Equity And Diversity Quotes

Maybe the word hasn’t been invented yet – that thing beyond diversity. We often define movements by what they’re against, but the final goal is greater than the powers it dismantles, deeper than any statistic. It’s something like equity – a commitment to harvesting a narrative language so broad it has no face, no name.

Progressives seem to believe that if they say the words “diversity, inclusion, and equity” often enough, all problems will be solved.

If your voice didn’t hold any power, people wouldn’t work so hard to make you feel so small.

Diversity is being invited to the dance. Inclusion is being asked to Dance. Equity is allowing you to choose the Music.

Imagine a young Isaac Newton time-travelling from 1670s England to teach Harvard undergrads in 2017. After the time-jump, Newton still has an obsessive, paranoid personality, with Asperger’s syndrome, a bad stutter, unstable moods, and episodes of psychotic mania and depression. But now he’s subject to Harvard’s speech codes that prohibit any “disrespect for the dignity of others”; any violations will get him in trouble with Harvard’s Inquisition (the ‘Office for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion’). Newton also wants to publish Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, to explain the laws of motion governing the universe. But his literary agent explains that he can’t get a decent book deal until Newton builds his ‘author platform’ to include at least 20k Twitter followers – without provoking any backlash for airing his eccentric views on ancient Greek alchemy, Biblical cryptography, fiat currency, Jewish mysticism, or how to predict the exact date of the Apocalypse. Newton wouldn’t last long as a ‘public intellectual’ in modern American culture. Sooner or later, he would say ‘offensive’ things that get reported to Harvard and that get picked up by mainstream media as moral-outrage clickbait. His eccentric, ornery awkwardness would lead to swift expulsion from academia, social media, and publishing. Result? On the upside, he’d drive some traffic through Huffpost, Buzzfeed, and Jezebel, and people would have a fresh controversy to virtue-signal about on Facebook. On the downside, we wouldn’t have Newton’s Laws of Motion.

The Ideological Conformity of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity Progressives seem to believe that if they say the words “diversity, inclusion, and equity” often enough, all problems will be solved. But of course only certain types of diversity, inclusion, and equity matter. Diversity based on race, ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity are foundational sacraments in the Cult of Diversity. On the other hand, intellectual and political diversity are heretical ideas that need to be expunged.

Meeting high standards on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion is simply good business.

Women and people of color who advocate for diversity and equity are often punished for their efforts in peer, team, and management evaluations. Ironically, the people who are not penalized in their evaluations for their diversity and equity efforts are—say it with me—white men.

Structuring jobs to fit personality is almost certain to lead to favoritism and conformity. And no organization can afford either. It needs equity and impersonal fairness in its personnel decisions. Or else it will either lose its good people or destroy their incentive. And it needs diversity. Or else it will lack the ability to change and the ability for dissent which (as Chapter 7 will discuss) the right decision demands.

To live sustainably, we must live efficiently - not misdirecting or squandering the earth's precious resources. To live efficiently, we must live peacefully for military expenditures represent an enormous diversion of resources from meeting basic human needs. To live peacefully, we must live with a reasonable degree of equity, or fairness, for it is unrealistic to think that, in a communications-rich world, a billion people will except living in absolute poverty while another billion live in conspicuous excess.

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion should be a top priority of every Chief People Officer — not as a matter of charity, but of corporate preservation.

The late Dr. Larry Hurtado, historian of early Christianity, in his wildly celebrated book Destroyer of the Gods, told the story of how a tiny Jewish sect of Jesus followers overcame the bastion of paganism and won over the Roman Empire in only a few centuries. His thesis was that it wasn’t the church’s relevance or relatability to the culture but its difference and distinctness that made it compelling to so many. The church was marked by five distinctive features, all of which made it stand out against the backdrop of the empire: The church was multiracial and multiethnic, with a high value for diversity, equity, and inclusion. The church was spread across socioeconomic lines as well, and there was a high value for caring for the poor; those with extra were expected to share with those with less. It was staunch in its active resistance to infanticide and abortion. It was resolute in its vision of marriage and sexuality as between one man and one woman for life. It was nonviolent, both on a personal level and a political level.

