Legislatures Are Coming For DEI

It is slowly dawning on liberals across America that DEI is, in most contexts, illegal. The whole point of DEI is to discriminate against disfavored groups, and in favor of preferred groups. Liberals have a hard time understanding that there is anything wrong with this, but the courts–most notably, recently, in the Harvard and UNC cases–are beginning to set them straight.

In many states, legislators aren’t waiting for litigation to unfold. They are passing laws barring universities from spending money on DEI, disbanding DEI programs, and so on. Of course this is causing consternation in the world of higher education. For a glimpse of how the other side thinks, check out this piece in The Chronicle of Higher Education:

At least 14 states this year will consider legislation that could dismantle the ways college administrators attempt to correct historical and structural gender and racial disparities and make campus climates more inclusive, according to a Chronicle of Higher Education analysis.

That’s the party line. But DEI initiatives never are based on actual discrimination that was once carried out by the institution in question. That would actually be legal. Instead, they are intended to “correct” the fact that the world does not automatically employ race and gender quotas in bestowing good things. Instead, you have to work for them. And the idea that the discrimination mandated by DEI makes “campus climates more inclusive” is ridiculous. Many men, especially white men, are forgoing college precisely because they correctly feel excluded by DEI ideology.

While college administrators argue that they have a legal, moral, and financial obligation to more aggressively tackle forms of discrimination on campus…

Hold it right there! DEI has nothing to do with “tackling” actual discrimination on any campus. It demands that less qualified minorities be hired instead of more qualified white and Asian men and, often, women. That is the whole point. DEI doesn’t “tackle” discrimination, it viciously implements discrimination.

…and provide extra resources to historically marginalized employees and students — who will soon make up more than half of the nation’s population…

“Historically marginalized employees and students” are those that belong to certain demographic categories–blacks, American Indians, in some cases Hispanics, illegal immigrants, gays, and so on. Whether the individuals who are admitted, hired or promoted on account of DEI were themselves disadvantaged is a completely different question that is never asked. Very often, they are privileged individuals who grew up wealthy and, because they failed to apply themselves diligently or lacked talent, didn’t meet normal academic standards. But because they are by ethnic or gender definition “marginalized,” these wealthy but unaccomplished people get special treatment via DEI. This happens all the time.

…opponents say those efforts are ineffective, illegal, and, in fact, discriminatory against white men.

Of course they discriminate against white men. That is the whole point, and DEI advocates glory in it.

This is painfully stupid:

Advocates of DEI efforts say colleges have a long legacy of discrimination and lack of diversity in their ranks. Consider that Black students accounted for 7.4 percent of those admitted to selective higher-education institutions in 2021, despite Black Americans accounting for nearly 13 percent of the population enrolled in undergraduate education.

Yes, do you know why that is? Because on the average, their grades and test scores weren’t good enough. If it weren’t for athletic prowess, those numbers would be lower, too. For a brief, shining moment that lasted a few decades, our universities represented a meritocracy–not perfect, perhaps, but extraordinary by any global historical standard. But those days are gone. Quotas have now replaced merit, and the discrimination against some groups–Jews and Asians, in particular–is vicious.

There is much more at the link, and to be fair, some voices of sanity are heard. But let’s close with this:

For [Brielle Shorter, a sophomore at Ohio State] and many students, college is a social experiment where people from different backgrounds exchange ideas, and for the less fortunate a place to make connections that can lift them up the socioeconomic ladder.

“I think that’s another confusion on what Black students want now versus what they wanted before. The cost is driving the desire for more inclusion, and we understand that it’s not what you know but who you know. So in that way making college more inclusive and improving the sense of belonging goes a long way to helping students of color and people from disadvantaged backgrounds,” Shorter said.

An interesting and intelligent perspective. The idea that who you know is more important than what you know is silly and destructive, but could have appeal to a college sophomore. But the segregationist trend of modern education–separate courses, separate majors, separate dormitories, separate dining halls, separate graduation ceremonies, with racial resentments encouraged and rewarded at every opportunity–negates this kids’s sensible desire to make friends who may be useful to her in later life.

DEI is just another iteration of the age-old impulse to discriminate on behalf of one’s friends and against one’s enemies. Happily, lots of state legislatures aren’t tolerating the current climate of discrimination. Let’s hope the laws they are passing drive a stake through the heart of the DEI enterprise. And let’s also hope that the courts continue to enforce the principle of non-discrimination on the basis of race and sex, where those laws apply.