Mentioned in the article, maybe. But it’s common knowledge that most faculty today are de facto activists, they just done self identify as such usually.
Listen to the recent pinker mearsheimer debate. Pinker would be a good person to advocate for the triumph of enlightenment values and where else would those values be most evident than the academy, and yet Jewish students are made to cower in fear at the student mobs tolerated, if not in effect manufactured by the educators at the nations’ highest institutions, Harvard, Penn, MIT… I know people who were in forced out of grad school for not engaging in activism, let alone committing the ultimate sin, having heterodox views. Perhaps that’s less common in STEM, where politics are non-essential, but it’s de rigeur in social sciences and I’d imagine much of the humanities. It’s common knowledge in many circles that you’ll get different education at Claremont vs berkeley.
Berkeley has had the left leaning historical reputation from the days of the free speech movement and Vietnam protests. But these days (it-least from an outsiders view) it actually seems more grounded since it's a public school & doesn't do race based admissions (Berkeley is 35% asian & 20% white vs CMC is 16% asian and 35% white)[1][2]
“I know people who were in forced out of grad school for not engaging in activism”
Really?
I also don’t think the school needs to manufacture student mobs. People get these opinions from the internet far more than school imo. Furthermore, if Jewish students were cowering, which I doubt, it wouldn’t invalidate the mob’s reason for forming, which is in response to an ongoing genocide. I’m glad the school doesn’t crack down on opposition to such.
Is it common knowledge? My understanding is that it's generally the administrators and students who are the main forces of activism on campus, not the faculty (outside of some departments).