I have insider information on MIT, but not on this specific situation.
In general, I would describe much of cancel culture not as a grassroots movement, so much as an astroturf movement. It gives entrenched powers an extrajudicial process to target people.
Abbot spoke out against legacy / alumni / etc. admissions. I suspect that, or something similar, was the real crime. MIT isn't huge into legacy / alumni admissions, so I suspect the mob got kicked off by somebody else (Harvard, just up the river, is big into legacy / alumni, would find this threatening, and leaderships are joined at the hip).
In general, I would describe much of cancel culture not as a grassroots movement, so much as an astroturf movement. It gives entrenched powers an extrajudicial process to target people.
Abbot spoke out against legacy / alumni / etc. admissions. I suspect that, or something similar, was the real crime. MIT isn't huge into legacy / alumni admissions, so I suspect the mob got kicked off by somebody else (Harvard, just up the river, is big into legacy / alumni, would find this threatening, and leaderships are joined at the hip).