I think that one of the greatest strengths of the university system is the idea that "offensive" ideas can be debated. An enormous amount of knowledge has been gotten from heresy, and I would argue that universities have been so central in the spread of knowledge precisely because they encourage (or at least tolerate) people who go against the grain.
This has disappeared, and I think that it leads to bad ideas winning.
One of the reasons why the US has such a strong protection toward speech, especially political and ideological speech, is that the Founding Fathers and their successors recognized the unpalatability of conflicting ideas and gave them the strongest possible protection. They recognized that such protection would give assholes the ability to say horrible, offensive things, and they believed that such a side effect was far better than the alternative - stifling free expression and allowing bad ideas to win because their proponents were better represented, better connected, or just flat-out more willing to suppress the other side's viewpoints.
The fact that these students are completely ignorant of this history is amusing because our modern academic tradition was based entirely off of this belief in a "marketplace of ideas."
Ben Franklin said, "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
I'd love to see what those exact same students would say if the prevailing attitude changed and a massive wave of right-wing ideology took over campus politics. I'm sure that they'd be crying about how their self-evident right to self-expression was being horribly violated. Poor things.