The term DEI, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion implies Non-diversity, Inequality, and Exclusion. DEI’s application is never consistent with its pitch.
Anyone bragging of diversity today is probably a phony or doesn’t know the contemporary meaning. Those committed to diversity today are not committed to doing the best or promoting the best. DEI is committed to promoting those who agree with the politics of DEI–and nothing else. Otherwise, DEI advocates would believe Clarence Thomas made the Supreme Court more diverse (and better) or that Larry Elder was the best choice for California governor or a potential Trump VP. Instead, DEI advocates celebrate Kentaji Brown-Jackson’s historic appointment to the Supreme Court and think Kamala Harris is wonderful while generally ignoring that both were chosen because they are black women (that’s not a racist statement; we were explicitly told the criteria before they were picked). Any media list of influential black Americans consistently excludes Thomas, despite his thirty years as an (outstanding) Supreme Court justice. When such lists include black politicians, they never include black conservatives like Elder, Senator Tim Scott, Condoleezza Rice, Ben Carson, Representative Allen West, or a litany of others. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/01/23-black-leaders-who-are-shaping-history-today.html
DEI advocates would not like anything Thomas Sowell, a wonderful black conservative thought leader, has taught or written. Ibrahim X Kendi, renown anti-racist consistently forwarded by one-channel media, is more in tune with the DEI crowd, yet Dr. Kendi cannot even define racism without using the term itself. There is no comparison between these two thinkers (sample from Dr. Sowell: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/its-a-saturday-morning-bonus-podcast-for-01-20-24/id1253076699?i=1000642318482)
DEI advocates from sixteen years ago did not applaud Sarah Palin as ground-breaking identity pick for John McCain , but the DEI crowd is delighted with ground-breaking identity hires of Pete Buttigieg and Rachel Levine. The DEI crowd gushes about Michelle Obama bringing class and beauty to the White House, but never acknowledges Melania Trump was a professional model; for some reason, no credit, no matter how superficial or tangential, can be given to your political opponent.
DEI sounds wonderful until the surface is scratched. We all want to right the wrongs of the past. We all want to be fair and just. We all want to live up to America’s founding promise. We all want to be righteous–or at least be perceived as righteous. We could all agree with a basic apolitical concept of DEI, but DEI advocates demonstrate time and again, they want their own diversity picks lauded and the Right’s diversity picks discredited. When the Right plays the DEI game or when they simply put forth better people than the Left’s identity hires, they still lose the PR battle; the Right’s choices are ignored or discredited by the one-channel media. DEI is never about laudable, righteous goals or helping the people it purports to help.
“What I care about is the reality of goodness, not the perception of it. And what I see all over the place is people who care about looking good, while doing evil,” Elon Musk to Andrew Ross Sorkin, November 30, 2023
DEI is designed solely to empower one political party. DEI confirms your bona-fides as an anti-racist (or anti-whatever), but, in fact, DEI itself is the bigoted, misguided, sometimes evil policy.
In 2021, DEI advocates thought it righteous to use race as a criteria to distribute limited supplies of the COVID vaccine even though race is not a significant factor in contracting COVID (factors such as age and weight are far more significant).
DEI advocates believe it is just to have unequal college entrance standards for different ethnicities. This practice is certainly not fair for those discriminated against nor does it help those candidates who squeak in at the margins (and struggle to compete at an academic institution they are mismatched with).
harvards-gatekeeper-reveals-sat-cutoff-scores-based-on-race
Harvard sends recruitment letters to African-American, Native American and Hispanic high schoolers with mid-range SAT scores, around 1100 on math and verbal combined out of a possible 1600, CNN reported.
Asian-Americans only receive a recruitment letter if they score at least 250 points higher — 1350 for women, and 1380 for men.
The SAT problem is being “corrected” by encouraging colleges to ignore SAT scores when selecting applicants.
DEI advocates believe it righteous to hire based on race in an effort to correct for prior racially motivated hiring practices:
‘The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination. The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.’ Dr. Ibrahim X Kendi, Director of the Center for Antiracist Research, Boston University
In other words: stop racism by practicing more racism. What could go wrong?
The following statistics demonstrate DEI’s failure. In 2001, before DEI took sway, polling showed race relations were not so bad. Today’s results are monumentally worse.