If we are not intentionally conscious in our communications, we are likely to cause unintentional harm.

You cannot understand someone whose life experience is only ever portrayed to you through movies.

Being in the dominant group, where the culture matches our culture, tends to lead to not only advantage, but also conscious laziness.

Many people in Nixon’s camp had genuine faith in affirmative action. It wasn’t designed to fail, but it wasn’t designed to succeed, either; the intent behind it was not rooted in a desire to help black people attain equal standing in society. It was riot insurance. It was a financial incentive for blacks to stay in their own communities and out of the suburbs.

Where there is patience there is strength. Where there is contentment there is bliss. Where there is integrity there is trust. Where there is joy there is happiness. Where there is kindness there is mercy. Where there is hope there is courage. Where there is love there is power. Where there is truth there is freedom. Where there is prudence there is caution. Where there is humility there is honor. Where there is charity there is goodness. Where there is justice there is peace. Where there is freedom there is responsibility. Where there is tolerance there is diversity. Where there is order there is harmony. Where there is tolerance there is diversity. Where there is silence there is stillness. Where there is health there is wealth. Where there is knowledge there is treasure. Where there is understanding there is equity. Where there is wisdom there is fortune.

The essence of equity is that each of us must develop the necessary skills to treat the collective of diverse people around us with the same degree of hope, aspiration, and positive expectation that we afford ourselves.

Historically the division of labour originates in two facts of nature: the ​inequality of human abilities and the variety of the external conditions of ​human life on earth. These two facts are really one: the diversity of ​Nature

Storytelling can be the most potent way to celebrate progress, inspire change, and bring about a more diverse world. If stories shape our perceptions, then perhaps the stories we never hear shape our biases through the lack of awareness they enable.

I understand that this work is demanding, complicated, and exhausting, but I also know that there is no better feeling than to see yourself and the world as they really are. When you have an awakening, the dance of discomfort in cross-cultural relationships begins to dissipate. You begin to shake the fear of truly being seen, and you learn to embrace not only your strengths but your humanness.

The great flaw of all these administrative techniques is that, in the name of equality and democracy, they function as a vast "antipolitics machine", sweeping vast realms of legitimate public debate out of the public sphere and into the arms of technical, administrative committees. They stand in the way of potentially bracing and instructive debates about social policy, the meaning of intelligence, the selection of elites, the value of equity and diversity, and the purpose of economic growth and development. They are, in short, the means by which technical and administrative elites attempt to convince a skeptical public--while excluding the public from debate--that they play no favorites, take no obscure discretionary action, and have no biases but are merely taking transparent technical calculations.

What may be learned from the rebuttals made by the defendants in New Jersey and from the protests that were sparked by the decision of the court? Much of the resistance, it appears, derives from a conservative anxiety that equity equates to "leveling." The fear that comes across in many of the letters and the editorials in the New Jersey press is that democratizing opportunity will undermine diversity and even elegance in our society and that the best schools will be dragged down to a sullen norm, a mediocre middle ground of uniformity. References to Eastern European socialism keep appearing in these letters.

Each and every one of us was created to carry out justice, judgment, truth and equity on the earth. It could be in different spheres of life, in various professions or in diverse gifting. But the mandate is clear, his nature must be reflected on the earth. If he is a God of justice, people must see his justice on earth. If he is a God of sound judgment, that sound mind must be revealed in people who identify themselves with him on daily basis. If God is truth, that truth must reign supreme on the earth even as he reigns over the universe. If fairness, impartiality, equity, are his essence, that should become dominant in any society

My Pronoun is People (Inclusivity Sonnet, 1266) My pronoun is people, I'm divergent, yet invincible. I am straight, I am queer; I am civilian, I am seer. Spirit of life, I - am universal! Call me disabled or differently able, Call me collective or individual. Fleshly forms I've got plenty, All run by same love and liberty - Culture supreme is inclusion. Each heart is a shelter for another, Each life is sanctuary for another. Blasting all traditions of divide into cinders with knowledge-dynamite, we shall emerge as each other's keeper. You ask, what am I - I say, I am human, Better yet, I'm human's idea of a human. I am but the human absolute - morally unbending 'n divinely cute - ever evolving testament to expansion.

