By Selwyn Duke
Does “diversity” really now mean conformity of thought? This question arises with a Supreme Court case, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, involving racial affirmative-action policies.
The defendants, Harvard and the University of North Carolina, have argued that diversity is a benefit. The former asserted in its court brief that “decades of experience and study prove ‘that diversity “lead[s] to greater knowledge” for everyone,’ and promotes ‘the tolerance and mutual respect that are so essential to the maintenance of our civil society,’” relates Newsweek’s James Piereson. Yet this argument might have just been blown up, the writer states, by a headline-grabbing little incident recently occurring at Stanford Law School.
On March 9, Stanford law students shouted down Fifth Circuit Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan at a Federalist Society event at their school. What’s more, not only did five administrators present allow the blatant disruption — in violation of Stanford’s policies — but diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) dean Tirien Steinbach actually fanned the flames. Taking the microphone and delivering prepared remarks, she claimed that Duncan “literally denies the humanity of people” and told him, “Your work has caused harm.”
Read the rest here.
Comments