In 2001, 70% of black Americans said race relations were somewhat or very good. Twenty years later, the number was 33%. White Americans were at 70% also in 2002 and by 2021 the number had fallen to 43%.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1687/Race-Relations.aspx
What has happened? Did we return to slavery or Jim Crowe in the 21st Century?
I have watched the change throughout my lifetime. I grew up in the South in the 1970s; racism was on the decline. My peers accepted the integration of the races and rejected the ugly practices of just twenty years earlier.
Time heals all wounds–but politics intervened to reverse that trend. In the late 1990’s, under the Clinton Administration, the term “diversity” was introduced. As a government employee, I participated in the first diversity training. It was nonsense initially and the nonsense has mushroomed. All government agencies and large businesses today push diversity on employees; I take the same silly diversity training course annually. Every large organization now has a sizeable DEI office and policies to enforce their worldview. It is a great plan: call us all bigots, provide your nonsensical solutions, and tell us we better conform or else.
In the last few years, even the NFL has pushed this nonsense on the public. Were it helping, I could tolerate the supposedly good intentions. However, when the DEI push began, 7 in 10 Americans believed race relations were on a good footing. Now that number has fallen to 4 in 10, both whites and blacks recognizing the decline. DEI is making life better? Liberals will tell you more DEI is still needed.
Dr. Gay is Targeted?
DEI advocates do not care Blaze TV host, Jason Whitlock was labeled “worse than a white supremacist” by ESPN personality Steven A Smith. This charge is based on a personal feud, but if this were said about Dr. Kendi, Michele Obama, or other black Leftist, it would labeled racist. Labeling Whitlock and other black conservatives as “traitors to the race” is far more problematic.
Abdullah of Black Lives Matter: “Anytime you put a Black face on white supremacy, which is what Larry Elder is, there are people who will utilize that as an opportunity to deny white supremacy. They say, ‘How could this be white supremacy? This is a Black man.’ But everything that he’s pushing, everything that he stands for, he is advancing white supremacy.”
https://www.newsweek.com/forty-years-attacks-slurs-against-justice-thomas-opinion-1705248
Russell Adams, chairman of Howard University’s department of Afro-American studies, said, “His marrying a white woman is a sign of his rejection of the black community.” Barbara Reynolds, a USA Today columnist, wrote Thomas has “already said no to blacks; he has already said if he can’t paint himself white, he’ll think white and marry a white woman.”
Justice Thurgood Marshall was married to an Asian-American woman. James Earl Jones, Michael Jordan, Sidney Poitier, Richard Pryor and Quincy Jones all married white women, and no civil rights leader said anything remotely similar to this despicable smear. Incoming Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is married to a white man, and no one would begrudge her for it—nor should they. But for the Left, it’s okay to claim that Justice Thomas hates black people because he married a white woman.
The message is clear: Thomas is a traitor to his race because he thinks his own thoughts.
Criticism of Thomas has been de rigueur for thirty years (along with any other black conservative), but after five minutes every one-channel media outlet (all DEI advocates) claimed racism for criticizing Harvard President Gay. Sorry, she was fairly criticized for tacitly supporting Anti-Semitism (poison-ivy-league).
Congresswoman Stefanik: And Dr. Gay at Harvard? Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules of bullying and harassment? Yes or no?
President Gay: It can be depending on the context.
Congresswoman Stefanik: What’s the context?
President Gay: Targeted at an individual targeted, as at an individual.
Congresswoman Stefanik: It’s targeted at Jewish students, Jewish individuals. Do you understand your testimony is dehumanizing them? Do you understand that dehumanization is part of antisemitism? I will ask you one more time. Does calling for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s rules of bullying and harassment? Yes or no?
President Gay: Anti-Semitic rhetoric when it crosses into conduct, that amounts to bullying, harassment, intimidation, that is actionable conduct, and we do take action.
I found these comments sickening, yet 511 Harvard faculty, more than half of their entire faculty, defended Dr. Gay by invoking the term “diversity”:
“The critical work of defending a culture of free inquiry in our diverse community cannot proceed if we let its shape be dictated by outside forces,”
Diversity is the flag they defend no matter what. They must never admit DEI is problematic. Diversity must always be moving in the positive direction or something has gone wrong. Whitlock, Elder, Thomas, and other black conservatives do not count, however.