It doesn't matter how much companies talk about equality and inclusiveness. What matters are the incentives it creates for employees. Those incentives speak louder than any speeches by the CEO, or bias training workshops, or posters on a wall.

Being accused of microaggression can be a harrowing experience. Manhattan Institute Fellow Heather Mac Donald relates in City Journal how an incident got out of hand at the University of California, Los Angeles, in 2013. Professor Emeritus Val Rust taught a dissertation preparation seminar in which arguments often erupted among students, such as over which victim ideologies deserved precedence. In one such discussion, white feminists were criticized for making "testimonial-style" claims of oppression to which Chicana feminists felt they were not entitled. In another, arguments over the political implications of word capitalization got out of hand. In a paper he returned to a student, Rust had changed the capitalization of "indigenous" to lowercase as called for in the Chicago Manual Style. The student felt this showed disrespect for her point of view. During the heated discussion that followed, Professor Rust leaned over and touched an agitated student's arm in a manner, Rust claims, that was meant to reassure and calm him down. It ignited a firestorm instead. The student, Kenjus Watston, jerked his arm away from Rust as if highly offended. Later, he and other "students of color", accompanied by reporters and photographers from UCLA's campus newspaper, made a surprise visit to Rust's classroom and confronted him with a "collective statement of Resistance by Graduate Students of Color". Then the college administration got involved. Dean Marcelo Suarez-Orozco sent out an e-mail citing "a series of troubling racial climate incidents" on campus, "most recently associated with [Rust's class]". Administrative justice was swift. Professor Rust was forced to teach the remainder of his class with three other professors, signaling that he was no longer trusted to teach "students of color". When Rust tried to smooth things over with another student who had criticized him for not apologizing to Watson, he reached out and touched him in a gesture of reconciliation. Again it backfired. That student filed criminal charges against Rust, who was suspended for the remainder of the academic year. As if to punctuate the students' victory and seal the professor's humiliation, UCLA appointed Watson as a "student researcher" to the committee investigating the incident. Watson turned the publicity from these events into a career, going on to codirect the Intergroup Dialogue Program at Occidental College in Los Angeles. As for the committee report, it recommended that UCLA create a new associate dean for equity and enhance the faculty's diversity training program. It was a total victory for the few students who had acted like bullies and the humiliating end of a career for a highly respected professor. It happened because the university could not appear to be unsympathetic to students who were, in the administration's worldview, merely following the university's official policies of diversity and multiculturalism.

You’ve heard these statistics, or something approximating them, before. No matter how many diversity, equity, and inclusion workshops your organization requires, if your leaders and managers aren’t truly diverse, then the monoculture will prevail.

[M]aking equity a pervading focus of educational reform and innovation will require colleges and universities to move beyond the goals of access and compositional diversity to conceive of and deliver all types of educational experiences, grounded in liberal education, that support the success of all students, regardless of the institutions they attend.

Your supply chain strategy should have a diversity, equity and inclusion component that intentionally caters for ‘supply chain staffing’, ‘supply chain vendors’ and ‘benefactors of your supply chain network’. This leverages the creative gusto of a diverse workforce, unlocks innovation from a rich supplier base and ensures solutions are inclusive and sensitive to the needs of diverse supply chain benefactors.

Tribune was the ultimate challenge and opportunity. We saw myriad ways to unlock value through the company’s diverse businesses. And that was intriguing now that nearly all the other bidders had left the room. We offered a proposal to sponsor a going-private transaction by an employee stock ownership plan, or ESOP. Under the terms of the deal, all of the outstanding shares of Tribune would be acquired for cash through a multistep series of transactions. Upon completion, 100 percent of the company’s stock would end up being held by the ESOP, which would be owned by company employees. So Tribune would be an employee-owned company. We would invest roughly $315 million in the company in exchange for a $225 million subordinated promissory note and the right to buy about 40 percent of Tribune’s equity in the future. Employees wouldn’t be required to invest anything in the ESOP, and the new structure would shift all eligible employees to an ESOP stock-vesting schedule. The pension plan was already frozen for new hires and active only for grandfathered employees, so we would be creating a new retirement vehicle that included more employees as the company went forward. An independent entity—one of the most experienced ESOP trustees in the country—would represent employees in all the ESOP negotiations. The ESOP structure would also unlock substantial value through immediate and long-term tax considerations.

