logo
Why College Matters: For The Love Of Learning—And Democracy

Why College Matters: For The Love Of Learning—And Democracy

Forbes11-06-2025
In a time of tense scrutiny of higher education, it helps to be reminded why college matters.
Two recent talks by highly acclaimed novelists left sparks on how much the opportunity to learn still means to people, and why it's important for keeping our country strong.
The joy of learning is an undercurrent throughout the efforts to increase the share of Americans with college degrees or other credentials that lead to measurably better economic outcomes. There is incredible hope and promise embedded in the word opportunity—that people have the freedom to learn, the chance to pursue their passions, and a real path to thrive.
I was struck last month by New York Times bestselling author R.F. Kuang's poignant call to protect the rare opportunity of American higher education in a world where many are subjected to political suppression.
Kuang brought a crowd to their feet as the convocation speaker at Georgetown University. I happened to be in the audience as Kuang, a Georgetown School of Foreign Service graduate herself seven years ago, urged the Class of 2025 not to take education for granted.
'A university is such an impossible fantasy—a place where we can test dangerous, unorthodox ideas; where we can dream up better worlds; where we can make mistakes; where we can change our minds,' Kuang said. 'The life of the mind is a utopia, and history proves its precarity. It will die if we stop fighting for it.'
Kuang's own story includes five novels, two master's degrees, and a No. 1 ranking on the New York Times Best Sellers list for her fantasy series, 'The Poppy War' trilogy. She's also pursuing a doctorate degree at Yale University in East Asian languages and literature.
But her regard for learning really goes back three generations. Kuang's great-grandfather and grandfather in China sought to obtain education in the time of political and economic turmoil. Kuang's father made it to Beijing University to study physics—graduating in 1989 in time to join other students in the Tiananmen Square protests to demand political reforms.
China's leadership sent troops into the streets, a moment captured forever by the global image of a student standing his ground before a line of tanks. Thousands were killed or injured, and Kuang's father, who had already gotten permission to pursue his doctorate in the United States, left for California.
'America represented this utopia where one could think and speak freely,' Kuang told the Georgetown graduates. 'You'll never find a bigger patriot than my dad. He flies the red, white, and blue on the Fourth of July. He rocks a cowboy hat. He loves fishing and grilling and driving his truck. He says he's already fled one authoritarian state, and he's not going to flee another.'
Gen Z hit college-going age at a time when public faith in higher education has declined to a historic low. The perception of college, Kuang noted, is that it's an exorbitantly expensive ivory tower for political brainwashing, AI cheating, and partying.
College should not be 'an amusement park, a member's club for the elites, a corporation,' she said, calling upon higher education to cut out its rot and change. Universities need to open their doors, allow honest dialogue, and share knowledge with the world—because the opportunity to learn is so valuable.
'We are so accustomed to speaking of the university as a frivolity, as a luxury, that we have forgotten how rare a space this is,' Kuang said.
'Hold onto that luxury,' she encouraged the graduates. 'Refuse the poverty of thought. Stay curious.'
Not that life for the graduates, even with the benefits of that education, will be simple or easy:
'Now you will put your ideals to the test, and more likely than not watch your dreams meet the crushing anvil of reality,' she said.
'You are stepping into a world now where, if you hold on to your principles, sooner or later you will be staring down a tank. But my father emerged from that bloody square, and the first thing he did was seek out another classroom.'
The powerful urgency of Kuang's speech stuck with me. Gen Z is stepping into a much more uncertain world than the generations before them, as democratic principles at home and abroad face threats, and as artificial intelligence transforms the workplace and raises the bar for a more educated workforce.
While often defined by challenges, Gen Z brings distinct talents to society as digital natives with a better understanding of mental health and wellbeing, and a keen interest in finding climate change solutions.
John Green, whose 'The Fault in Our Stars' became a No. 1 bestselling novel and hit motion picture, understands Gen Z's mindset and hunger for learning.
More than a dozen years ago, Green launched an educational video series called CrashCourse with his brother Hank. It became popular among high schoolers, making history and biology lessons entertaining and easily digestible.
Some of his inspiration came from being a 'reluctant learner' himself, as Green put it, who didn't want to learn algebra or French but had teachers who never gave up on him.
'I wanted to capture what I later learned in life is the joy of learning—the fact that we are here to understand ourselves in the universe,' Green said at a Lumina Foundation retreat in Indianapolis, our shared home base. 'And if we're lucky, we get to do it in community with people and learn from people who are smarter than us—or at least people who have been smart longer than us.'
Known to 3.9 million YouTube followers as the Vlogbrothers, the Greens became interested in helping students access college when they learned that millions of Americans start college but don't complete degrees, sometimes still burdened by student loan debt.
They wanted to see if a couple of guys in their 40s who have jobs could navigate the complex college system. The answer was no.
That led the brothers to produce the 'How to College' CrashCourse series to demystify the system and team up with Arizona State University to create Study Hall, which offers low-cost, flexible college courses. Students pay only $25 upfront, then can choose to pay $400 for transferable academic credit after seeing their final grade.
In his talk at Lumina, Green spoke of the need to create an education system that works for everyone and values community. To Green and to most of us, solving America's higher ed challenges is essential not just for economic growth, but for democracy itself.
'This is also about having an educated and informed citizenry at a time where life is going to get very, very weird,' he said, explaining how artificial intelligence can now create videos in his likeness and spread misinformation.
'They can say anything. And that means that we need a really well-informed, educated citizenry,' he said. 'That is critical for the future of our democracy and the future of our country.'
These two storytellers—R.F. Kuang and John Green—offer vivid reminders that education remains both a personal lifeline and a public good. Whether it's Kuang's family story of striving for knowledge, or Green's mission to widen the path through flexible, affordable learning, their experiences highlight what's at stake when access to higher education is threatened.
At this inflection point, higher education needs more creative ideas to redesign systems, like Green's Study Hall courses. It needs advocates for its value, like Kuang, and to further prove itself by setting up today's graduates for tomorrow's future.
For all its flaws, college remains a powerful engine of opportunity. At its best it shapes thinkers, challenges assumptions, and fosters resilience in the face of life's challenges. And at a time when democracy itself is being tested, the need for informed and empowered citizens has never been greater. Education, in the end, is more than a degree—it's a commitment to the shared future we're all building.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump's attack on in-state tuition for Dreamers is bad law — and worse policy
Trump's attack on in-state tuition for Dreamers is bad law — and worse policy

