So you’re a Conservative Republican and you’re against DEI. I wonder why.
Many Republicans have passed laws or forwarded bills against DEI initiatives in state universities. Also, some companies have terminated their DEI initiatives, along with their associated vice presidents and managers in the wake of the Supreme Court decision striking down Affirmative Action in college admissions. Basically, opponents of DEI have now conflated it with Affirmative Action. They are two different things, but they know that.
Using that conflation, Republican politicians are threatening legal action against companies that have DEI initiatives. Tom Cotton, senator from Arkansas, has threatened Target with legal action, claiming the company discriminates because of its initiative to increase Black employment by 20% and spend $2 billion on vendors of color. What’s wrong with this? Nothing. We all know it. How this initiative by Target is discriminatory is beyond me. If Black folk and vendors of color were traditionally kept out of employment and vendor contracts (they were and are), then who is this discriminating against when this is simply redress?
So why have Conservatives taken aim at DEI? Let’s break it down.
“D” stands for Diversity. Diversity is a good thing the vast majority of the time. When it comes to corporations and colleges, it’s still a good thing. You want a diversity of thought, while being on the same page. You want a diversity of thought in a democracy, well some of us do. You want a diversity of culture in a so-called Melting Pot. So what’s the problem?
If you’re against diversity, then you’re for its opposite: Homogeneity. Everything is the same. Everyone is the same. Everyone thinks the same. That’s not only boring, it stifles innovation, creativity, and contradicts The American Melting Pot. Maybe Republicans don’t believe in The Melting Pot anymore apparently.
“E” stands for Equity. This means having the quality of being fair or impartial. Fairness? Impartiality? Sound like good ideas to me. I want to live in a fair society. I want to be judged impartially for my actions. I want things that aren’t fair and impartial to be made so. What’s wrong with that? Nothing.
The opposite of Equity is Inequity. That means Unfairness and Partiality towards someone or something. Being unfair and partial leads to jealousy, resentment, anger, and hurt. Why would someone be for that?
“I” stands for Inclusion. It’s the state in which one is included in a group or structure. Also, it’s a practice or policy of providing equal access to opportunities and resources. Don’t know about you, but I think the definition is a good thing. If it makes sense, people should be included in things they were once shut out of, like opportunities and resources.
The opposite of Inclusion: Exclusion. The definition states, keeping folks out of a group or structure. That’s not nice. It means preventing access to opportunities and resources. That’s not good. Who’d want that?
Who wants Homogeneity, or Inequity, or Exclusion? And why? People who believe in Hierarchy, that’s who.
In a conservative society, Hierarchy is key. There needs to be a strong leader(s) and loyal followers. They believe some people best remember their role and their place, in a society, be it on top, or on the bottom. Unfortunately, many folks who believe in Hierarchy tend to believe some folks should be over others. They believe in homogeneity, inequality, and exclusion. They believe in In-groups and out-groups.
Diversity isn’t appreciated in a hierarchy. Similar thought and action are preferred because this supports the hierarchy.
Inequality supports hierarchy for obvious reasons. Hierarchy by its very nature is unequal. Those on the top are seen as more valuable than those in the middle, or the bottom. Need I say more?
The same goes for Exclusion. Under a hierarchy, there are the aforementioned in-groups and out-groups. It’s hard for someone in the out-group to move into the in-group. It’s difficult for someone to move up and down in a hierarchy. It’s hard for those on the bottom to move into the middle, towards the top. It’s hard for those in the middle to move into the upper tier. And as far as the top tier goes, there’s a tendency to exclude others from their tier. It’s the nature of the beast.
Politicians, like Tom Cotton, and associated pundits, believe in hierarchy, especially the hierarchies they belong to and receive their privilege from. Hierarchies give the likes of a Tom Cotton power. Cotton, and folks like him, don’t want to lose that power, or share it. To them, even sharing power is a partial loss. Engaging in DEI initiatives is considered a loss of power and control. This is why they see DEI as a threat. Otherwise, DEI initiatives don’t hurt anyone, they help all participants involved, even White folks. I’ve seen it personally in my own experience.
People who are against DEI tend to be White Nationalists, White Supremacists, and greedy corporatists. Why would somebody agree with those types? Americans are supposed to be better than this. Tom Cotton is supposed to be better than this.
Cotton’s mask of race-neutral hiring and admissions would be great if he really believed in it. DEI would be unnecessary if there was no racism or discrimination in America. But there is tons of racism, sexism, homophobia, and discrimination in university admissions, home loan lending, and in the workplace. Conservatives, like Cotton, want to pretend these things no longer exists to maintain power and not do the hard work of actually creating a real race-neutral society. But discrimination still exists in every corner of America That’s why we need DEI — and must fight to keep it.