Equity Diversity And Inclusion Quotes

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.

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.

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.

It is relatively easy to point fingers at political figures whose leadership tactics resulted in diminished optimism and increased despair during a time when millions of souls were starving for the exact opposite. It is not so easy to ask how one may have contributed to the creation and maintenance of the culture of disregard and discord which helped spawn the tragedy in the first place.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.