DEI : A Catalyst for Silence?

      I was previously a member of a student government body at a community college, as such I am fairly familiar with the ins and outs of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies at academic institutions. The institution I worked at had an equity-focused merit-based system, and I have seen its good fruit in the local community. That said, that doesn’t mean DEI is without its faults, far from it, and one fault in particular has to do with one of DEI’s core tenants.

       I remember one of my DEI training sessions where we had discussed privilege. At the very beginning of this session there was a discussion of privilege and identity. One of the quickest points made was the idea that a “Christian white cis-male” is generally the most privileged type of person in society and that anyone who may differ from this identity may not have the ‘most privilege’ possible. Several things went through my mind first. My first thought, though I didn’t vocalise it at the time, was simply,

“Hang on a minute, I thought this was a diversity, equity and INCLUSION training, doesn’t inclusion mean to include ALL identities?”

     My second thought was,

“By stating this, aren’t we just placing our prejudice on a certain group of people to feel better for our society’s past sins? This is absolutely hypocritical!”

     In addition to these thoughts was another important idea that is important to consider. Consider this “principle” if you will again.

“The Christian cis-white male is the most privileged person in society, and anyone who may differ from this set of identities may not have the ‘most privilege’ possible.”

     If you reworded this statement, you’d most likely get something similar to the statement below.

“Christian cis-white males are all oppressors and exercise their free will at the expense of anyone who may identify differently.”

     I hope that I have illustrated the issue at hand. This core idea is frankly wrong and dangerous. Firstly, the Armed Forces in the United States were desegregated in 1944, Academic Institutions were integrated between the 1960s-1970s, and the equal protection clause, and equal employment clause, both written into federal law, gives protections to all peoples in this country. So the idea that “Christian cis-white males” can go around oppressing people for fun is absolutely absurd, not that it doesn’t happen, but that it almost always has consequences, legal, social or otherwise. Secondly, the above statement does not account for human nature and greed for control. People, for as long as we have existed, will find random reasons to hate and oppress people just for who they are, regardless of identity. Thirdly, this absurd statement also leaves the door open for racism and antisemitism. Consider this, outside of the United States, no one is simply ‘white’. There are Poles, Germans, French, Slavs, Scandinavians, English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish, etc. the idea that all these people groups can be lumped together as ‘white’ is inherently racist, since it disregards each and every group’s cultural differences to each other. In addition, consider the left’s most recent common trope of calling all Jews ‘white’. This again is inherently racist, incorrect and antisemitic, considering that Jews have come from all over the Diaspora. With this in mind, consider the below situations, all having occurred within the past 24 months as of writing.

      When the attacks on Israel occurred on October 7th 2023, all the groups that proclaimed to be for human rights, women’s rights, etc. were absolutely silent. 1300 people were killed and 250+ taken hostage including at least 16 women. Where were the women’s rights groups? Where were the human rights groups?

      In late February of 2025, the newly established Syrian government, which was set up right after the fall of Bashar al-Assad, started a whole series of mass killings of Christians, Druze and Alawites in response to the rushing of an outpost by Assad loyalists. Casualty figures are at least a couple thousand by conservative estimates. However, weirdly there has been a bit of a media blackout and a lack of noise from human rights groups. Why? “No Jews no news?”

      In both cases, an Islamic faction seeked out to threaten and attack groups like Jews and Christians in which under DEI, they would be considered oppressors, not the oppressed. Since these situations don't fit the DEI narrative, all groups and/or institutions that subscribe to the ideas and narratives of DEI remain silent and only speak up in situations when their idea of “cis-white Christian male oppression” can be used. This is a disturbing bias in media and advocacy. Wasn’t the whole point of DEI to prevent injustice? Isn’t the news supposed to be unbiased and report on all issues and not only when it suits their narrative? This bias is inherently wrong and flawed at the most fundamental level.

      The core idea of “cis-white Christian male oppression” is a dangerous oversimplification of the injustices of American History. It takes a sledgehammer to a failed heart, a situation where a scalpel is more appropriate. This raises an important issue that students and administrators must consider. Although DEI policy by the letter is generally alright, if the narrative it's based upon is inherently flawed and harmful, the policies under this narrative framework themselves are problematic. Because when considering policies and laws, it's important to take a look at the letter of the law, but exponentially important to determine the ‘spirit’ of the law.

E.L.