I have lost track of the number of times when I chatted with DEI professionals or even diversity hires of different races and backgrounds who painfully told me that they are put in a position that makes them incapable of making any meaningful changes in their workplace. That their job is primarily to be tokenized and make the institution look and feel good, but in reality they – and any diverse person in their workplace – feel totally paralyzed in environments that look good, but are in fact extremely controlled by the few privileged at the top. [From “The Trump Age: Critical Questions” published on CounterPunch on June 23, 2023]

He understands intuitively that appeals to a new system of governance based on “diversity, equity, and inclusion” are a pretense for establishing a political order that is hostile to his values, even if he does not yet possess the vocabulary to pierce through the shell of euphemism and describe its essence.

Inclusive education principles advocate for learning environments that embrace and celebrate diversity and foster a sense of belonging and equity among all students.

Instead of looking at accommodations as a barrier, an inconvenience, see those shifts and changes as getting one step closer to all the compromises being made every minute of the day by a person with autism.

If it does not hurt you or others directly, why do you deny its existence? Why do you deny that this world is full of such rich colors? We do not know them all.

The theoretical frameworks we bring to our praxis and our own experiences as scholars of color coalesce with a fundamental assumption in ACL, that identity is central to our praxis as leaders, and that our work as scholars advocating for increased diversity of leadership in spaces of higher learning is very much informed by our own identities.

diverse range of asset classes (debt, equity, gold, etc.) as well as in more than one security (Reliance, Tata, Infosys, Hero, etc.) within

When I went to college, also in the South, I took every opportunity to celebrate my cultural background and to press for diversity efforts on campus. Still, I linked race mainly with notions of multiculturalism and inclusion and less with justice and equity.

The most common explanation by leaders and those in positions of influence is that equity, diversity, and inclusion take time. My question is, whose time – that of a human or a God? The scriptures tell us the God’s one day is equal to one thousand human years. So, if we are talking in terms of God’s time, it has only been six days. If we are talking in terms of human time, then recorded human history is six thousand years. How much longer are we expected to wait.

Difference was never the problem in and of itself—and Um-Helatians still have differences with each other, of opinion and otherwise. Of course they do! They’re people. But what shocks the young citizens of Um-Helat is the realization that, once, those differences of opinion involved differences in respect. That once, value was ascribed to some people, and not others. That once, humanity was acknowledged for some, and not others.

Our Filters are what we need to pay attention to, yet they are what many of us are oblivious to.

The vital question we each need to ask ourselves is not if but when and where I am contributing to disparities in my profession, in my system, in my community?

We think we are in conscious control and are making our own decisions when, in actuality, we aren’t.

We mistakenly believe our cultural behaviors are the good, right, and respectful behaviors. What convinces us of that misperception? Our Filters.

Our challenge is how to identify and talk about our differences, well, differently.

Unless we’re interacting with a mirror all day, we are interacting across differences.

It can feel as if we’re giving up our own values or giving in to the other person’s preferences. The reality is, it’s not giving up but adding on.

The systems within our organizations continue to churn out disparities and inequities, and all too often, those charged with fixing the problem look to the wrong source.

Organization after organization has created a culture of, for, and by only round holes, yet they say they want square and triangle and star pegs.

Equality applies the same rules and advantages to all in an attempt to treat everyone fairly. While used with the best of intentions, the results are rarely equal.

People in this land come from many others, and it shows in sheen of skin and kink of hair and plumpness of lip and hip. If one wanders the streets where the workers and artisans do their work, there are slightly more people with dark skin; if one strolls the corridors of the executive tower, there are a few extra done in pale. There is history rather than malice in this, and it is still being actively, intentionally corrected—because the people of Um-Helat are not naive believers in good intentions as the solution to all ills. No, there are no worshippers of mere tolerance here, nor desperate grovelers for that grudging pittance of respect which is diversity. Um-Helatians are learned enough to understand what must be done to make the world better, and pragmatic enough to actually enact it. Does that seem wrong to you? It should not. The trouble is that we have a bad habit, encouraged by those concealing ill intent, of insisting that people already suffering should be afflicted with further, unnecessary pain. This is the paradox of tolerance, the treason of free speech: We hesitate to admit that some people are just fucking evil and need to be stopped. This is Um-Helat, after all, and not that barbaric America.

