Higher Education in America: It’s Worse Than You Think 
Edited by Kevin D. Roberts with an introduction and conclusion by Christopher F. Rufo.
Encounter Books, 2026.
Hardcover, 308 pages, $32.99.
Reviewed by Nathaniel Urban.
Sometimes, a title speaks for itself. Kevin Roberts’s Higher Education in America: It’s Worse Than You Think forces American higher education to look itself in the mirror—and it is embarrassing. Higher education is far worse than we think. Whether it is foreign influence, administrative bloat, student activism, antisemitism, accreditation, or poor academic standards, American higher education suffers from deep problems.
But it is not the place of conservatives to give in to despair, and that is the best part of the book. The last four chapters are a series of policy recommendations and conclusions on the state of affairs. Each of the preceding chapters includes the authors’ insights as well, and these authors are some of the best higher education policy analysts and college professors in the United States. Adam Kissel, George Harne, Jay Greene, Mark Bauerlein, Joshua Katz, Patrick Deneen, and Inez Feltscher Stepman are all forces to reckon with. The role of the conservative in the renewal of American higher education is to believe that it is possible and worthy of renewal. Prudence dictates that it all cannot, and should not, be burned down. Like a cancer, the tumors must be cut out and the body restored to its intended function. In the spirit of Kirk, the conservative reformer must remember the imperfectability of human nature, a moral truth that the modern academy has forgotten.
Chris Rufo’s introduction reminds readers about the purpose of the university and liberal education itself: “To liberate the mind from ignorance and passion and align it with truth.” The purpose of education is not to allow students to pick from the cornucopia of postmodern theories. It is rather to introduce them to the enduring moral order and great shared history of Western Civilization. Rufo’s introduction is thoughtful and even theological. He says the ideology of deconstruction can only destroy, not create. Perhaps unintentionally, perhaps not, his comment is rooted in the theology of Augustine and the words of Tolkien. Evil is incapable of creating anything new. It can only distort that which is good. “The Shadow that bred them can only mock, it cannot make: not real things of its own. I don’t think it gave life to orcs, it only ruined them and twisted them,” said Tolkien. American higher education is corrupted, yes, but from forces outside that penetrated within. Deconstruction is one of these ideologies, and so is diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). The task of the succeeding chapters is to identify and remedy the challenges conservatives face in reforming higher education.
Part One examines the economics of the university today. Institutions list inaccurate net prices, loan forgiveness is a sham, the federal government has a monopoly on the student loan system, and tuition prices do nothing to indicate high academic standards. Regarding the economics of hiring faculty, Andrew Gillen notes that faculty on the left outnumber faculty on the right by 6.9 to one across the board. Alarmingly, qualified candidates still face political litmus tests like diversity statements on their applications. John Sailer has a whole chapter later about diversity statements and the plethora of funding progressive scholars receive for a far-left political agenda.
The last chapter of Part One begins to scratch the surface of administrative bloat and higher education’s incessant need to coddle students. Fr. Dcn. Kyle Washut was an exceptional choice to write this chapter. With charity and resolve, Fr. Washut shares statistics about the large number of students facing severe loneliness and anxiety, alcohol abuse, and pornography and smartphone addictions. He is genuinely worried about students. They cannot live the good life if they are saddled with such burdens. Fr. Washut does not deny that these problems exist, but to fix them requires students to accept their state of nature. They are imperfect beings, yet perfection appears to be mistakenly available within college administrations. The size of administrative budgets has ballooned to meet students’ ever-growing list of needs—psychologists, sociologists, DEI officers, state-of-the-art recreation centers, pools and lazy rivers, therapy dogs, safe spaces, and the list goes on. It is puzzling that students living in luxury are so unhappy. Maybe, then, it is time to do away with the extravagance. Fr. Washut suggests a college experience of simplicity and the pursuit of virtue. This pursuit is much different from the pursuit of perfection. The pursuit of virtue is the lifelong practice of making good decisions repeatedly while still acknowledging one’s own imperfections and need for grace. The bureaucracy of higher education does little to support such an endeavor.
