Sort of right- He is trying poorly to make the case that old-school academic liberals are becoming a minority- and are being pushed out by what he calls
" the “far left,” the “post-colonial left” or what I call POCOFO, an acronym for "post-colonial, post-Foucault"
What he can't see you does not understand is the so-called POCOFO are simply neo-Marxist.
I only read the excerpt but my hot take is that he makes the same mistake that guys like Dennis Prager make, which is that he sees too much of a distinction between leftists and modern so-called liberals.
He’s right that the left’s true enemy is the classical liberalism that came out of the Enlightenment. Where he’s wrong is in thinking that that kind of liberalism is embodied by today’s so-called “liberals” when in fact it’s embodied primarily by American political conservatives as a matter of consistently applied principle.
So called “liberal” academics are just leftists who are too weak minded to take their leftist premises to their logical conclusions. Thus they have areas where they’re hesitant to take the full leftist plunge, and in these areas they resemble conservatives aka classical liberals. For instance “liberal” academics have lagged behind their leftist vanguard in repudiating free speech even though a consistent application of leftist principle requires its repudiation.
In decades past, committed leftists would have seen these “liberals” as useful idiots to be allied with in a united front kind of way to take over the campuses. But now that the left has won that war, “liberals” have become truly useless and are starting to be seen as de facto accidental conservatives to be marginalized or destroyed in the left’s mopping up operations.