Organisations are scrambling, and they assume DEI (Diversity, equity and inclusion) won't bring in revenue, so they give it the smallest budget. Then they allocate what little DEI money they do have to programs and events concerning hiring rather than retention, professional development, education, or training. That might help bring in new entry-level employees of color, but if you don't dedicate resources to retention and development, how are you going to help advance these workers to executive positions? If you don't invest in progress, no one is going to suddenly work miracles.

Universal healthcare ensures that all individuals have access to necessary medical services regardless of their ability to pay. This policy addresses the gaps and inequities in the current healthcare system, where millions of Americans remain uninsured or underinsured. Countries such as Canada and the United Kingdom provide successful examples of universal healthcare systems that deliver better health outcomes at lower costs compared to the U.S. system. Education policy is another area where progressive alternatives can counteract Project 2025’s agenda. Investing in public education, increasing funding for schools in underserved communities, and promoting inclusive curricula that reflect the diversity of American society are essential steps toward achieving educational equity. Progressive education policies prioritize the needs of students and educators over privatization efforts and standardized testing, ensuring that all children have access to a high-quality education.

Your generals and admirals are spending money on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs when any sane leader would be applying that bandwidth to combat readiness. Ship collisions tell the story; the Fitzgerald and McCain collisions, one of your subs, the USS Connecticut, ran into an underwater mountain not far from here. All that only highlights the problem.

Inclusion is the story of sunlight falling equally on the garden of flowers (Diversity) and the gardeners (Inclusive Leaders) tending to the plants to grow and flower. Some plants need extra support, some need extra care and nutrition. The sun merely shining (Equality) cannot impact all equally unless they are made receptive (Equity). Only then, can these flowers bloom and bear fruits. Responsibility also rests with those who want to be included, by constantly upgrading themselves to be receptive to the efforts of inclusion. This is what sunflowers do. Diversity can be imposed; Inclusion is a choice. A choice which comes from love.

This is the time for the creative Man. Woman. Who must decide that She. He. Can live in peace. Racial and sexual justice on this earth. This is the time for you and me. African American. Whites. Latinos. Gays. Asians. Jews. Native Americans. Lesbians. Muslims. All of us must finally bury the elitism of race superiority the elitism of sexual superiority the elitism of economic superiority the elitism of religious superiority So we welcome you on the celebration of 218 years Philadelphia. America.

In our time, we do not have an all-powerful state forcing this on us. This dictatorship is far more subtle. Under soft totalitarianism, the media, academia, corporate America, and other institutions are practicing Newspeak and compelling the rest of us to engage in doublethink every day. Men have periods. The woman standing in front of you is to be called “he.” Diversity and inclusion means excluding those who object to ideological uniformity. Equity means treating persons unequally, regardless of their skills and achievements, to achieve an ideologically correct result.

they tend to follow a common pattern: The incident: Someone writes or says something that’s acceptable to most of society but blasphemy within SJF. The backlash: A major protest occurs both within the institution and on social media, often equating the offender’s words with harm and demanding punishment in the name of safety. The moment of truth: Leadership within the institution—in each case, an institution specifically built to play by liberal rules—is forced to either stand up for its liberal ideals or cede to mob demands. Leadership cedes to SJF: In many cases, leadership initially stands up for liberal values. But when the backlash persists, to avoid being guilty by association, leadership fires the target or retracts their words. Leadership affirms allegiance to SJF: Public statements say something like, “The incident is antithetical to our values. We vow that it will not happen again. We reaffirm our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

At the heart of every flourishing democracy is the unyielding commitment to free speech. It is the beacon that illuminates the path towards a more just and equitable society, where every citizen is empowered to participate in shaping the collective narrative. Embracing free speech isn't just about tolerating dissent; it's a celebration of intellectual diversity, a recognition that the strength of a nation lies in the unfettered expression of its people.

Freedom lies in being bold. The chains of social conditioning can only be broken by those who dare to challenge the status quo and redefine what leadership means beyond gender.

