DEI is a Toxic, Hypocritical Ideology
It promotes an anti-meritocratic, anti-intellectual, illiberal, narcissistic, victimhood-driven way of interacting with the world
PsychSkeptics own Bekah (@bekahknowsbs) recently recorded a Munk Debate Podcast on the topic of DEI in the workplace, where she takes the position that such programs do more harm than good.
Here’s a summary of the arguments from her closing statement:
The current DEI ideology, and the programs it informs, is harmful because it is based on lies. It misappropriates the morally laden terms of diversity, equity, and inclusion in a grift for power. Proponents exclude and vilify all voices of dissent and are intolerant of diverse perspectives. It is harmful because it promotes an anti-meritocratic, anti-intellectual, illiberal, narcissistic, victimhood-driven way of interacting with the world. This toxicity spreads, harming individuals, who are judged not on action but identity, and organizations, who are impeded in the enterprise of success by wasting resources in service of the DEI industrial complex.
Beyond that, it is harmful to society by undermining the foundations of social progress – the ability to engage in reasoned, logic-based debate with others with whom we disagree, evaluating individuals on their actions and rewarding them for their meritorious behavior not their identity, promoting the value of critical feedback not the validation of mediocrity under the guise of niceness, and rewarding actual achievement. We all become victims of this tyranny faced with growing entitlement, increased workplace tension, and the lack of ability to engage in open dialogue, all of which prevent us from experiencing the benefits of great achievements, stifled under the weight of this cancerous bloat.
A true proponent of change should seek to implement policies that are effective, which evaluations of DEI programming demonstrate are not. A true proponent of change should seek to reinforce individual agency and advocate for programming to support those behaviors that result in the development of resilience and the cultivation of skills that underlie successful functioning into adulthood. If you want a better society, you should seek to reinforce the valuation of merit and hard work, as that and only that is what can lead us to develop technological advancement, cultivate innovation, and lead the way to create better outcomes for a wider range of individuals. The DEI agenda in theory and practice is antithetical to such aims. By shuttering freedom of expression, by placing identity above individual agency, and by seeking power rather than progress, DEI unequivocally does individuals, academia, organizations and society far more harm than good.Â
Listen to the full podcast here and please share!
Of course we should hire and promote on merit. But unfortunately this isn’t what’s been happening, ever. Women in particular are accustomed to their merit being invisible to decision makers and organisations have been robbed of that merit through bias of decision makers.
It seems the only way to bypass this bias is to force DEI. People will get hurt, but nothing like the damage that’s been done via hiring and promotion practices in decades past.
I’m hopeful it will also force the development of far better KPIs so that merit can be more realistically assessed, and also hopeful for a utopia where DEI is no longer necessary, a relic of the past.