If you're anything like me, the disdain you have for the Ivy League Bubble™ — a veritable navel-gazing echo chamber — cannot be overstated. This article details just one of too-many-to-count examples of why you — and I — feel the way we do.
Anyway, for the purpose of this article, let's start with Princeton, move to Yale, then circle back to Princeton.
Recently, the Princetonians for Free Speech (PFS) announced the release of a "first-of-its-kind" study — finding that 98 percent of reported political contributions from current Princeton faculty went to Democrat candidates or affiliated groups during the 2023–2024 election cycle.
I know — try to control your shock and amazement.
So where did the remaining 2 percent go? Independent candidates and affiliated groups received the remaining 2 percent, while Republican candidates and affiliated groups received zero.
This part of the announcement made me laugh out loud. No, really.
PFS said the findings point to a near-total absence of viewpoint diversity among the university's faculty.
I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but it doesn't take an Ivy League "scholar" to know that of course they've reached a near-total absence of viewpoint diversity — which has been a goal of many, if not most, public universities across America for years. Moreover, it's tantamount to nirvana in the Ivy League.
George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley weighed in on the announcement in a Friday column:
At schools like Yale and Princeton, they have achieved near 100% for Democrats (with only a couple of percent going for independent or socialist causes). Yet, if you ask faculty about the purging of their ranks, they will often shrug and say that they just cannot find a conservative or libertarian who is intellectually worthy of an appointment to their schools. It was the same absurd rationalization that was once used to justify not hiring minorities or women.
I just had a debate with a William & Mary law professor who admitted there is no other rational explanation for the virtual absence of conservatives and libertarians than systemic bias. Indeed, if a company were to go to court to say that there was nothing intentional in a virtual absence of minority employees, it would be laughed out of court.
Precisely — the final sentence.
And What of Yale?
In a word, the same story.
In January, the Yale Daily News reviewed more than 7,000 Federal Election Commission filings from 2025 listing Yale as the employer: “Of 1,099 filings that included ‘professor’ in their occupation, 97.6 percent of the donations went to Democrats, while the remaining 2.4 percent went to independent candidates or groups,” the student newspaper reported Jan. 14.”
The study reinforces the recent Buckley Institute report, which found that, of the 43 departments surveyed, 27 entire departments contained zero Republican professors.
Even allowing for the possibility that the analysis missed a few contributions, that would have near-zero impact on the larger picture. The numbers reveal an extraordinary — yet totally predictable political imbalance among the Yale and Princeton faculties; one that is difficult (impossible) to reconcile with the broader notion of intellectual and viewpoint diversity. Moreover, the Left's definition of "intellectual and viewpoint diversity" doesn't square with that of the objective among us.
Turley provided a bit of relevant "groupthink" in academia:
Professors often express shock at the thought that there would be any political or ideological litmus test for hiring. I have also opposed such measures. However, the hypocrisy is crushing. Today’s faculty are responsible for a near-complete ideological purging of their ranks.
They have created a hostile environment for anyone with conservative or libertarian viewpoints, including students who rarely have the opportunity to hear from a professor from a center-right perspective at most schools.
So, here's the thing:
Is there any question that the political upheaval we're now seeing in the Democrat Party is, in part, the spawn of Ivy League indoctrination metastasizing in younger, "know-it-all," left-wing elitists?
Of course not — meanwhile, the song remains the same.