The most profound revolution of our era is the realisation that by shifting our internal mindset, we possess the power to transform the external realities of our lives.

Obstetricians working in inner-city hospitals report that black mothers have higher rates of complications during pregnancy and in delivery because of higher rates of morbid obesity, hypertension, and inattention to prenatal care and prenatal-care appointments. Packing those doctors off to diversity reeducation will not improve black childbirth outcomes.

Culture supreme is inclusion.

Watch out for words like “equity, diversity and inclusion,” or even “the People,” “the common good,” “the general welfare,” and “brotherhood of man.” When in the mouths of politicos, these are the watchwords of totalitarianism

Whenever you hear the words “inclusive,” “diverse,” and “equitable” (or diversity, equity, and inclusion), be ready for surveillance, punishment of the “privileged,” sacrifice of national citizens to global interests, and the labeling as “dangerous” and marking for (virtual) elimination those supposed members or leaders of “hate groups” who oppose such measures.

Diversity, equity and inclusion: this is the new language of totalitarianism. If you think such a notion far-fetched, find the watch-words of Soviet and Sino-Communist totalitarianism and compare them with this new set. Before “diversity,” “equity” and “inclusion,” the terms were “equality,” “the people,” “the common good,” and so forth.

Correll’s conclusions were confirmed in 2016 with the release of four studies that found either no antiblack bias in police shootings or a bias that favored blacks. Three of the studies—by Roland Fryer, Ted Miller, and the Center for Policing Equity—reviewed data on actual police use of force; a fourth put officers in a more sophisticated life-size video simulator than the computers that Correll uses.6 That study, led by the University of Washington’s Lois James, found that officers waited significantly longer before shooting an armed black target than an armed white target and were three times less likely to shoot an unarmed black target than an unarmed white target. James hypothesized that officers were second-guessing themselves when confronting black suspects because of the current climate around race and policing. Both experimental and data-based research, in other words, dispel the claim that police officers are killing blacks out of implicit bias. That has not stopped the implicit-bias juggernaut, however.

The report went on to recommend the bureaucracy inflation that is every school’s default response to racial protest: in this case, a new associate dean for equity and diversity, a permanent committee on equity and diversity, diversity training for the faculty, and a beefed-up grievance process for lodging complaints of racial discrimination, among other measures lifted directly from the protesters’ petition.

Peterson has stern advice for parents whose children are being taught white privilege, equity, diversity, inclusivity, and systemic racism: take them out of the class because they are not being educated but indoctrinated.

How have you mistaken the look of diversity for actual inclusivity and equity?

I believe in the radical equality of all human beings. No human is of greater or lesser value than anyone else. The word “radical” has in its beginnings the word “root,” meaning what is foundational. I believe the commitment to radical equality is the root, or foundation, of inclusive meeting practices and fair facilitation.

The show brilliantly depicts how the default Whiteness of tech development, a superficial corporate diversity ethos, and the prioritization of efficiency over equity work together to ensure that innovation produces social containment.5 The fact that Black employees are unable to use the elevators, doors, and water fountains or turn the lights on is treated as a minor inconvenience in service to a greater good. The absurdity goes further when, rather than removing the sensors, the company “blithely installs separate, manually operated drinking fountains for the convenience of the black employees,”6 an incisive illustration of the New Jim Code wherein tech advancement, posed as a solution, conjures a prior racial regime in the form of separate water fountains.

There are five elements of social interaction that activate strong threats and rewards in the brain, thus influencing how we react in given situations: standing, certainty, connection, control, and equity

We must object to any requirement of an orthodox Social Justice statement of diversity, equity, and inclusion, or mandatory diversity or equity training, just as we would object to public institutions that required a statement of Christian or Muslim belief or attendance of church or mosque.

[T]he education system in America is designed to keep wealth and resources for the privileged and to keep the poor and the crushed folks at the bottom, with rare exceptions usually amplified and promoted for PR purposes. If education’s primary purpose is to save people through knowledge and social mobility, then the millions of Americans, including many Black people, who don’t have access to good education as do the rich and privileged children getting prepped up early on for ivy league schools, is a clear indication that the American education is a huge failure.

