This, you see, is why the D.E.I. societal pathogen will be harder to kill than the Hydra.
Northwestern University’s School of Education and Social Policy site has a web page titled “Leading Change with Inclusion, Courage, and Global Perspective.” It explains why educators must “skillfully” attempt to “pursue equity and inclusion,” including instructions on how “good discrimination” can be preserved by a campaign to “anchor equity in strategy.”
Dress up the pig any way you want, the policy being extolled on this site is still institutional and societal discrimination against whites, Asians, and men. Our corrupt and thoroughly politicized educational institutions are the ethics villains here, and the Northwestern University’s School of Education and Social Policy website is a smoking gun.
The mind-numbing jargon-filled social justice gibberish on the site includes four “insights”—cant, you see, is now “insight.” #1, “Retreating from Equity Creates Strategic Risk—Not Safety” argues for “practitioners”—-once known as “teachers”—need to “anchor equity in strategy—not politics or sentiment.” Whatever that means. Practitioners are also urged to build “internal literacy around the risks of retreat and the long-term business costs of abandoning equity commitments” and to “clarify which elements of your equity work are evolving and which values and practices remain non-negotiable”
Ramalama Ding-dong!
“The question isn’t whether leaders should pursue equity and inclusion—it’s how to do it skillfully when the ground keeps shifting amidst political, legal, cultural, and global pressures that are currently pushing organizations toward caution or retreat,” readers are told. You know, those annoying pressures like having to follow anti-discrimination laws and the Constitution.
The second “insight” is “True Inclusion Requires Both belonging AND Uniqueness.” “Examine where assimilation pressure exists: What unspoken expectations require people to downplay difference[s] to fit in?” Assimilation is the natural process whereby groups (and nations) become functional and cohesive. Can’t have that!
The third insight is “Without a Global Lens, Local Inclusion Efforts Stay Incomplete.” Huh? Oh, educators must “examine how global inequities show up in local policies, talent pipelines, or organizational assumptions.”
Finally we have how “Bias Travels Through Systems Unless Intentionally Interrupted.” The solution, natch, is installing better biases. “Why does inclusive leadership matter now more than ever?” Beats me: I thought what matters is competent, experienced and effective leadership. Then came Kamala Harris…
I think my favorite bit is the dubious statistic quoted that “43% of employees say they will quit if their employer doesn’t continue to support DEI, with rates even higher among Gen Z, millennials, and women.” If that were a real stat, which I doubt, most of those employees are only employed because of DEI, and they know it.
Do read the whole page, if only for mordant humor. As Jeff Goldblum says in a clip from “Jurassic Park,”
I fear it’s too late for a whole generation infused with this garbage throughout their formative years. DEI will pose a continuing threat to racial harmony, functioning systems, ethical values and social coherence unless it is kept at bay until that whole generation has passed on. So heed a second clip from “Jurassic Park”…
Ethics Alarms 
Fortunately, I can not think of a single actionable item in that pile of honey. Once you’ve read any of that, what would you do? Maybe say, “Right on!” or, “Power to the people!” and then take a nap?
hooey, not honey.
The DEI is such a core tenant of the progressive left that they are not going to give it up easily. Their brain has a logic block that refuses to acknowledge anything that goes against their core beliefs.
I was reading a reddit thread a few days ago. I went back and tried to find it again without success, so I can’t link it here. It was about people who moved out of the US and what did and did not surprise them about the difference between where they moved to and the US. There were so, so many posts that simultaneously talked about how much they felt safe in their new home, but would include in the same post how much they disliked the lack of diversity there. Usually it was comparing a major US city vs. a large city elsewhere. They had an amazing ability to never, ever consider “hey, maybe those two are connected?” I’m sure they never considered that they could move to one of those icky conservative places in America, then feel safe there too.
“Practitioners are also urged to build “internal literacy around the risks of retreat and the long-term business costs of abandoning equity commitments” and to “clarify which elements of your equity work are evolving and which values and practices remain non-negotiable”
The first looks to me as a call to start writing articles and sources now. They’ve achieved as much DEI as they can now, so now they need ‘reputable’ sources they can point to to demonstrate how devastating it will be to turn back the dial. NYT will start publishing articles on it soon, and the academic papers will start working their way through the system. That way, they’ll be able to point and nod sagely about how they always knew that losing even an ounce of DEI would be devastating for fragile communities. (Although, if the community in question is so fragile, why is including them a strength? Hmmm…)
The second reads to me as a call to codify which aspects of DEI they will hold up as ‘immutable and essential’ vs ones they can publicly admit ‘aren’t working at perfection right now, but it’s a process of evolution.’ Both will be heralded as examples of how great DEI is, and note how neither admits DEI is possibly bad.
I have a 10 y/o grand niece by marriage. Born out of wedlock, Her first ten years she was raised pre domiantly by her grandmother, while her mother played the role of “diva.”
They moved here to Alabama. When I see her the 10 y/o is decked out in bizarre androgynous clothing. I ask her if the various, and numerous, bracelets, bangles, and beads mean anything.
Her answers are a litany of “progessive” agenda items. On Christmas day she idenitfed one particlar badge, among many, as the “non-binary flag.”
I sigh in exasperation because as you said, this DEI indoctrination is indeed a hydra that has a generation inbued in it.