American universities should be for Americans



During a press gaggle this week, President Trump casually announced that the United States would allow 600,000 Chinese nationals to enter the country as college students. He has long focused on improving relations with China, but the idea of importing and educating such numbers runs against the America First instincts of his voters.

When Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was asked why these students were so important, he admitted that many U.S. universities would go out of business without foreign enrollment. For the right, that sounds less like a warning and more like a promise.

Republicans once opposed bailouts for failing businesses. Why make an exception for universities that train activists and foreigners to despise America?

Ending large-scale immigration from a rival power while letting bankrupt institutions fail should be an easy win. Instead, the Trump administration seems poised to prop up anti-American universities by training the children of our most dangerous adversary.

Why import students from our greatest rival?

Every conservative politician and pundit insists that China is America’s foremost threat. It has a massive population, vast economic leverage, deep investments in resources, and ambitions to expand its sphere of influence. Its military is large, its weapons advanced, and its spies operate regularly on U.S. soil. A hot war may be unlikely, but it is fair to call China our greatest economic and geopolitical rival. So why are we welcoming Chinese nationals into the country, much less into our most prestigious schools?

America’s broader immigration crisis has already ravaged our job market, housing market, health system, and education system. Illegal immigration rightly comes first: Illegal aliens are unvetted, often smuggled in by cartels and gangs, and begin their stay by breaking the law.

But the public is waking up to the damage caused by legal immigration as well. The administration recently admitted there are 55 million active visa holders eligible to enter the United States — a number equal to the combined populations of Florida and Texas. Voters want both illegal immigration ended and legal immigration slashed.

Chinese nationals should be first on the block. If China is truly our enemy, why would we let any of its citizens inside? The Chinese state is infamous for espionage. Its spy network has penetrated American government, military, corporations, and universities. These spies don’t just chase classified secrets; they steal research and technology from labs and departments. Commentators like Eric Weinstein have suggested that universities slow their own programs for fear that breakthroughs will be stolen by foreign students. America is holding back its own scientific progress to import spies. That’s insane.

Educating tomorrow’s rivals

The danger goes beyond espionage. Universities don’t just teach skills; they confer the credentials that grant access to elite institutions in business, science, and government. A Chinese student who returns home brings knowledge and prestige that strengthen a rival nation. One who stays uses that same credential to climb into elite corporations or agencies that shape American culture, policy, and economy. Why would we seed our leadership class with foreign nationals from our chief adversary?

This also raises the question of whom our universities exist to serve. In a Fox News interview, Howard Lutnick admitted outright that these Chinese students would displace Americans from top universities. That isn’t speculation; it’s an open admission. Under an America First agenda, displacing native students for the children of foreign rivals is indefensible. Taxpayer-backed institutions must put American children first.

The bailout excuse

Lutnick argues that Chinese students keep universities solvent. Foreign students pay higher tuition and receive less aid. So what? The idea that universities are too big to fail and must be bailed out with foreign visas is laughable. Many schools already hoard enormous endowments. If others collapse, that’s the market working. Republicans once opposed bailouts for failing businesses. Why make an exception for universities that train activists and foreigners to despise America?

RELATED:‘Paperwork Americans’ are not your countrymen

Blaze Media Illustration

The truth is that universities are ideology factories. They churn out left-wing radicals who hate America and despise Christianity. Yes, we still need doctors and engineers, but there is no reason to subsidize this industry with mass immigration. Republicans should be forcing universities to purge their bias or lose government funding. Instead, they are keeping them afloat with students from a hostile foreign power.

America First means Americans first

Trump often makes sweeping statements he never intends to enact. This may be a bargaining ploy in negotiations with Xi Jinping. But sovereignty should never be a chip in trade talks. Chinese enrollment peaked at 372,000 in 2020 and fell to 277,000 in 2024. Now the administration is talking about more than doubling it. The correct number isn’t 600,000. It isn’t 277,000. It’s zero.

The United States should stop importing enemies to enrich its ruling class. American universities should exist for Americans. That is what America First must mean.

The real fraud in higher ed: Universities need that Chinese money



The universities preaching that America is structurally racist now say they need international students to survive. Sad but true.

President Trump on Monday floated a proposal that has conservatives buzzing. Just before meeting with the president of South Korea, while discussing trade negotiations with China, Trump suggested that the deal might include allowing 600,000 Chinese students to attend American universities.

Instead of winning hearts and minds, universities would be exporting American self-loathing. Why should taxpayers fund that?