If it is true that education is the main foundation of any society, it follows that the state of race in today’s America mirrors its education system.

Universities promote diversity. On April 24, 1997, 62 research universities led by Harvard bought a full-page advertisement in the New York Times that justified racial preferences in university admissions by explaining that diversity is a “value that is central to the very concept of education in our institutions.” Lee Bollinger, who has been president of the University of Michigan and of Columbia, once claimed that diversity “is as essential as the study of the Middle Ages, of international politics and of Shakespeare.” Many companies and universities have a “chief diversity officer” who reports directly to the president. In 2006, Michael J. Tate was vice president for equity and diversity of Washington State University. He had an annual budget of three million dollars, a full time staff of 55, and took part in the highest levels of university decision-making. There were similarly powerful “chief diversity officers” at Harvard, Berkeley, the University of Virginia, Brown, and the University of Michigan. In 2006, the University of Wisconsin at La Crosse decided that diversity was so important that its beneficiaries—students—should pay for it. It increased in-state tuition by 24 percent, from $5,555 to $6,875, to cover the costs of recruitment to increase diversity.

Investors generally fail to follow the most basic investment precepts. Instead of concentrating on the central issue of creating sensible long-term asset-allocation targets, investors too frequently focus on the unproductive diversions of security selection and market timing. Instead of constructing equity-oriented, well diversified, tax-sensitive portfolios, investors too frequently choose to mimic the conventional, poorly structured consensus

The reason diversity quotas or affirmative action initiatives exist is to open a door that might otherwise be shut. But opening that door just enough to let one person through and then letting it shut once more isn’t the progress we need.

Those with the least social capital and power shouldn’t be asked to instigate the most change.

Ever onward to equality.

Cultural diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) enables the generation of visions, missions, and objectives that will allow the United States of America to build back better!

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are business imperatives not social responsibility.

{D]iversity, equity, and inclusion' represents a new mode of institutional governance. Diversity is the new system of racial standing, equity is the new method of power transfer, inclusion is the new method of enforcement. All of this could be presented to institutional leadership in a language that appears to be soft, benign, tolerant, and open-minded — something that, combined with the threat of accusation, elite administrators were culturally incapable of resisting.

I confront the question of whether DEI initiatives are divisive and ineffective. The answer is yes on both counts, but not for the narratives propagated by the American ruling class of oligarchs. Rather, we should consider how DEI initiatives have worked just enough to keep the status quo intact for those at the top, while planting the seeds of division between a significant percentage of marginalized and impoverished white people and every other marginalized and impoverished group in the U.S. and beyond. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

In the end, we are left with this painful conundrum: we only need DEI initiatives because we don’t truly have a society that values diversity, we don’t have equitable workplaces and communities, and we don’t practice inclusion in the deep sense of the word. The day we have them weaved into the fabric of our human awareness is the day the need for such initiatives will cease to exist. Yet, to forcefully do away with DEI is a way to forcefully govern, discipline, and put each marginalized body and group of people in their right place – a place of servitude – through a culture of fear and terror spread by the privileged white oligarchs at the top. This is precisely why silence and retreat are much costlier than resisting not only what is being done to DEI, but how DEI has been done all along. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

Many DEI officers/professionals I have spoken to over the years have confirmed to me that they don’t feel they have any power to change the structures of the workplaces in which they work. They are given just enough power – along with a fancy job title – to appear as though they are making changes, but once and if they dare to confront real problems, they are often replaced or disciplined by the privileged whites who remain at the top of every institution and organization. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

Many people have asked me recently what I make of all the workplaces who were so quick to roll back on their DEI practices. My answer is that these are very likely the kind of workplaces that have abused, misapplied, and co-opted DEI initiatives all along. It is proof that they were never serious about such initiatives in the first place. For them, DEI work was just playing the game, and the game they play is quick to change when the rules of that game are changed. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