Dr. Gay disgraced her institution and academia in general, but, Dr. Gay is a black liberal and that makes all the difference. She says genocide of the Jews is not quite as bad as it sounds, yet, some say the criticism is only about race:
If the original statement was not problematic enough, Dr. Gay also came under fire for being a serial plagiarist. There are ample reasons for her removal unrelated to race. Why go to such lengths to defend this person?
Dr. Gay in her career had not written any books and has published just 11 articles. Among that small body of work, the Washington Free Beacon uncovered 50 instances of plagiarism. It seems she had become accustomed to the practice. The question to assess, as Dr. Kendi puts it, is: why should the university president be held to a lower standard than students?
A CNN anchor defended Dr. Gay as well, saying: “She wasn’t accused of stealing anyone’s ideas. She has been accused of copying other people’s writings without attribution.” Dr. Gay is defended because of her race, but her supporters claim she is being attacked because of her race.
When I hear Dr. Kendi speak, I think “racist” not “anti-racist”. Please don’t let facts trouble you when defending DEI.
- Dr. Liz McGill of the University of Pennsylvania who testified to Congress alongside Dr. Gay and whose responses were equally bad resigned first; she is white.
- Harvard already set a precedent years earlier. Larry Summers, a former Harvard president, also white, was forced to resign when he talked of differences between men and women with regard to math and science skills (something theoretically possible, but politically unpalatable).
- In 2023, the Stanford president, also white, was forced to resign for similar problems with academic integrity.
Still, listen to experts like Dr. Kendi and you will be fine.
Dr. Gay should have been fired for her comments to Congress, but it took the plagiarism to do her in. I think it is legitimate to ask: how did she become the university president? She never published a single book in a profession which lives and dies by the term “publish or perish”.
I agree with Jamele Hill (right panel) that affirmative action hire does not mean under-qualified. Clarence Thomas may have been selected because he was black, but he was highly qualified. Barrack Obama was elected to the presidency twice. Tens of millions of Americans who voted for him believed he was qualified. Dr. Gay, however, does appear to be an under-qualified affirmative action hire. Defending her after facts are established is the racist action.
This is a lie. It was proven. Harvard issued corrections to her papers.
Why issue “corrections” if there wasn’t anything to the charge? Why re-define plagiarism as “duplicated the language without quotation marks”? It seems clear they are attempting to hide something. Don’t let me interfere with your racism, Ms. Hill.
I wonder if Dr. Kimbrough, Dr. Kendi, Jamele Hill, the ladies on The View, and the rest of one-channel media would align a defense for the oft-unfairly maligned Justice Thomas? What’s their delay?
Inclusion or Exclusion?
Boston mayor, Michelle Wu, was recently criticized for promoting an “Elected of Color” party.
“There are many, many events that are private events for all different sorts of groups, and so we’ve clarified that and look forward to seeing everyone at one of the other dozens of opportunities to celebrate the holidays together,” Wu said in video from NBC 10.
This rhetoric sounds good, but we can be sure there is no “elected but not colored” party, not that there should be one in any case. I doubt there is a government sponsored “Irish only” party, even though Boston has a large Irish population. Furthermore, the Irish were discriminated against a hundred years ago in places like Boston. Do we have to correct for this past racism?
It is also interesting to note Mayor Wu’s own Caucasian husband should be excluded from this party. Why is this exclusionary policy, done in the name of inclusion, tolerated? One defender of Wu said the following:
“It’s not at all divisive,” Louijeune told the station. “It’s creating spaces for people and communities and identities with shared experiences to come together.”
Whites have no shared experience with nonwhites? No white person has ever been excluded or treated badly? I have experienced a steady stream of racist attacks from our media and politicians directed at whites during the last few years. The following is an extreme example, but there are countless similar sentiments throughout media and academia.
on having whiteness by donald moss – Bing
Whiteness is a condition one first acquires and then one has—a malignant, parasitic-like condition to which “white” people have a particular susceptibility. The condition is foundational, generating characteristic ways of being in one’s body, in one’s mind, and in one’s world. Parasitic Whiteness renders its hosts’ appetites voracious, insatiable, and perverse. These deformed appetites particularly target nonwhite peoples. Once established, these appetites are nearly impossible to eliminate. Effective treatment consists of a combination of psychic and social-historical interventions. Such interventions can reasonably aim only to reshape Whiteness’s infiltrated appetites—to reduce their intensity, redistribute their aims, and occasionally turn those aims toward the work of reparation. When remembered and represented, the ravages wreaked by the chronic condition can function either as warning (“never again”) or as temptation (“great again”). Memorialization alone, therefore, is no guarantee against regression. There is not yet a permanent cure.