Part Two addresses the bureaucracy, a bureaucracy large enough to warrant its own section. George Harne opens with a chapter on college presidents and their lack of leadership. At the root of their poor leadership is the misuse of language. Speeches, press releases, public comments, and social media posts are filled with corporate-style jargon that affirms the therapeutic and fragile condition of students. Harne says enough of this too. If need be, professors should fail students, he argues. They should make them read difficult books. They should speak honestly. And presidents should likewise protect the tradition out of which the university was founded. It is either the ancient, classical, religious tradition or the tradition of the Enlightenment and Age of Reason. Nietzsche introduced a third tradition that rejected the first two and embraced the individualistic quest of self-discovery. This is the tradition that has since corrupted universities unchallenged.
Jay Greene’s recommendation to shrink the bureaucracy is simple: do not donate money. Universities have a reputation for dishonoring donor intent. If alumni and philanthropists would like to donate money, it is best if they donate to academic centers that have their own 501c3 tax designation. But behind the curtain of the bureaucracy are the parasitic offspring of Marxism: critical race theory and DEI. At their core, their purpose is to incite revolution and teach students an us-versus-them mentality. Presidents, administrators, and student groups have all rallied behind the banners in the name of progress. And the danger lies now in the rebranding of DEI offices. Make no mistake, it will reemerge.
Part Three covers the blatant dominance of left-wing politics in higher education. In the perverted spirit of nihilism, students have been taught that Western Civilization, the Great Books, and the American Founding are meaningless. Identity politics overtook the humanities, and the history of the West became a narrative of guilt and disgrace. Mark Bauerlein remains hopeful, however, that students yearn for good art and literature. They just need the kind of professors who believe in the traditional purpose of a liberal education.
Leftist college presidents have allowed antisemitism to run amok on their campuses. They have refused to punish student extremists or ensure legal and equal protection for Jewish students. DEI returns as a catalyst for antisemitism, telling Jewish students to feel ashamed of their culture and admit Israel is an oppressive state. Training students for political activism is now common curriculum at colleges of education. Men are undermined, and campuses become, well, more feminized. Trigger warnings, safe spaces, and inclusive environments replace the pursuit of truth. Conservative opinions are shouted down or canceled. The increasing polarization of the sexes is delaying family formation (i.e., men are more conservative, women are more liberal, yet neither sex is willing to compromise). Plagiarism is even tolerated in the name of DEI.
Higher Education in America is a self-portrait of American higher education, and an ugly one at that. Once again, though, the conservative reformer cannot give up. The solutions the authors propose are practical and encouraging. Creating a National Academy, closing the remaining Confucius Institutes, investing in new centers and institutions, improving price transparency, disciplining students, removing Marxist theories like CRT and DEI in all their forms—these ideas have teeth and they require teams of conservative policymakers, faculty, and donors to implement.
A much deeper issue lingers discussed by Patrick Deneen. American progressives are confident they can perfect human nature. It is a utopian narrative that has resulted in woke ideology. I agree with Deneen. At the heart of it all, I see a student body that is either unaware or in denial of their nature. They are the creation of the Creator. They are fallen but redeemed by grace and capable of goodness. They are drawn to the beauty of the Lord on High but have looked for Him in all the wrong places. The renewal of American higher education begins not just with policy, but with the humility of students to accept their nature and the roles they are called to in their families and communities. It is not a journey of self-discovery. It is the beginning of a habitual life of rightly ordered virtue.
Nathaniel Urban is a development associate at the National Association of Scholars (NAS) and a regular contributor at Minding the Campus.
Support the University Bookman
The Bookman is provided free of charge and without ads to all readers. Would you please consider supporting the work of the Bookman with a gift of $5? Contributions of any amount are needed and appreciated!