Boston Globe

time21 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Trump's attack on in-state tuition for Dreamers is bad law — and worse policy

Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Other surveys — by the Advertisement Among the targets of the administration's hostility, none elicits more sympathy from the public than the so‑called Dreamers — young people brought here unlawfully as children, who have grown up as Americans in everything but paperwork. (According to Gallup, Advertisement In lawsuits filed this spring against Texas, Minnesota, and Kentucky, the Justice Department maintains that offering in‑state tuition to students without legal immigration status — even if they were brought here as small children and essentially grew up American — violates federal law. In reality, it is the administration's assault that distorts federal law. It is also a brazen power grab that tramples states' rights, to say nothing of basic decency. Beginning in 2001, Democratic and Republican legislatures decided that if young people grow up in a state, are educated in its schools, and want to pursue higher education within its borders, it makes no sense to penalize them financially merely because of their immigration status. If there are good reasons to give a break on tuition to local students who want to go to a local college, what difference does it make whether they have a passport, a green card, or neither? Yet on April 28, President Trump Advertisement But that isn't true. Federal law does not say that undocumented immigrants must be excluded from any in-state tuition benefit. It Accordingly, the states that offer reduced tuition to undocumented immigrants condition the offer on criteria other than residency. States that offer in‑state tuition to undocumented students are acting not just humanely but rationally. Such policies reflect the common-sense principle that justifies giving a tuition break to any local student: It is in every state's interest to help its homegrown young people be as successful and well educated as possible. Lower tuition makes higher education more affordable, which in turn boosts the number of local families that can send their kids to college, which in turn expands the state's population of educated adults. A more educated population strengthens the state's economy, since college graduates are more likely to be employed and to earn higher incomes. For states like Massachusetts, which suffers from high outmigration, a particularly strong argument for the in-state tuition break is that graduates of public institutions are more likely to Advertisement None of these arguments has any logical connection to immigration or citizenship. They apply with equal force to those born abroad and to those born locally. And it is irrelevant whether those born abroad were brought to America by parents who had immigration visas or by parents who didn't. Dreamers aren't freeloaders. Like their families, they pay taxes — property taxes, sales taxes, income taxes, and even the payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare benefits, for which they are ineligible. (In 2022, according to the latest estimate from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, undocumented immigrants Aside from the Trumpian hard core, most Americans sympathize with the plight of undocumented immigrants who grew up in this country and have known no other home. That explains why (as Gallup reports) 85 percent of them would like Congress to make it possible for them to acquire citizenship. It also explains why in-state tuition for Dreamers has bipartisan support: The states that have enacted such policies include Oklahoma, Kentucky, California, and New York. Advertisement The Trump administration's lawsuits deserve to be dismissed on their legal merits, but they also deserve to be reviled as one more example of MAGA malevolence, which is grounded in nothing except a desire to hurt immigrants — Few Americans have any desire to punish young people who have done nothing wrong. The cruelty at the heart of Trump's immigration policy may thrill his base, but it repels a far larger America unwilling to abandon its values. Jeff Jacoby can be reached at

Trump's cuts threaten to rip research up by the roots
Trump's cuts threaten to rip research up by the roots