Dr Donald Moss teaches psychoanalysis at the New York Psychoanalytic Institute and the San Francisco Center for Psychoanalysis. According to the American Psychoanalytic Association, he has studied “clinical/ theoretical/ activist perspectives” in psychoanalysis since the 1980s. Moss has also written several articles for other academic journals.
There are plenty of common complaints among all races.
Perhaps we should return to Dr. King’s vision of a color-blind society?
The Army desires proportional representation of all races in the military, but taking race into consideration is proving counter-productive.
Report: Army ‘Baffled’ by Sharp Decline in White Recruits in Last 5 Years (breitbart.com)
The Army’s recruiting of white soldiers in 2023 had dropped almost by half in the last five years, according to a report.
That dramatic decline has coincided with a push by the service to increase recruitment of a more diverse population, according to a report.
The decline of white recruits has also coincided with the Army missing its target of 65,000 recruits in 2023 by 10,000.
Dr. King’s vision of a color-blind society has been abandoned. DEI divides us continually, reminds us of our differences and highlights suffering from only some groups, ignoring others. When you only have one tool, a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
The Google DEI Chief speaking of recent shootings, one in which ten black people were killed, one which targeted a Taiwanese church, and another a Korean owned businesses said the following:
In this case, it’s for the Black community to come together to mourn together. We also recently supported our Asian community because of what happened at the Laguna Woods Church in California. The word I will use here is attunement. We’re very attuned to what’s impacting our communities externally and internally.
The victims’ race is irrelevant, but DEI folks cannot stop injecting race into every discussion. There were more than 1,200 victims in Israel in October, hardly any of them black, Chinese, or Korean. Does she speak of them or ignore them because she believes they are “white privileged”? Nobody is immune to death, suffering, or victimization. We all experience a turn in the barrel at some point in our lives. Without race issues being front and center, and DEI being a remedy, DEI directors have no reason for a job.
With our racial-equity commitments, we set goals for leadership and then we set goals to more than double the population of Black employees at Google.
Google, the Army, Harvard, universities, and others should do what is best for their business model and quit paying homage to DEI. The Army followed DEI and wound up excluding whites, not increasing other groups. Does this decline in numbers improve national security?
In a broad spectrum, we should see proportional representation among groups, but when narrowing the focus to one company, one industry, one university, etc. there are natural variations. I am not alarmed because the Chinese restaurant I enjoy has mainly Chinese employees. Blacks are 12.5% of the US population, yet some businesses employ more than 12.5% (the NBA, for example) and some fewer (the NHL, for example). There is no problem with those variations. This is the meaning of the term average. To force every institution to meet the average will lead to more mismatches. In fact, quality is diminished when forcing “equitable” racial proportion across the board.
Our politicians sell the notion of white privilege. In my youth, I recognized politicians bought votes by appealing to our financial interest: cutting taxes or building boondoggles in our neighborhood, bringing a big employer to town. Today, they still buy votes, but in a different manner. They tell us we are not getting ahead because someone else did at our expense. Blame the white racists. If white yourself, absolve yourself by recognizing your white privilege. Say the notion of “white privilege” is nonsense, and you are targeted as the racist. Many stay silent or buy in to avoid the label. Some voters benefit from this scheme and so the buying of votes continues.
DEI is the new lie provided. We all need to recognize the problem.
[Dr. Jordan] Peterson stated that Canada’s DIE (Diversity, Inclusivity and Equity) mandates are harmful to his “qualified and supremely trained” straight while male students, who would “face a negligible chance of being offered university research positions, despite stellar scientific dossiers.”
Florida as well recognizes the problem and is combating the racism of DEI:
Seek the Truth 
One thought on “DEI Dystopia”