Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes are widely implemented on university campuses, public institutions and large corporations though such programmes are now in decline internationally.
I always felt that DEI programmes, despite their good intentions, are particularly inappropriate for universities, where most research and teaching is conducted. DEI exerts a chilling effect on free expression of ideas in several legitimately contested areas, conflicting with the truth-seeking mission of the university.
Dictionary.com defines DEI as a conceptual framework promoting fair treatment and full participation of all people, especially in workplaces, including populations historically underrepresented or discriminated against because of background, identity, disability, etc.
Decent people abhor such discrimination and support reasonable legislation outlawing such practices. It may seem unreasonable, therefore, at first glance, to criticise DEI programmes in universities. And, let me be clear, I respect the good intentions behind these programmes. However, deeper analysis shows that DEI can be far more problematic than dictionary definitions imply.
The university’s mission is to discover new knowledge (truth) through research, to teach the existing body of knowledge to students and to foster their critical-thinking skills. Open inquiry and debate are essential for this mission and universities protect this atmosphere by operating a unique policy of academic freedom. This guarantees academic staff will not be penalised for promoting unpopular ideas they have developed through the application of their academic expertise.
DEI programmes are implemented in the spirit of PC/woke. Woke, an adjective derived from African-American vernacular English, means alertness to racial prejudice, social inequalities, sexism, LGBT rights, and more. Woke also promotes highly contested notions such as gender ideology, intersectionality, white privilege, safe spaces, micro-aggressions and critical race theory. Many people feel woke is frequently entertained to an unreasonable degree and feel uneasy with its promotion of identity politics.
University academics must be free to research/debate all ideas so long as they don’t infringe civil law. But DEI programmes advocate hotly contested policies in some/many areas as though they harmonise with established reality, eg mandatory rules for gender pronoun use. Academics who legitimately question these policies encounter fierce public criticism and, at the least, risk cancellation on social media. University authorities are reluctant to uphold academic freedom and many academics are intimidated into silence.
American University of Austin philosopher Dr Peter Boghossian claims DEI/Woke in practice completely inverts its dictionary definition (The Free Press April 7th, 2024). Boghossian is specifically addressing American DEI/Woke which is considerably more gung-ho than anything we see here but I think his views have significant value. I quote from his youtube.com videos — Woke in Plain English: “Equity” (youtube.com).
On diversity, he claims: “When the woke use the word diversity they mean people who look different but think alike. A black conservative for example would not be a diverse candidate because he doesn’t subscribe to the woke world view.”
On equity Boghossian claims: “Equity means making up for past discrimination with current discrimination. Certain individuals/groups must be discriminated against in order to make up for discrimination that other individuals/groups suffered in the past — the best candidate [for a job] is not judged solely on the basis of merit/ability, but on other characteristics like sex, sexual orientation or race”.
And regarding inclusion: “What the woke mean by inclusion is restricting speech. An inclusive space is a welcoming space, but to make people feel welcome you must make sure they are not offended and the best way to do this is to exclude certain ideas ... So, an inclusive space means an environment that restricts speech.”
American university woke was grievously wounded recently when the woke world view of Harvard University president Claudine Gay unravelled in public view. Many people were shocked to hear Gay’s evasive responses when, following raucous pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations in October 2023, she was asked if calling for genocide against Jews was counter to Harvard harassment policy. Gay resigned on January 2nd last.
This Harvard incident may also mark the beginning of the end of American DEI. After such events, politicians and senior executives feel emboldened to wind down DEI programmes. There are now 76 anti-DEI bills in more than 30 US state legislatures. DEI job numbers peaked in early 2023 but fell 5 per cent later that year and by 8 per cent so far in 2024.
Zoom recently terminated its internal DEI team. Meta, Tesla, Home Depot, Wayfair and other corporations started making deep cuts in 2023. It seems we are entering the twilight of the DEI era.
- William Reville is an emeritus professor of biochemistry at UCC