Professors and the Republic: Why Academia Must Teach America First
A nation does not survive on autopilot. It survives because each generation is deliberately taught what it is, why it exists, and what it demands of its citizens. That responsibility does not belong solely to parents, clergy, or elected officials. It belongs to professors, whether some in academia like it or not. Political science professors in particular carry a civic obligation that goes beyond abstract theory. Their job is not merely to analyze power structures or deconstruct institutions. Their job is to explain, defend, and transmit the principles of the American republic.
Let’s be clear. “America First” is not a slogan of hostility. It is a statement of political order. Every sovereign nation must put its own citizens, laws, and cultural continuity first, or it will not remain sovereign for long. Political science departments that refuse to articulate this foundational truth are not being neutral. They are neglecting their duty.
The United States is not simply a geographic space. It is a constitutional system rooted in ordered liberty, representative government, federalism, individual rights balanced by civic responsibility, and a shared commitment to the rule of law. These principles did not emerge accidentally. They were fought for, debated, written, amended, and defended—sometimes at terrible cost. Professors who treat these achievements as morally interchangeable with any other political arrangement misunderstand their role. The American constitutional tradition is not one case study among many; it is the governing framework under which its students live.
In recent decades, however, much of higher education has drifted toward a posture of detachment from national loyalty. Students are often taught to critique America before they are taught to understand it. They learn about flaws without first appreciating foundations. They are encouraged to elevate transnational identity over civic identity. The result is not sophisticated cosmopolitanism. It is confusing.
Political science should begin with first principles: What is a nation? What binds a people together? Why does sovereignty matter? Why do borders exist? A functioning republic depends on unity—not uniformity, but unity. Unity requires a shared civic language and a hierarchy of loyalty. The Constitution, the laws passed under it, and the enduring values of the American political tradition must rank above the customs and political norms individuals bring from elsewhere.
This is not an attack on immigrants. Immigration has been part of the American story from the beginning. But successful immigration historically required assimilation into American civic culture. Immigrants did not come to transplant the political systems of their home countries, but to join the American one. They learned English. They adopted constitutional norms. They pledged allegiance. That process was not oppressive; it was unifying.
When professors implicitly suggest that immigrant political values should stand on equal footing with American constitutional principles within American public life, they erode the very cohesion that allows a diverse society to function. A republic cannot operate as a patchwork of competing sovereignties. It must have a center of gravity. In the United States, that center is the Constitution and the political culture built around it.
To love one’s nation is not to deny its imperfections. It is believed it is worth preserving and improving from whence we came. The classroom should be a place where students wrestle honestly with America’s contradictions—but also where they are taught why the American experiment is unique and worth defending. Civic education without patriotism becomes cynicism. Patriotism without education becomes sentimentality. Professors are uniquely positioned to strike the proper balance.
The phrase “putting America first” in an academic context means teaching students that public policy decisions must prioritize the well-being, security, and cohesion of the American people. It means evaluating international agreements based on whether they serve national interests. It means understanding immigration policy through the lens of social stability and constitutional integrity. It means analyzing economic policy based on its impact on American workers and families, rather than abstract global metrics.
This approach is neither isolationist nor xenophobic. It is political realism. Every nation in the world prioritizes its own interests. The United States should not apologize for doing the same. Professors who present nationalism as inherently suspect while treating global governance as morally superior are not engaging in neutral scholarship. They are advancing a normative position—one that often goes unexamined.
University faculty frequently speak about “critical thinking.” Critical thinking must include scrutiny of globalist assumptions as much as nationalist ones. It must include examination of whether dissolving borders, diluting civic identity, or subordinating national law to international bodies strengthens or weakens democratic accountability. Students deserve to confront those questions directly.
Moreover, unity is not a luxury. It is a precondition for democratic self-government. A population that does not share basic commitments cannot deliberate effectively. If citizens disagree not only on policy but on foundational values—such as constitutional supremacy, free speech norms, and equal protection under law—politics becomes a tribal contest rather than a civic debate. Professors should reinforce those shared commitments, not fragment them.
To hold American values higher than foreign political values within American institutions is not intolerance. It is coherence. A nation-state that refuses to privilege its own constitutional framework over external norms will eventually lose control over its own destiny. Professors who shy away from this reality out of fear of being labeled partisan are abdicating intellectual responsibility.
Academia has long prided itself on shaping citizens. That mission requires clarity. Students should graduate understanding that they are inheritors of a constitutional republic that demands loyalty, participation, and defense. They should leave classrooms with a respect for the sacrifices that built this nation and an appreciation for the freedoms it protects. They should be equipped to critique policy without despising the country.
A republic survives when its educated class believes in it. If universities cease to transmit civic allegiance alongside analytical skill, the long-term consequences will not be abstract. There will be political instability, declining trust, and weakened sovereignty.
Professors do not need to become propagandists. They do, however, need to remember that they teach within a specific nation, under a specific Constitution, funded by a specific public. Teaching America first in the classroom is not about exclusion. It is about preservation. A house divided cannot stand. A house that forgets why it was built will not stand for long.
The task of the professor, then, is straightforward: teach the system, teach its history honestly, critique it rigorously, but never forget that the ultimate goal is to prepare citizens capable of sustaining the American experiment. Anything less is not academic neutrality. It is civic negligence.