Toe the line or face backlash.
That, sadly, is the position in which “woke” companies, employees, universities and faculty now find themselves. It’s time to write those statements or pay a price.
The statement must fall in line, too, in helping define what is acceptable within the limits of their ideological sphere. That sphere, unfortunately, is not very large.
Acceptable statements must bow to how The Left wants its DEI initiatives interpreted. Look up any number of DEI statements from companies you know, and you will find much of the following:
Diversity must mean diversity based on race, skin color, sexual identity, sexual preference, etc.
Equity must mean equality of outcome, or something is inherently biased or oppressive.
Inclusion must mean everyone is included that agrees with their ideological bent. Excluded are those holding different opinions; they are from the oppressive class, a term defined by them, of course.
Those definitions are precisely why many companies and individuals stay away from engaging in this virtue-signaling, oft-racist, anti-MLK, socialist, victim-fostering, coercive, 1984-ish, brain-washing endeavor. It is hard to blame them for staying away, but rest assured, it’s a mistake.
The radical Left is winning the culture war because it is all too willing to engage and push beyond the limits we used to have as a society. Because rational-thinking Americans previously saw the Left’s ideology as crazy and too extreme to conceive, they remained docile. They have now reaped the results of that passivity.
Men in women’s sport is just one example.
Nobody could have conjured such a wild thought 10 years ago. “They” captured the narrative and convinced enough people in the right positions that this was the “inclusive thing to do,” especially with new DEI standards as they define them.
It is a wonder to see how “they” claim the moral high ground in allowing men who identify as women to compete on an equal footing with biological women. How did “they” do this on such a grand level with something that is so clearly unfair to girls and women? It didn’t happen overnight, but it did happen because we didn’t believe it could.
The Left should not be left to define DEI. It is, however, because we have ignored it as the propaganda it is. But this propaganda has been effective. The way “they” teach has gone mainstream and is leading the next generation to believe a false narrative about the meaning of strength in diversity, the difference between equity and equality, and the proper way to be inclusive.
Instead of letting them define DEI, we should return to defining our country by the ideals upon which we were founded.
And we should correct their erroneous definitions of DEI. Here’s my company’s example:
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Statement:
We seek those with diverse skills, talents, interests, experiences, and perspectives (within our field) who share our vision, ideals/values/priorities, and work within our company’s structure to contribute in a meaningful way to our enterprise’s purpose, which is to help our TEAM reach its full potential while we help our employees and partners reach theirs.
We adhere to Martin Luther King’s method of judging when we hire and promote, based on content of character as well as competence, ability to work with others, desire to be a part of something greater than self, and willingness to subordinate personal interests to success of team.
We do not hire based on race, color, creed, national origin, sex, sexual identity or sexual preference, but on merit and the policy above, for doing so would lead to an unhealthy culture and foster a toxic environment disabling our ability to thrive as an organization and as individuals.
Equity as defined by many is equality of outcome. We reject equity defined in this fashion. Life is not equitable. Not all teams win the Super Bowl. Not everyone gets a gold medal at the Olympics. Not everyone is paid the same. No two people have the same talents or ability. Equity can be obtained only by unfairness and coercive measures. Non-equitable outcomes do not mean corruption, but universally equal outcomes surely do.
We do believe in equality. Our first identity is as a child of God. Here, you will be treated as such with no regard for any other self-identifying characteristic. You will possess no advantage or disadvantage except on your performance and your ability to help us accomplish our vision in a moral and professional manner.
We include people who need to be included. Successful coaches play the players most likely to win against a specific opponent. Similarly, people will be selected based on the task at-hand to form the best team possible to meet the end goal. Personnel may be substituted as the occasion requires. Relationships and feelings are important to us but not at the cost of the mission, in most cases. The best person for the job, if available, will get the work. This means inclusion by merit. If one wants to be included more often, that is a great incentive to accelerate one’s own growth and competency. If one is included it’s because we deem him/her essential to the mission.
There’s my attempt. Now write your own version and let’s restore the American playing field which the Left is destroying.