Diversity of Opinion and De-facto Racism: the Rhetoric Against DEI by Peeler, Lorant Haddock

lhp14 — 2024-12-02 17:26:51 UTC

lhp14 — 2024-12-02 17:27:50 UTC

lhp14 — 2024-12-02 17:30:21 UTC

Link is through Archive.Today to avoid paywall

lhp14 — 2024-12-02 17:31:58 UTC

lhp14 — 2024-12-02 17:32:50 UTC

If you chose to read / listen to something else, please include the title and link to it as well as the rest of the prompts!

2024-12-08 19:55:59 UTC

This overview of the roundtable "exposing" DEI in higher education feels utilizes strategies such as manipulating definitions, claiming that DEI is doing more harm than good by singling out minoritized populations, and equating DEI initiatives (and therefore Democrats) to the "evils" and un-American practices of socialism.

Some ways to combat this might be to ask why the participants believe socialism, practiced by our government through programs like Social Security and government subsidies for industries, are evil and anti-American; ask the participants' resources backing their claims; and asking about their understanding of how funding for these programs is currently allocated and will be reallocated in the future according to their "efforts".

2024-12-13 17:02:02 UTC

I see most of the arguments being made in this article against DEI as falling in the category of "Don't trust the professionals, DEI has no value" and also "words mean whatever we want". Specifically the idea of pro-DEI ideas stemming from exclusion and also that DEI values don't really benefit anyone. This article suggests that DEI initiatives don't actually do anything to create diversity and refer to DEI as ideological conformity. In my opinion, being clear about definitions and also focusing on target audience would be most helpful in this situation. This article reads to me as someone who fundamentally misunderstands DEI and its goal so providing clarify on that at an institution level would be helpful. Additionally, this author has major issues with DEI that seem all over the place and so focusing time on those who do care and will support initiatives is a better use of time.

2024-12-15 01:49:51 UTC

This release emphasized the "words mean whatever we want" and "false common ground" rhetoric strategies the most, with a sprinkle of the "cherry picking" strategy - the latter was, however, primarily used to take digs at President Biden and throw around fear tactics. If someone said these things to me, I would remind them as indelicately as possible of the history of higher education - I would ask them how they might interact with these things as they would actively impact their lives, if they feel that this decision would truly give them any additional power or influence. I would also remind people that many parts of DEI funding goes to serving first-generation and "underprivileged" students, who would, by it's typical definition, being chasing the American dream - and isn't that the very thing Cloud is arguing DEI gets in the way of? If you allow him to remove this support, how do you plan to maintain his commitment to ensuring taxpayer dollars help all American's, if you are removing funding from American's seeking to better themselevs and their family's opportunities?