It was a typically chilly Melbourne afternoon when we arrived at the NAB building in Docklands to attend Christopher Pyne’s book launch. Instead of dully walking through the corporate doors to be greeted by glowing faces at the registration desk we were stopped by the much angrier faces of dozens of so-called ‘student’ protesters. The protesters, arms interlocked across the entranceway, stood just in front of a line of police protecting the building.

In our ill-fated attempt to get inside we approached one of their leaders, identified by his holding of a megaphone, to ask him to make a gap. The gentleman, who recognised me from student politics, agreed to help by getting the protesters to make room for us to get inside. However, just seconds later he broke his commitment. Instead of letting us through he announced that ‘Matthew Lesh, a senior Young Liberal’ was in attendance, which resulted in a moment of silence followed by aggressive chants of ‘f–k off Liberal scum’ to my face.

Once again we tried to enter the building, only to be stopped by the human chain and even more aggressive yelling in our faces. After some difficulty getting away we were able to find an alternate entrance upstairs. This was just a few minutes before the alternate entrance was swarmed and the building locked down. We watched on, this time from the inside, as their physical pressure resulted in breaking glass and the injury of five police officers. They even punched security personnel. There was just one arrest. Police time wasted, a book launch delayed, and many forced to turn away from the event due to lack of access to the building.

This latest rally is not really anything new. It is not the first time members of the Socialist Alternative, and their friends in Labor students and the National Union of Students, have protested Christopher Pyne or a senior Liberal politician. Earlier last year, in response to the Federal Budget, barely a day went by without a physical altercation between protesters and police. But there’s something special about trying to protest a book launch—for a book, Letter to My Children, that is less about politics and more about the personal. Their attempt to stop a book launch is perhaps reminiscent of Soviet efforts to burn decadent western books.

The attitude that nothing is out of bounds, that all intellectual pursuits that do not conform to the far-left zeitgeist must be stopped, seems to have penetrated into the daily working agenda of certain groups. The political left, once the champions of free speech and dissent, have now taken an almost ultra-conservative response to the expression of any ideas or beliefs that challenge their narrow conception of society. On campus they stopped Jewish students from entering a public lecture because they might have exposed a contrary opinion. (As a result of this particular episode, the Monash Socialist Alternative have been banned from that university campus.) They disrupted a former Liberal MP during a guest lecture because, heaven forbid, they would express views that are contrary to their thinking.

As the far-left protesters try to shout down opposing views when they are presented, increasingly young people are only exposed to a limited range of perspectives. This is both through their choice and the failure of our higher education system. A dark side of the decline of the traditional newspaper is that it has led to the educated young being exposed to an increasingly narrow set of ideas. Rather then opening a broadsheet, which contains various views and facts, young people are far more likely to self-select by only reading news stories and opinion pieces posted by their friends on social media. This is only worsened by the existence of online news sites that are intentionally biased and one-sided. While people may have traditionally been selective in the news they read, it is extraordinarily to witness how this has been taken to the extreme and left many unaware of the facts behind an issue of public policy.

This year marks my fourth year at one of Australia’s top universities. Most of the tutors are good; almost all of the academics try their hardest. But it is impossible to ignore the underlying bias in the ideas that are expressed and the issues covered, especially in political science courses. It is also impossible to ignore the extent to which students seem to simply lack even a rudimentary awareness of opinions that do not conform with their left-wing political views. In my university politics classes, even at an Honours level, I have sat stunned at the absolute uniformity of political leanings on display from students. This creates a suffocating atmosphere in which almost everyone seems to agree, and those who disagree far too often remain silent. A form of groupthink has emerged on our university campuses in which people seem to be shocked by the mere existence of a Liberal like myself.

The failure of many young people to explore different ideas is only exaggerated by the failure of our universities to expose students to a diversity of opinion. During my first year I took an introductory course in political philosophy. A good way to explore different historical and contemporary political ideas, I supposed at the time. After spending some introductory weeks on medieval and early modern political ideas we got onto specific topic weeks. There was, thankfully, one week on liberalism and another on conservatism. However the lectures almost exclusively focused on dismissive criticism rather than appraisal. This was followed by weeks devoted to classical Marxism, anarchism, communism, socialism, feminism, and even ‘green political theory’—all given their own two hour lectures, despite their similar collectivist philosophical base, and all predictably painted in a positive light.

A healthy debate of ideas should be welcomed at university. It should be a place where all students feel comfortable in their own shoes to express ideas—no matter how naive, or controversial. The far-left must not be allowed to shut down opposing ideas, and students must be exposed to a variety of different perspectives.

Ultimately, the philosophical basis of an idea should not matter, but rather how effectively the argument can be made and others convinced.

We are strongest when the battle of ideas on campus, and in Australian society, encourages diversity. Our foremost places of learning and exploration have a responsibility to ensure that all ideas are given the light of day.