Over my 14 years at Parker, I’ve been privy to numerous conversations about how our school handles politics, all of which seem to be about the following: how we are way too homogeneously and aggressively liberal.

I certainly don’t reject the fact that we as a school are overwhelmingly Democratic, especially in this current election cycle, where I can count on one hand the number of friends I affirmatively know support Trump.

Looking beyond political labels, though, I see a student population that often is much more aligned with traditionally conservative ideals, fearful of radical change, and complacent when it comes to the basic ways in which American society is structured.

Of course our version of conservatism differs greatly from the far right of the Republican party. Especially when it comes to what we call “social issues,” Parker students are fairly open to including others and tend to see beyond traditional, religious norms. Yet when it comes to making serious personal sacrifice to make the world fairer, Parker students are more resistant.

Take Civic Engagement, for example, where in recent years Parker students openly derided the notion of being required to spend time doing some sort of public service or engaging civically through attending various events. Many students had substantive complaints with the program’s requirements, but a lot of the backlash simply centered around students with the ability to help others not wanting to be forced into actualizing their ability do the helping, which, in essence, is one of the central theses of liberalism, even moderate liberalism: that government should use its authority to progressively tax the wealthy to provide for a social safety net, which primarily helps the poor and the elderly.

Even in class, privileged Parker students tend to shy away from liberalism, as soon as it involves having to give something up. For example in history class last year, I remember the moment when our discussion shifted from discussing the civil rights movement in America to discussing the possibility of monetary reparations directed towards individuals of African descent to make up for centuries of institutional racism that to this day still account for momentous racial wealth disparities.

Everyone could support ending segregation, getting rid of blatantly racist laws, yet when advocacy entailed directly taking away resources from those who benefited, directly or indirectly, from institutionalized racism to begin to make up for those who were harmed, a majority of the class became silent. They shied away from the possibility of taking a meaningful step towards a more just society.

These instances are, in many ways, much more revealing of about students’ underlying political concerns–how they live and breathe citizenship–than are what boxes they will-or-would choose to check on November 8. This election is of immense importance, and I desperately hope everyone in the Parker community who can does check the right box on election day.

But fundamentally, voting for the right candidate and moderate increases in the marginal tax rates for the richest Americans, especially when the choice is easy, is not enough for us to call ourselves true liberals. Instead, we must be committed to social justice – even when it entails giving stuff up and doesn’t really help us look better.

I’m not sure whether we will become as passionately liberal as we often imagine ourselves to be. Nor am I positive that being passionately liberal is even the right thing. But unless we engage critically with the stances we take and how we follow through on those stances, our quiet conservatism will likely linger, whether we like it or not.