affiliates and journalists are less transparent. This opacity creates opportunities for individuals to gain access to sensitive networks, messaging, and potentially student data.

Hollenbeck’s activities—her Kremlin presence, her coverage of pro-Trump events, and her involvement in TPUSA events—illustrate why external scrutiny is warranted. While no definitive proof of espionage or formal Russian affiliation has been established, the pattern of her engagements suggests a potential risk of foreign influence.

Implications for Student Organizations

Hollenbeck’s case highlights broader vulnerabilities. U.S. student political organizations, particularly those with ideological missions and national reach, can be attractive targets for foreign influence. The combination of access to young adults, credibility on campuses, and ties to political figures creates strategic opportunities for external actors.

Even the perception of foreign infiltration can damage trust, complicate fundraising, and raise national security concerns, particularly when student data or organizational communications could be exposed.

Vigilance and Transparency Are Essential

While no concrete evidence has emerged proving that Hollenbeck acted on behalf of the Russian government, her Kremlin connections, TPUSA involvement, and early work covering ideologically charged events like Gorka’s summit illustrate a cautionary tale. Student organizations, nonprofits, and journalists must remain alert to potential foreign influence and implement safeguards to protect institutional integrity.

For TPUSA, this means auditing affiliations, reviewing internal vetting procedures, and ensuring participants act in the organization’s and public’s best interests. For journalists and watchdogs, it underscores the importance of persistent investigation into intersections between U.S.-based political networks and foreign actors.

The case of Alexandra Hollenbeck demonstrates that in today’s political environment, the lines between ideology, influence, and infiltration are increasingly blurred—and the stakes for student organizations and U.S. democracy are higher than ever.

Source link

August 14, 2025