In November 2020, Shelby Steele, the Robert J. and Marion E. Oster Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, characterized the Black Lives Matter movement in a Wall Street Journal opinion as “inauthentic,” writing that “Blacks…put themselves forward as victims… to make their case for entitlements.” Steele’s conservative perspective is just one example of the slew of right-wing commentary produced by Stanford’s Hoover Institution.
Ironically, just a few hundred feet away from Hoover is Stanford’s Green Library, where an over 100-foot banner with the words “Know Justice, Know Peace” once draped. The pervasive Black Lives Matter protest chant stands starkly opposed to popular Hoover ideology, a juxtaposition that is fundamental to Stanford’s political culture and history.
Consider, for instance, the infamous Stanford commencement “wacky walk,” a nontraditional procession where graduates wear silly and humorous costumes to receive their diplomas. Compared to the more uptight and formal traditions of elite East Coast universities such as Harvard or Princeton, Stanford appears relatively progressive and boldly nontraditional. Then again, this alternative culture is not entirely representative of Stanford.
Some of the most popular leaders of America’s new-right movement include billionaire entrepreneur Peter Thiel and Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri who were — not too long ago — Stanford undergraduates. Thiel, a major-right wing donor, founded The Stanford Review, a prominent conservative political journal boasting many members across the university. The publication was also once staffed by President Trump’s pick for NIH Director, Dr. Jay Battacharya.
Still, Stanford’s geographic location, at the heart of Silicon Valley and just 35 miles from the liberal epicenter that is San Francisco, is fertile ground for left-wing perspectives. Stanford students, similar to their peers at other elite institutions, mounted a pro-Palestinian encampment last spring and the University reads a Native American land acknowledgment before official events. While The Stanford Daily labels itself as “an independent daily newspaper,” a media bias and fact check service identified a “center-left” bias in the paper’s “story selection that slightly favors left-leaning issues.”
Although the majority of Stanford students carry a left-wing affiliation, reflected in The Stanford Daily and student activism, the robust history of The Stanford Review provides a unique counterweight to this dominant political culture.
Stanford administration is even more politically divided when compared to other universities. For instance, the University of California, Berkeley does not house any conservative think tank even comparable to the funding and notoriety of Hoover. Berkeley also holds a strained relationship with most conservatives, settling a $70,000 lawsuit over “secret or unfairly restrictive policies toward conservative speakers.” Berkeley’s political culture and institutions skew heavily left, placing fourth on ABC News’ most liberal colleges in America list. On the East Coast, students at Yale University generally lean liberal; However, unlike Stanford, Yale University does not exhibit such a multitude of nontraditional practices that optically challenge its conservative history.
While the distribution of students’ political ideologies at Stanford may not significantly differ from those at their peer universities, the coexistence of both strong nonconformist traditions and conservative institutions on the administrative level create a unique dynamic.
This tension is not a recent development. Founding President of Stanford and eugenicist David Starr Jordan opened enrollment to female students in 1891, making Stanford one of the first private universities in the nation to be co-educational. “Most members of the ‘’62 Seven,’ who were, at the time, the largest cohort of African American freshman in Stanford’s history, encountered little outright hostility, and few [those] interviewed recall overtly racist incidents directed at them.” Stanford was both at the forefront of educational equality and discriminatory beliefs.
How should Stanford’s distinctive blend of old and new, liberal and conservative, be evaluated? Is this identity crisis oddly beneficial? As a freshman only a quarter into my Stanford education, I believe one has to perform quite the mental gymnastics to argue the contrary. Stanford’s indecisive identity, split between two polarized ideologies, is refreshing. We are unable to stereotype the typical “Stanford” student, and it is this ambiguity, unpredictability and freedom of thought that constitutes Stanford’s identity.
We often seek to solve “identity crises,” create consistency and ease the ideological turbulence. However, when it comes to Stanford’s fractured identity, it is one “crisis” I hope will continue to confuse.
This article has been updated to reflect that Stanford wasn’t officially desegregated in 1962. The University has never been formally segregated.