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

Trump's cuts threaten to rip research up by the roots

The chain saw approach to medical research funding is not just reckless — it's shortsighted. The families of the richest 2 percent also get cancer and other deadly diseases, and no amount of money can buy a cure that doesn't exist. Advertisement Dennis E. Noonan Wellesley Thank you for Kara Miller's article on the challenges of long-term research in the face of the Trump administration's cuts ( Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up While only a small fraction of original ideas achieve success as envisioned, scientists consistently persevere with passion for their ideas. The research environment overall, however, brings waves of advances. Unlike the business and dealmaking mind-set of the current administration's so-called leaders, scientists are not self-promoters by type. They struggle for funding over years, driven by their passion for making a difference for the world. Advertisement The most telling risk inherent in the Trump cuts is the potential impact on global competition. As Miller points out, for decades some of the world's best minds have come here, with the United States having benefited. But more recently, greater global tools and competition have prompted serious foreign competition for the best minds — and for the opportunities to control future technologies. The administration's cuts would put the United States more than a generation behind in our children's and grandchildren's future world. Larry Kennedy Jacksonville, Fla. I weep when I see what the Trump administration is doing to our country and our world. Kara Miller's article on the savaging of basic science — 'research aimed at understanding rather than commercializing' — is but one example. This type of research may have no application right away. However, over 20 or 30 years, many dozens of applications may emerge, often covering many different fields. The original development rarely occurs in business laboratories because there is no immediate payoff. It is therefore essential that government continue to fund basic science. As Miller points out, a stable flow of funding is essential for the production of a continuing stream of research results. Disruption of the Trumpian kind has several undesirable results: Besides stopping the flow of original ideas, over the long term it will reduce our capacity to learn from and absorb ideas produced in other countries. We have seen mid-career scientists being welcomed by other countries while the paths of early-career scientists have been demolished. American politicians, Republican and Democratic alike, must stand up to the president and say, 'Basic research is the seed corn for 'Making America Great Again.' It must not be destroyed.' They should then act and vote accordingly in Congress. Advertisement Martin G. Evans Cambridge The writer is a professor emeritus at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto.

Japan votes in a key election as Prime Minsiter Ishiba faces a loss and political uncertainty

time3 hours ago

Japan votes in a key election as Prime Minsiter Ishiba faces a loss and political uncertainty

TOKYO -- Japanese were voting Sunday for seats in the smaller of Japan's two parliamentary houses in a key election with Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and his ruling coalition facing a possible defeat that could worsen the country's political instability. Voters were deciding half of the 248 seats in the upper house, the less powerful of the two chambers in Japan's Diet. Early results were expected Sunday night. Ishiba has set the bar low, wanting a simple majority of 125 seats, which means his Liberal Democratic Party and its Buddhist-backed junior coalition partner Komeito need to win 50 to add to the 75 seats they already have. That is a big retreat from the 141 seats they had pre-election, but media surveys predict big setbacks for Ishiba. A poor performance on Sunday would not immediately trigger a change of government because the upper house lacks the power to file no-confidence against a leader, but it would certainly deepen uncertainty over his fate and Japan's political stability. Ishiba would face calls from within the LDP party to step down or find another coalition partner. Soaring prices, lagging incomes and burdensome social security payments are the top issues for frustrated, cash-strapped voters. Stricter measures targeting foreign residents and visitors have also emerged as a key issue, with a surging right-wing populist party leading the campaign. Sunday's vote comes after Ishiba's coalition lost a majority in the October lower house election, stung by past corruption scandals, and his unpopular government has since been forced into making concessions to the opposition to get legislation through parliament. It has been unable to quickly deliver effective measures to mitigate rising prices, including Japan's traditional staple of rice, and dwindling wages. U.S. President Donald Trump has added to the pressure, complaining about a lack of progress in trade negotiations, and the lack of sales of U.S. autos and American-grown rice to Japan despite a shortfall in domestic stocks of the grain. A 25% tariff due to take effect Aug. 1 has been another blow for Ishiba. Ishiba has resisted any compromise before the election, but the prospect for a breakthrough after the election is just as unclear because the minority government would have difficulty forming a consensus with the opposition. Frustrated voters are rapidly turning to emerging populist parties. The eight main opposition groups, however, are too fractured to forge a common platform as a united front and gain voter support as a viable alternative. The emerging populist party Sanseito stands out with the toughest anti-foreigner stance with its 'Japanese First' platform that proposes a new agency to centralize policies related to foreigners. The party's populist platform also includes anti-vaccine, anti-globalism and favors traditional gender roles. Conservative to centrist opposition groups, including the main opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, or CDPJ, the DPP, and Sanseito have gained significant ground at the Liberal Democrats' expense. The spread of xenophobic rhetoric in the election campaign and on social media has triggered protests by human rights activists and alarmed foreign residents.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store