Aug 14 2008

“Diversity Leadership” and the diversity training industry: a project of the Left

Category: diversity,higher education,multi-culturalharmonicminer @ 9:34 am

Diversity Training University International (DTUI) is a company specializing in training diversity officers and workers for organizations. They maintain a blog where they discuss “diversity issues” from the point of view of diversity trainers and managers, and in a recent article discuss the difficulties diversity managers and trainers can have when they meet resistance.

In-house diversity professionals often ask me about how to address resistance to their diversity and inclusion program. These professionals describe managers who give a nod to the diversity program in leadership meetings, while making excuses for not being more actively involved in addressing the issues in their units. Others enthusiastically offer their opinions and suggestions on other topics, but disengage when the diversity goals are covered. A couple of the managers seem to be openly hostile towards the diversity program based on the reasons they give for not supporting it and the aggressive tone of their statements about it. Many managers may not openly show support negative statements about the diversity program, but you can see their faces light up while that “brave” individual speaks her or his mind.

I guess you can count me as one of those speaking his mind.  And yes, I’ve seen eyes lighting up when I speak up for people who are a bit reserved but agree with me.

Here is one of the more revealing paragraphs:

Our view of cultural diversity has been ingrained in us since birth. It
is not easy to unlearn the biases and prejudices we are exposed in a
society that gives us the double message of being tolerant in our
attitude and exclusive in our behaviors. Liberals tend to bend over
backwards for people who are different
and too many people of color
struggle with their own sense of sense of being treated unfairly. The
diversity professional must be clear about any baggage he or she brings
to the work.

I provided the boldface, to illustrate the inadvertent admission of the article. Diversity is a project of liberals, of the Left. No news here…. but the admission is useful for confirming it in the mind of doubters.

Why does this matter?

Because when organizations embrace diversity, they are embracing the Left. It really is that simple. That might be OK for some organizations, but when Christian universities, churches, other para-church organizations, etc., embrace diversity, they will not be able to avoid the intrusion of aspects of the Left which they may (and certainly should) find objectionable, on a host of social issues and political implications.

It is possible, of course, that a strong diversity movement in an institution is not the cause of a Leftward motion, but is rather a symptom of it. The correlation is clear, however. Whether diversity is itself a contributor to Leftward motion, or whether it is merely the “canary in the coal mine”, or both, a strong diversity emphasis in your institution is something to be concerned about, if you hold to traditional perspectives on matters like abortion, gay marriage, national defense, government taxation and redistribution, etc.

If you’re a diversity professional now, I suggest you encourage your children to seek another career. According to the New York Times:

Ethnic and racial minorities will comprise a majority of the nation’s population in a little more than a generation, according to new Census Bureau projections, a transformation that is occurring faster than anticipated just a few years ago.

Got that? Your job is going to be as obsolete as the buggy whip, and quite soon. Better start planning for early retirment, and encourage your kids to major in something else…. say, engineering or business administration or marketing. Or white studies.

Tags:

3 Responses to ““Diversity Leadership” and the diversity training industry: a project of the Left”

  1. Tom Hunt says:

    When I read the actual definition of cultural diversity, I hold that cultural diversity is not a bad thing. Conservatives and especially Christian conservatives should feel very comfortable with the subject. Notice the true definition says nothing about different sexual orientation, religion (or lack of) or other social issue. The definition speaks only to “ethnic, gender, racial, and socioeconomic variety”.

    The issue, to me, is that Liberals have changed the definition to fit their agenda. I would think that Christian institutions of higher learning would know better.
    **************************************************************************************
    Cultural diversity

    Definition: ethnic, gender, racial, and socioeconomic variety in a situation, institution, or group; the coexistence of different ethnic, gender, racial, and socioeconomic groups within one social unit

    Webster’s New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7)
    Copyright © 2003-2008 Lexico Publishing Group, LLC
    *********************************************************************************

  2. harmonicminer says:

    Sadly, the dictionary definition is not the one that controls in institutions, public or private.

    It is not a matter of “ethnicity” or “culture”, in that if you’re an Italian immigrant, a Hungarian immigrant, or a white Zimbabwean (there are some… one just won Olympic Gold in swimming), you don’t count as a diversity hire. Sad, but true.

    It is not a matter of “socioeconomic variety”, in that if you’re a poor white person, you don’t count as a diversity hire, while a rich black person does. Shoot, you can be a poor white person RAISED by poor black people… there are some instances of this. You don’t count, but your adoptive brother does (that is, the natural descendant of the family into which you, the white person, were adopted).

    It is less and less a matter of gender in higher education, for an excellent reason. For some years now, more women than men are being graduated from college. Women can’t realistically be considered the “minority” in higher education for much longer, and in fact there will soon be an imbalance in the other direction.

    The only “diversity” factor that really counts is race. And if you’re Asian, even that won’t do you much good, because Asians are presumed not to “need” diversity policies to get ahead. So, the net result is this: diversity hires tilt an institution to the Left, because disproportionate numbers of blacks and Hispanics tilt Left. Around 90% of blacks vote Democratic. Around 70% of Hispanics vote Democratic.

    Democrats represent the Left in the 21st century, regardless of the centrists that could be found in the party decades ago. There are no Scoop Jacksons or Pat Moynihans anymore. The hard Left has pretty much taken over the party leadership.

    This doesn’t mean that all blacks and all Hispanics buy into the entire agenda of the Left. It does mean that the overall effect of their presence in your institution will be to drive it Left. Oddly, whites who are deeply committed to diversity tend to be even more Left, overall…

    If you represented an institution whose ideological perspectives you wished to maintain, you could certainly seek (and find) “persons of color” whose beliefs were in sync with your institution. But it doesn’t work that way, because fans of “diversity” would find such an “ideological test” to be objectionable on its face. In the end, diversity rules over all, and the movement to the Left is assured.

    So, as I said, the “chicken or egg” question is not clear. What is clear is that if the chicken lays eggs, you’ll soon have more chickens.

  3. harmonicminer says:

    None of this has any bearing on the proper way for Christians to treat individuals of any race or background, which should be with love and open arms. It has a bearing on what is the correct policy for institutions who wish to maintain their ideological identity, which presumably includes Christian universities, among other things.

    Institutions with “directors of diversity” have normally already decided to devalue certain aspects of their heritage, even if they have not yet allowed themselves to say so in their public relations work.

Leave a Reply