
With less than three weeks until Election Day, the University of New England hosted a panel of political experts on Wednesday, Oct. 16, at its Biddeford campus, to explore whether the political spectrum still holds meaning in a time of ideological flux.
The panel, “Election 2024: Left, Right, or Unrecognizable?” was the eighth installment of UNE’s signature President’s Forum series, which provides a venue for respectful discourse on the most pressing social and global issues of our time, allowing conversations to unfold with civility and respect for differing opinions, according to a UNE press release.
Held at the Harold Alfond Forum, the event featured panelists Verlan Lewis, Stirling Professor of Constitutional Studies at Utah Valley University; Hyrum Lewis, professor of history at Brigham Young University-Idaho; Bryan Caplan, professor of economics at George Mason University; and Robin D. Hanson, associate professor of economics at George Mason University.
The conversation was moderated by Shannon Zlotkowski, M.S., assistant provost for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion at UNE.
UNE President James D. Herbert opened the event by emphasizing the university’s commitment to fostering open inquiry and constructive dialogue.
“At UNE, we are committed to fostering robust discourse on difficult topics from a perspective of intellectual humility, curiosity, and civility,” Herbert said, noting that the President’s Forum is one of a variety of programs through which the University realizes this goal as part of its Marketplace of Ideas initiative. “Hopefully, by the end of the night, we’ll understand the upcoming election on a deeper level and will have been introduced to some new ways of thinking – and talking – about politics that are less polarizing.”
The Marketplace of Ideas initiative reflects UNE’s core belief that exposure to differing perspectives is essential to personal growth and meaningful education. As part of the initiative, the President’s Forum provides a structured venue where students, faculty, and thought leaders can engage in civil discourse around some of the most contentious issues of our time.
The event unfolded as an engaging dialogue about the shifting political landscape ahead of the Nov. 5 election. While many Americans view the upcoming election as a battle between two opposing visions – either electing the nation’s first female president or re-electing a controversial former president – the panelists questioned whether these distinctions were as clear-cut as they seem.
Throughout the evening, discussion ebbed and flowed in, asking whether the ideological boundaries between America’s two dominant political parties are too fluid or contradictory to fit neatly into old paradigms.
Joshua Pahigian, M.F.A., director of the UNE Center for Global Humanities, reflected on the significance of the forum in shaping student perspectives.
“Events like this challenge us to think beyond simplistic narratives and help us understand that there are often deeper truths hidden beneath political labels,” Pahigian said. “It’s important that our students develop the confidence to explore difficult questions and engage with uncomfortable ideas. Learning to grapple with differing viewpoints with humility and respect is essential for their growth.”
Pahigian also noted that the forum offered a model for civil discourse, especially critical in a polarized world. “The ability to engage others thoughtfully, even when we disagree, is key to making society function. UNE’s commitment to these values is what makes this event so impactful.”
“Events like this are a reminder that education isn’t just about finding answers – it’s about learning how to ask better questions,” Pahigian added.
The next installment of the President’s Forum will take place Feb. 13, and will explore the supposed liberal bias among faculty and professional staff on college campuses.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less