Conservatives need to learn how to take a win
The University of Florida should be a line in the sand
What does a win in the culture wars look like? For the last several years, University of Florida was it.
University of Florida’s former president Ben Sasse’s philosophy was best summed up in a line he delivered on CNN in May 2024, at the height of the anti-Israel encampments on other campuses. “We just don’t negotiate with people who scream the loudest. That just doesn’t make any sense to me.”
The sanity was welcome. “We will always defend your right to free speech and free assembly,” he added. “And, also, we have time, place, and manner restrictions, and you don’t get to take over the whole university. People don’t get to spit at cops. You don’t get to barricade yourselves in buildings. You don’t get to disrupt somebody else’s commencement. We don’t allow protests inside.”
While other schools had antisemitic outbursts, complete with vandalism and violence, UF held the largest Passover seder in the country for their students. While other schools saw Jewish kids file lawsuits over “Jew Exclusion Zones,” UF took to heart a letter from then-Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody reminding all state schools of the “zero-tolerance policy for antisemitism in the State of Florida.”
Protests were allowed, encampments were not. The sense of order at the school was unique in a chaotic time.
And it worked.
In 2024, The Wall Street Journal called UF “The Harvard of the Unwoke” and Forbes magazine put it on its list of “new Ivies” and number 4 on its list of 25 best public colleges in the country.
In 2020, “the university received 38,069 applications and admitted 13,925 students.” Last year the number of applicants jumped to 65,375 and the number of admitted students rose slightly to 15,707.
The numbers aren’t in for this year yet but parents at tony south Florida private schools are calling this admission cycle the “UF Bloodbath.” Kids were getting into Stanford, into Harvard, but not into UF.
Sasse’s tenure came to an unexpected end in July when, citing his wife's deteriorating health, he stepped down from his role as president.
Since then, the school has been searching for a new president before announcing last month that they had narrowed the search down to just one finalist, Santa Ono, president of University of Michigan. The UF Board of Trustees and Board of Governors will soon vote on Ono’s approval. They should reconsider this choice.
Until he was considered for the UF position, Ono had been a classic far-left University president making land acknowledgements and saying "the climate crisis is the existential challenge of our time."
He was also all-in on the disastrous policies of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.
In his 2023 Inauguration speech, Ono spoke of implementing “DEI 2.0” and referred to racism as “one of America’s original sins.” In the DEI 2.0 strategy document, Ono writes that he is “committed to DEI being a major focus of my presidency.” He was open about his goals to “emphasize DEI in terms of strategic priorities; build a campuswide effort; develop institutional and constituent capacity to implement and improve DEI initiatives; fully institutionalize DEI into the university; and ensure continued progress and long-term sustainability.”
The document continued that the plan is to “leverage the benefits of diversity - we must create the conditions of equity and true inclusion. By definition, this means that things must change (with “things” meaning who has power, influence, and voice in priorities and decision making).”
In October 2023, Ono introduced a new measure that would become “Principles on Diversity of Thought and Freedom of Expression” at the school. Ono said “At this time of great division, it is more important than ever that we come together in a shared commitment to pluralism, to mutual respect and to freedom of speech and diversity of thought at this great public university.”
That was largely a failure. A month later, journalist and author Josh Hammer spoke at the University of Michigan and was shouted down by various leftist groups. No one at the University stepped in to help. Where was this so-called commitment to pluralism, to mutual respect and to freedom of speech? A few months after that, Ono announced a “disruptive activity policy” change but only after the protesters cut short his speech at a convocation for honors students.
Has Ono had, as some believe, a conversion where DEI is concerned? It’s unlikely. When Ono was president and vice-chancellor of the University of British Columbia, he and the two co-chairs of the President’s Task Force on Anti-Racism and Inclusive Excellence, wrote an op-ed in the Vancouver Sun on the two year anniversary of George Floyd’s death, arguing that “systemic racial inequities” continue to “permeate the halls of academia” including at UBC. They added that they were aware of “the discrimination, including micro-aggressions, that IBPOC community members routinely face in classrooms and other university spaces. Racism can be explicit and blatant, or it can be subtle and difficult to identify.”
The report called for mandatory “education and professional development on anti-racism and decolonization” for all faculty members. Ono made sure to note he “every member of the UBC community will benefit by studying its insights and recommendations.”
These are the words of a man who had drunk the entire jug of leftist kool-aid.
Ono also had a problem with the way the Universities were being pressured to combat antisemitism. In a leaked audio from October 2024, Ono says “There are powerful groups who may know that my peers from presidents of other universities have been in the hot seat in Congress. The question from Congress is not balanced. It’s focused almost entirely on antisemitism, which I think is an issue, but there’s also islamophobia as well.”
Just last month, Ono signed a letter criticizing the Trump administration for “undue government intrusion in the lives of those who learn, live, and work on our campuses” and rejecting “the coercive use of public research funding.” Ono’s name was recently removed from the signatory list as he attempts to clean up his history in time for the UF position.
Why is Ono the top pick for the UF job with this history? UMich has long been considered one of the best public universities in the country. There is a sense that poaching the University of Michigan’s president is a mark of prestige. But things are changing, what’s considered an elite university is changing, and UF could easily lead the way on those changes if they can take the win.
Taking the win is the most important part. Conservatives need to accept winning, for the first time in a long time, a battle in the culture wars. We won. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion have become dirty words because they caused harm and we proved it. Chris Rufo has spent years showing how DEI led to educational rot. The New York Post Opinion Page has been intensely covering the free speech battles on campuses from the early days of “safe spaces”. The Trump administration is applying financial pressure on universities to actually clean up their antisemitism problems. We won.
What would the left do with this kind of win? Would they take the opportunity to install a conservative at the premier “Blue State” state school who only newly opposes the defeated ideas? They would not.
On the first day of Sasse’s tenure at UF, a group of far-left students taped a list of demands to his door. Included in the list was the demand that “he commits to non-compliance with state-imposed activities targeting freedom of political thought, racial equity and gender-affirming care — including attempts to enforce the so-called "Stop WOKE Act"; he maintains all pre-existing commitments to inclusivity, equity, diversity and justice.”
Sasse ignored their demands. Would Ono?