Many DEI trainings and narratives have indeed enabled or produced types of people who seem to be looking for excuses to be offended and to construe, sometimes genuine human slips, as intentional micro and macro aggressions. Even worse, the way things have been done has resulted in people who are quick to play identity cards anytime they are confronted with totally unrelated matters like being incompetent in doing their work or other unrelated professional and personal matters. I am in no way condoning or denying the existence of racism, sexism, and countless other forms of exclusions, marginalization, and even violence against so many vulnerable groups and individuals, but I also can’t in good faith ignore the darker side of this coin. For one side to be true, it doesn’t negate the other darker side. In many workplaces and university campuses, we have armies of people who overuse and even abuse the language of ‘feeling violated’ over things like someone mistakenly not referring to them as “they,” but they remain completely silent and unmoved by countless injustices on campus or at work, let alone about atrocities and genocides in the outside world. We have a type that wastes so much time giving themselves and others the ‘permission’ to indulge in selfish acts of complicity, indifference, and silence under the guise of ‘self-care.’ [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

Political correctness was never supposed to happen. Ever. The problem with politically correct language is already in the term itself: it corrects the language, and in doing so, it politicizes it through such imposed corrections. The problem with political correctness is that it corrects the language without correcting the conditions that produce and enable that language. In doing so, we lose two battles: the battle for correcting the conditions that produce the need for the language of political correctness, and the battle for creating awareness among those who think that using politically correct language is going to make any meaningful changes. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

It is not a secret that most American and Western institutions and workplaces are very much like mountains: the higher one climbs, the whiter they become. But this whiteness at the top should not be seen as representative of all white people. We must distinguish between the white people who are as marginalized, silenced, and impoverished just like many other groups, and the specific ruling class that is white and that in fact also includes a big percentage of people who only started passing as white in recent history. The latter fact is crucial to understand why the small percentage of privileged whites at the top don’t mind the narratives that bracket all white people together, because in doing so, they continue to use all whites as human shields, while benefiting from framing everyone else as an enemy of white people at large. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

We hear how diversity and equity are about lowering standards or doing away with them altogether. If DEI initiatives do the work they are supposed to do, they should not be lowering standards. Rather, they should revise and change standards in ways that take into consideration all groups who were never considered when these standards were made. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

The first problem with the word “diversity” is the word itself. Who is diverse in relation to whom? The way diversity is often framed in institutional domains implies that some people are diverse in relation to others. That some need to learn diversity while others have it and bring it to the table. This framing, I argue, has from the start driven a wedge between a significant percentage of marginalized and disadvantaged white people and other marginalized and disadvantaged groups—groups that should naturally be allies, not enemies. The only group that benefits from this divide is a small percentage of privileged whites who use the structure of whiteness to their full advantage. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

By hiding behind the overarching term “white privilege,” the small percentage of privileged whites have ensured the following: first, they remain disguised behind the veil of whiteness and thus maintain the status quo. Second, they ensure that most marginalized white people remain defensive—and come to their defense—whenever their wealth and power are threatened. Third, through the structure of “whiteness,” privileged whites ensure that a large percentage of disadvantaged white people see other groups fighting against similar socio-economic ills as enemies, not allies to unite with in their battle. As such, the first bold proposal I make, if we are serious about social change, is to replace “white privilege” with “privileged whites” to account for the many whites who are not privileged and distinguish them from those who are. The huge number of disadvantaged white people are allies in this battle against the privileged, wealthy ruling class who utilize countless “isms” and “phobias” as sorting devices, while using the term “white privilege” as a tool to prevent any potential allyship between many white people who are not part of their club, yet are misled to think that the problem is everyone else in society except the privileged whites…Precision in language makes a huge difference to ensure all social groups who need to unite and work together have clarity on what kind of changes are needed, and who exactly is blocking change and transformation. [From "Understanding the DEI Dismantlement” published on Counterpunch on January 31, 2025]

The most common explanation by leaders and those in positions of influence is that equity, diversity, and inclusion take time. My question is, whose time – that of a human or a God? The scriptures tell us that God’s one day is equal to one thousand human years. So, if we are talking in terms of God’s time, it has only been six days. If we are talking in terms of human time, then recorded human history is six thousand years. How much longer are we expected to wait.

Yes, I know what DEI stands for.” As does every Black woman in the workforce since 2020, when seemingly every industry discovered this magic combination of words. DEI means diversity, equity, and inclusion, sure. But it also means free labor to be given willingly to fix problems that we didn’t create. It means a box checked with no real change made.