Another very valuable Pancake on very difficult issues of social policy. Kudos for taking it head on.
There’s no question that DEI has gone way too far and deserves to be slashed. What started out as a good-faith effort to address systematic discrimination and exclusion morphed into an ideological behemoth that overwhelmed its good intentions. At best, DEI training was useless (I endured some of it), and at worst it backfired (as you noted).
I retired before the full DEI onslaught, but the University of Michigan’s investment in DEI is appalling, even if there’s a case for a smaller, more-focused DEI strategy. Take the DEI essays for academic hiring. I sat on several hiring committees (before and after retiring). The statements are and were ideological litmus tests that weren’t worth reading. Good riddance.
I certainly hope DEI has peaked. But I’m concerned about an overreaction back to the status quo ante, as reflected in the Tractor Supply company’s response. There’s room for targeted DEI and ESG efforts to address problems that require support from the public and private sectors to ameliorate.
As to the connection between DEI and antisemitism, I wouldn’t call it hypocritical (though I understand why it might be)—it’s much worse than that. For once I agree with Tablet/Armin Rosen. While DEI didn’t cause the spike in antisemitism, its refusal to recognize Jews as historical victims of discrimination and violence make a mockery of DEI’s claims, well, for DEI. DEI administrators’ anti-Israeli bias exacerbated the disgraceful protests and tepid administrative responses.
Another very valuable Pancake on very difficult issues of social policy. Kudos for taking it head on.
There’s no question that DEI has gone way too far and deserves to be slashed. What started out as a good-faith effort to address systematic discrimination and exclusion morphed into an ideological behemoth that overwhelmed its good intentions. At best, DEI training was useless (I endured some of it), and at worst it backfired (as you noted).
I retired before the full DEI onslaught, but the University of Michigan’s investment in DEI is appalling, even if there’s a case for a smaller, more-focused DEI strategy. Take the DEI essays for academic hiring. I sat on several hiring committees (before and after retiring). The statements are and were ideological litmus tests that weren’t worth reading. Good riddance.
I certainly hope DEI has peaked. But I’m concerned about an overreaction back to the status quo ante, as reflected in the Tractor Supply company’s response. There’s room for targeted DEI and ESG efforts to address problems that require support from the public and private sectors to ameliorate.
As to the connection between DEI and antisemitism, I wouldn’t call it hypocritical (though I understand why it might be)—it’s much worse than that. For once I agree with Tablet/Armin Rosen. While DEI didn’t cause the spike in antisemitism, its refusal to recognize Jews as historical victims of discrimination and violence make a mockery of DEI’s claims, well, for DEI. DEI administrators’ anti-Israeli bias exacerbated the disgraceful protests and tepid administrative responses.
Revision: Another very valuable Pancake on a difficult set of social policy issues. Kudos for taking them head on.