I’ve learned not to sprint ahead of Trump’s negotiations. He often uses public remarks as part of the bargaining table — dangling outrageous possibilities to shove the other side into error. And inconveniently for his critics, it usually works. Still, this one deserves a closer look.

Universities built on sand

As a professor at Arizona State University, the nation’s largest state school, I see firsthand how fragile higher education has become. Universities increasingly depend on international students to prop up their budgets. They reorient themselves not around local students but around foreign ones, reshaping programs and communications to make sure outsiders feel at home.

ASU boasts 195,000 students. Yet when the semester began, the university’s homepage highlighted international arrivals, not Arizona students. The welcome-back email did the same. Arizona families — the taxpayers who actually fund the place — were treated as an afterthought.

Administrators justify this by pointing to economic contributions, diversity, and talent. But native students notice the slight. Parents notice it too. The message is clear: Tuition dollars matter more than the citizens who built these schools. ASU may call itself the “New American University,” but more often it presents itself as the “No Longer American University.”

RELATED: Chinese nationals on student visas allegedly ripped off elderly Americans in nasty scheme

Moor Studio via iStock/Getty Images

A house of cards

Here’s the truth: Many American universities cannot survive without international tuition checks.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick admitted as much on Laura Ingraham’s Fox News show, saying the bottom 15% of U.S. colleges would simply shut down without that revenue. Universities have operated like Ponzi schemes, built on the illusion that enrollment growth never ends. But as American students tire of being hectored with radical political agendas, growth slows and the budgets collapse.

The U.S. already hosts about 270,000 Chinese students, not counting tens of thousands more from India, South Korea, and elsewhere. ASU alone has 16,000 international students, down from 18,000 last year. Trump’s proposed deal would more than double the number of Chinese students nationwide overnight.

What are they learning?

Even if you grant the economic benefits, the bigger question — maybe the biggest — is: What sort of education would these 600,000 students receive?

We could introduce them to the greatness of the American experiment, the sweep of Western civilization, and the biblical truths that shaped both. We could even present the gospel to hundreds of thousands of students who may never have heard it before. That would be a noble exchange.

But that isn’t what happens on most campuses.

Drop them into a humanities classroom and they’ll be steeped in anti-racism, DEI dogma, LGBTQ activism, “decolonizing the curriculum,” and the thesis that America and the West are irredeemably wicked. Instead of winning hearts and minds, universities would be exporting American self-loathing — either by turning foreign students into residents who despise their host country or sending them home as ambassadors of contempt.

Why should American taxpayers fund that?

A higher-ed reckoning

Universities like ASU showcase international students while sidelining their own. They rely on foreign tuition to mask fiscal rot. And in exchange, they sell a curriculum that treats America as racist, the West as evil, and Christianity as oppressive.

No “economic benefit” offsets that catastrophic formula.

If American universities want to survive, they must first clean their own house.

  • Admit the harm caused by their reckless anti-America, anti-West, anti-Christian curriculum.
  • Abandon DEI dogma, corrosive identity politics, and “decolonized” philosophy.
  • Value American students — the citizens and taxpayers who fund these schools.
  • Reorient higher education toward the people of the states and communities that built it.
  • Teach again that we are created by God, equal in worth, and capable of knowing truth, goodness, and beauty.

Only then can we discuss whether more international students make sense. Until then, it is rich with irony: The same universities that teach contempt for America now admit they need foreign students to survive.

A socialist New York isn’t just a local problem. It’s a national emergency.



In the heart of New York City, the unthinkable is becoming reality: a socialist insurgency is no longer on the fringes. It’s winning.

The mayoral primary victory of Zohran Mamdani, a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist, is not merely a local event or an eccentric district quirk. It’s a warning siren for the entire nation. What happens in New York doesn’t stay in New York — especially when it’s a city that sets the cultural, financial, and political tone for the rest of the country.

The battle for America’s soul is being fought in city council meetings, in primary elections, and on the streets of New York. We cannot afford to sit it out.

Mamdami’s radical agenda, cloaked in the soft language of “equity” and “community care,” is not about helping people. It’s about centralizing power under the government, redistributing wealth through force, and turning the most powerful city in the world into a test case for a socialist America.

If the financial capital of the free world falls to Marxist ideology, the rest of the country is not far behind.

American socialism’s ‘Ground Zero’

New York is a beachhead for a nationwide socialist revolution. It’s not just Mamdani — it’s a growing wave of elected ideologues, funded and organized, who want to gut capitalism and replace it with a top-down government-run system.

