President Shafik Is Failing Columbia

Under President Shafik’s tenure, Columbia University's prestigious legacy is not just under threat—it's becoming a punchline. When satirists like The Babylon Bee start awarding posthumous doctorates to history’s villains in Columbia’s name, you realize the crisis has taken a turn for the surreal. This kind of mockery, while absurd, is a telling symptom of a deeper disease eroding the foundations of an esteemed institution. Satire has a way of cutting through pretense to reveal uncomfortable truths. If we’re at the point where the reality at Columbia is indistinguishable from the farce of satire, then we've reached an inflection point. It's time for President Shafik to either reshape this narrative or step aside. Because in the court of public opinion, laughter can quickly turn to scorn, and the consequences for inaction become not just a matter of lost respect, but a legacy irreparably tarnished.

As a Columbia Law School alumnus and former chair of the board of visitors at the US Air Force Academy through its own dark times, I've seen what it takes to handle a crisis. I served on the Florida State Board of Education and I know about making tough calls. But what I'm seeing now at Columbia shakes me.

Anti-Semitic violence and intimidation are ripping through the campus, tarnishing our university's proud name and challenging the very ideals of academic freedom and safety we're supposed to uphold. The question is glaring: What happens when an institution charged with shaping our future leaders fails at its most basic duty to protect them?

Historically, universities have been arenas of robust debate, where conflicting ideas clash and synthesize to produce richer academic and social understanding. Columbia's legacy, steeped in vibrant intellectual movements from civil rights to anti-war protests, has historically embraced this role. Yet, the shift from vigorous debate to targeted harassment and intimidation under the guise of political expression marks a severe departure from these ideals. This change is the outcome of decades-long trends towards 'safetyism,' where the emotional well-being of individuals is so fiercely guarded that it undermines the resilience required for rigorous academic engagement.

As violence spills over into what should be sanctuaries of learning, Columbia's administration has shown total inertia. This lack of decisive leadership in addressing clear breaches of civility and safety is not confined to the Columbia campus but ripples outward, affecting all educational institutions across America. The chilling effect on Jewish students, who now face a palpable threat by merely expressing their identity or engaging with their campus community, deviates starkly from the ideals of diversity and inclusion that universities espouse. But one must ask, where is the moral leadership that once guided our places of higher learning? Can the guardians of such a prestigious institution justify their passive stance while students suffer under the weight of unchecked aggression?

Moreover, the economic repercussions of Columbia's inability to manage this crisis effectively could be severe. Universities, as major economic entities, rely not only on tuition fees but also on alumni donations, research grants, and public funding, all of which hinge on the institution's reputation. Just yesterday, billionaire megadonor Robert Kraft, owner of the New England Patriots, announced he is ceasing any new funding to Columbia, underscoring the immediate financial impact of the university's handling of the crisis. Historical examples abound where institutions that have mishandled public scandals or failed to secure their students' safety are marked with declines in enrollment, reductions in funding, and a decrease in competitive positioning which took years to rebuild. Columbia now faces a similar threat of long-term financial instability if it does not act swiftly to resolve the current situation and restore trust among its stakeholders.

The crisis at Columbia reflects a growing intolerance for dissenting viewpoints in spaces dedicated to free inquiry. This situation at Columbia is a symptom rather than an anomaly, revealing much about the broader challenges facing American higher education. The required response must be robust and immediate, involving more than just tightening security or issuing public statements. It demands that Columbia enforce strict penalties for those who engage in violence, visibly and decisively, to restore trust. It must reaffirm its commitment to open debate, protecting all voices, especially those threatened by violence.

In summary, with President Shafik at the helm, Columbia's leadership isn't just failing—it's collapsing. There’s no room for inaction when the stakes are this explosive. Columbia University's crisis demands urgent, decisive action—not tomorrow, not after lengthy deliberation, but now. My tenure at the US Air Force Academy and my experience on the Florida State Board of Education have taught me the value of swift, resolute leadership in times of turmoil. We must act, and act without hesitation, to stop the spread of chaos that threatens to undermine our academic institutions. We need to take back our campuses, restore order, and reaffirm our commitment to the principles of education, safety, and free expression. This is more than a matter of protecting individuals; it's about preserving the very fabric of our society, ensuring our universities stand as paragons of civility and human dignity. The time to act is now.