Their policies aren’t theoretical any more. They’re being implemented.

In Mamdani’s vision of New York, landlords are villains, property rights are negotiable, and the needs of illegal immigrants come before those of taxpaying citizens. Public safety is an afterthought. Drug use is decriminalized. Homelessness is institutionalized.

Infrastructure, transportation, policing, housing — all placed in the grip of government planners pushing equity over efficiency, ideology over functionality. The result is predictable: urban decay, mass exodus, rising crime, and collapsing infrastructure — a recipe we’ve seen in every city that’s flirted with socialist rule.

First New York, then the nation

But this isn’t just about New York’s self-destruction. It’s about national contagion.

New York City is America’s media hub, its cultural center, and, most critically, the beating heart of its financial system. If socialist policies like Mamdani’s take hold here, they will radiate outward. A city that once stood as a monument to capitalism will serve as a propaganda engine for the exact opposite.

And make no mistake — the rest of the nation is watching. If socialism becomes normalized in the Big Apple, other progressive cities will feel emboldened to follow.

The ripple effect is already in motion. Chicago, Los Angeles, Seattle — all experimenting with shades of the same ideology. The difference is that New York City is the crown jewel. Its fall would mark a point of no return. A city once revered for its grit, ingenuity, and entrepreneurial spirit would become the flagship of American decline.

The financial implications are staggering. New York isn’t just any city — it’s the global capital of finance. Wall Street, Nasdaq, the headquarters of major banks and corporations — all reside here. Investors around the world look to the city as a symbol of economic stability.

What happens when socialist policies threaten property rights, undermine police protection, and destroy incentives to do business here? Money will flee. Businesses will relocate. Markets will react. The economic engine of the United States will stall, and the consequences will reverberate worldwide.

RELATED: Stop calling Zohran Mamdani a communist — he’s something worse

Photo by Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images

Worse yet, the ideological shift will bleed into federal politics. As New York City’s congressional delegation grows more radical, so does the national platform of the Democratic Party. Policies birthed in Mamdani’s district — like rent cancellation, taxpayer-funded drug programs, sanctuary city mandates, and public housing on suburban streets — have already crept into the national discourse. What starts as a local experiment quickly becomes a legislative push in Washington.

This is why the stakes are so high. Conservatives must recognize that the fight is not limited to red states or Capitol Hill. It’s in Queens. It’s in Brooklyn. It’s in the very places where socialism is gaining power block by block, district by district. The battle for America’s soul is being fought in city council meetings, in primary elections, and on the streets of New York. We cannot afford to sit it out.

We must act

We must expose this radicalism for what it is. We must challenge the deceptive branding of “democratic socialism” as some harmless cousin of communism. We must fight back with truth, passion, and deliberate action. New York can no longer be written off as a lost cause. It must be reclaimed — because the country depends on it.

A socialist New York is not just a local problem. It’s a national emergency.

If Mamdani and his allies succeed in transforming the financial capital of the world into a socialist enclave, the damage will not be confined to the five boroughs. It will creep into every corner of America — one policy, one election, one city at a time.

We don’t need to imagine the consequences. We’ve seen them — in the crumbling economies of Venezuela and Cuba, in the failed experiments of Detroit and San Francisco. But if we allow the socialist left to take New York City, the fall of those places will pale in comparison.

The future of America could be written on the streets of New York. Let’s make sure it’s not written in communist red.

MAGA meets the machine: Trump goes all in on AI



The technology once confined to science fiction has now become reality, and its impact will be revolutionary. When artificial intelligence first broke through, many MAGA supporters reacted with suspicion. They saw it as another weapon for woke elites — a way to erase inconvenient facts and reshape public opinion, potentially with government support.

President Donald Trump acted to block that threat. His recent executive order directs the federal government to contract only with AI companies that “prioritize truthfulness and ideological neutrality.”

A MAGA-aligned council of AI policy experts will make the next golden age of American exceptionalism possible.

That’s a strong start, but MAGA weakens itself if it treats AI solely as a threat. I learned that firsthand, working in the field before most people even knew what AI was. It’s coming whether we like it or not.

Meanwhile, other nations — including enemies such as China — have committed to developing AI. If they reach artificial superintelligence first, the consequences could be catastrophic. Our technologists understand the stakes. America must lead in this arena, not trail behind.

Winning over MAGA

Despite what’s at stake, MAGA has a dearth of people who support or even understand AI — at least, until recently, when President Trump delivered remarks at the “Winning the AI Race” summit hosted by the "All-In" podcast at the Hill and Valley Forum.

That change is monumental. Imagine a few years ago, when an AI bot put you in TikTok prison for violating the site’s “terms of service” — as I was — and someone told you that a re-elected Donald Trump would participate in an AI summit with the big Silicon Valley companies and MAGA-aligned leaders.

That’s why people like James Burnham are key to bridging the gap between the Silicon Valley and the MAGA base.

Burnham bridging the gap

At the summit, I met with Burnham, a former senior lawyer at the Department of Government Efficiency and now head of the AI Innovation Council, to talk about MAGA’s role in shaping the future of artificial intelligence.

He may share the name of the author of “Suicide of the West” — a man often called the intellectual godfather of neoreaction and one of the first practitioners of psychological warfare — but the resemblance ends there. This Burnham is an unapologetic optimist, a happy warrior, and an original MAGA activist determined to unite the movement’s best minds with the tech right.

His goal: Mend fences and help define AI policy for the years ahead.

“I was there when Trump went down the golden escalator,” Burnham told me. “My hope is that I can help bridge the gap between true MAGA and the tech right.”

Some might see him as an unlikely figure for the role, given that his enthusiasm for AI matches that of Silicon Valley’s most bullish innovators. But for Burnham, advancing American AI is more than a defensive measure against hostile nations. It’s an opportunity to create America’s next golden age.

As he told the New York Post: “Artificial intelligence is a revolutionary technology with the potential to make the United States wealthier and greater than it has ever been.”

The AI we deserve

Burnham’s perspective is not exactly shared by much of MAGA — and understandably so. After all, as recently as last year, we were terrified that woke tech companies would use AI to clamp down on our speech. Having had that experience, our instinct might be to try to kill the technology in its crib.

RELATED: The AI takeover isn’t coming — it’s already here

sankai via iStock/Getty Images

But that’s simply not realistic — and not just because China will develop AI without us. The Silicon Valley’s left will then seize the mantle of the future. We can’t allow that to happen, not least of all because the left doesn’t deserve that kind of credit. All leftists want out of AI is the world’s smartest and most vigilant woke hall monitor.

America can — and must — do better than that.

But if we’re going to do better, we need the tech world to be willing to talk to us. That’s why people like Burnham are so critical. You win more flies with honey than with vinegar — just ask AIs themselves.

Unlike AI, however, a MAGA-aligned council of AI policy experts won’t just flatter the people it engages with. It will make the next golden age of American exceptionalism possible.

Study: 7 In 10 College Energy Courses Focus On So-Called Climate Change

'Ignoring the extant realities of energy will render students unprepared for making sensible decisions, whether in the public or private sector.'

Anti-American ideology still festers at West Point



Diversity, equity, and inclusion employees are still running amok in the hallowed halls of the United States Military Academy at West Point. President Trump and members of his administration have taken the first steps toward eliminating DEI in the military, but there won’t be lasting change until all traces of it are removed from our military’s oldest academy.

In 2024, Congress and watchdog groups started asking why cadets were being taught DEI and critical race theory ideology in West Point classrooms. Over the next several months, West Point was embroiled in controversy as the academy faced a barrage of congressional hearings, lawsuits, and Freedom of Information Act requests. But the school was able to successfully shield many of its woke policies through disingenuous public relations tactics.

As long as these officials remain in charge, any claims of returning to a pre-DEI, mission-focused ethos ring hollow.

More than six months into the new administration, it is clear that West Point’s “compliance” with President Trump’s “Restoring America’s Fighting Force” executive order and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s anti-DEI memo is merely perfunctory — and even deceptive. Their orders are being undermined by the continued presence of woke employees who continue to prop up a leftist regime that has embedded itself at West Point.

DEI by any other name

Dr. Morten Ender is a full professor of sociology at West Point whose work confirms his allegiance to DEI dogma. Before Congress became wary of DEI in the military, Ender worked as the co-chair of USMA’s Diversity and Inclusion Studies Minor. He was the point of contact for classes such as "Deconstructing Patriotism" and "The Evolution of Cross-dressing in the Military."

Ender also taught classes such as "Deviance and Social Control" and "Race, Class, Gender, and Ethnicity.” His work has included publications including “Dinner and Conversation: Transgender Integration at West Point and Beyond” and books like “Inclusion in the American Military: A Force for Diversity.” It’s absurd to believe that a person who so vigorously embraced the politicization of the military would simply give up that crusade in a new role, with a new title.

Since Congress took a harder line on DEI in the military, the DEI minor’s website has disappeared, and Ender’s bio has been cleaned up, removing any trace of his association with DEI. Originally, West Point’s site listed his many accomplishments, including his pro-DEI articles and woke classes.

West Point may try to cover up its history, but it will not fool us.

RELATED: ‘Get DEI and CRT out of the military’: Leftist media in shambles after Hegseth pick

Photo by Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

The continued employment of Lisa Benitez, another woke professor, is also puzzling in light of Hegseth’s clear directive to stop the inculcation of toxic ideologies like DEI and CRT in the military. The former chief diversity officer of West Point’s Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equal Opportunity, Benitez’s role has taken several new forms since 2024. In June of last year, she was given the title of Chief Engagement and Retention Officer and then became Equal Employment Manager only a few months later.

While Benitez no longer has an official presence on the academy’s website, her LinkedIn profile still lists her as a West Point employee, and her phone number matches that of the equal employment manager role.

Benitez organized the annual West Point Diversity and Inclusion Leadership Conference. This conference had been a bastion of woke ideology in our nation’s premier military academy, hosting talks on “The Evolution of Diversity” and “Corporate Diversity.” The name of the conference changed in January to “The Iris and Herman Bulls ’78 Family Legacy of Graduates and Leaders Forum” and was eventually canceled due to controversy. It’s clear, however, that the radical ideology it once openly promoted remains.

Col. Archie Bates III, the deputy director of West Point’s Behavioral Science and Leadership Department, attended one of those conferences. In addition to doing academic work on preferential college admissions, he touts himself as a skilled promoter of DEI and lists his many woke accomplishments. He also co-authored the military’s DEI policy, which authorized women for combat arms in 2011. Bates is currently the academy’s acting department head of Behavior Sciences and Leadership.

Another member of the DEI faculty still in place at West Point is Maj. Catherine Grizzle, who is currently an instructor for the Behavioral Science and Leadership Department.

Grizzle came up through the ranks when woke leadership was being openly promoted and praised. She has long been a poster child for DEI, becoming only the third female field artillery Basic Officer Leader Course gunnery instructor. Her LinkedIn profile showcases her full commitment to DEI, and she is the only West Point faculty member to have DEI listed as one of her research interests.

Fortunately, at least one faculty member who teaches DEI is leaving voluntarily. USMA history professor Anthony Guerrero, who has been at West Point for over two years, is resigning in protest due to President Trump’s crackdown on DEI.

In a New York Times op-ed, Guerrero called Trump’s executive order on military excellence and readiness a “legal command that provides cover for bigotry. It delivers hate in the guise of a national security issue, dressed up in medicalized language.” Not only is Guerrero defending transgender ideology, but he is also contradicting a direct order to keep his concerns private.

Ideology runs deep

West Point’s DEI leadership — including figures like Ender, Bates, Grizzle, Benitez, and Guerrero — represents just a fraction of DEI’s ideological entrenchment there. Despite recent efforts to present a façade of reform, West Point remains captive to the same people who have been championing divisive policies on race and sex for years.

As long as these officials remain in charge, any claims of returning to a pre-DEI, mission-focused ethos ring hollow. The result is an officer corps trained in ideological conformity rather than the lethality, leadership, and war fighting excellence our national defense demands.

While the Trump administration has taken commendable steps to roll back DEI in the military, those efforts cannot succeed if the very officials who created these policies remain in positions of influence. Lasting reform requires not just policy change but also serious personnel change.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published at the American Mind.

Denaturalize And Deport Zohran Mamdani For Immigration Fraud

Any serious nation with an interest in self-preservation would immediately denaturalize and deport Mamdani.

Colorado Christian Camp Wins Legal Victory Against State’s Radical Transgender Rules

Camp IdRaHaJe can continue its work in alignment with its Christian stance on biological sex, but Colorado is still pushing trans ideology.

Congressman ‘Sarah’ McBride Missed The Real Reason Why Support For The Trans Movement Was A ‘Mirage’

The unpopular and dangerous extremes were always the logical conclusion trans ideology was hurtling toward.

Why Non-Woke Indie Video Games Like Clair Obscur Are Going Gangbusters

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 presages the fall of woke gaming titans in its own indie gaming moment because it refused to bow to leftist ideology.