In recent years, few public and private institutions have shown resistance to the infection of the racially paranoid ideology that underpins the diversity, equity, and inclusion movement. But body politics seems to be producing a belated immune response.
Last year's U.S. Supreme Court ruling
Student for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard University/UNCFor example, it helped pave the way for the dismantling of DEI on college campuses across the country. Lawsuits and federal civil rights lawsuits targeting companies' DEI efforts quickly followed. Several U.S. organizations previously ensnared by racially charged programs, including Ford, Harley-Davidson, Tractor Supply, Jack Daniels and Walmart, are hoping to avoid similar legal challenges. Abandoned DEI as it faces pressure from normalcy advocates.
a
study A paper published Monday by the Network Infection Research Institute and Rutgers University points out that race-obsessed programs are divisive, counterproductive, and help create authoritarians, and that Americans will be more concerned about the rest of the DEI regime. It provided a strong justification for why it should be dismantled immediately.
“Some DEI programs not only fail to meet their goals, they can actively undermine their efforts.”
The study, titled “Teaching Hostility: How DEI Education Creates Hostile Attribution Bias,” states in the introduction:
Pew Research Center survey In 2023, more than half of American workers will receive a DEI meeting or training at work.
The reeducation that the majority of American workers are forced to undergo increases interpersonal empathy, fosters an inclusive environment, and maximizes diversity based on unchanging characteristics and sexual preferences. However, the study suggests that “some DEI programs not only fail to meet their goals, but may actively undermine efforts.”
“In particular, mandatory training that focuses on specific target groups may foster feelings of discomfort and perceptions of fairness,” the study said. “DEI efforts that are viewed as affirmative action rather than business strategy can cause a backlash and increase racial resentment rather than alleviate it, and diversity efforts aimed at managing bias may fail.” This can result in reduced representation and negative employee sentiment.”
The researchers collected a variety of DEI educational materials used in “intervention and educational settings” across three groups: race, religion, and caste, excerpted rhetoric from the materials, and used in a psychological survey measuring blatant prejudice, social distancing, and demonization. and authoritarian tendencies. ” Participants in the study were also tasked with reviewing the material or a neutral control material.
The results were dire.
The researchers found that across all three groups, participants “evoked a hostile attribution bias, amplified perceptions of prejudicial hostility in the absence of prejudice, and elicited punitive responses to imagined prejudice.” I discovered that.
In one test, researchers divided 423 Rutgers University students into two groups. One group read an apolitical regulatory essay about American corn production, and the other read an essay incorporating racist CRT propaganda by Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo.
After each group finished reading their assigned material, participants were presented with a “racially neutral scenario” in which a student's application to an elite East Coast university is rejected after being interviewed by an admissions officer. The students were asked about their awareness of racial discrimination within the university. Exchange. The scenario did not mention the race of the hypothetical student or admissions officer.
“Exposure to anti-oppressive narratives may lead to support for the types of demonization and scapegoating characteristic of authoritarianism.”
The group had previously reportedly received propaganda from Kendi and D'Angelo, which was “perceived to have created a hostile attribution bias…”[ing] Admissions officers were far more biased than those who read the neutral Maize essay. ”
According to the researchers, “participants exposed to anti-racist rhetoric perceived more discrimination from admissions officers (~21%), even though there was no evidence of discrimination at all” ) They believed admissions officers were more unfair to applicants (~12%), caused more harm to applicants (about 26%), and committed more microaggressions. (approximately 35%). ”
Simply put, Kendi and DeAngelo made their students aware of racism and injustice that didn't exist.
In other groups, the DEI materials provided by participants similarly fared worse than the control group.
For example, in caste research, when the word “Jew” was replaced with “Brahmin,” an Adolf Hitler quote resonated with participants exposed to DEI materials.
“These findings suggest that exposure to anti-oppressive narratives may increase support for the types of demonization and scapegoating characteristic of authoritarianism,” the researchers said. is writing.
“While DEI efforts typically affirm the laudable goals of combating bias and promoting inclusivity, an emerging body of research is highlighting the existence of anti-oppressive discourses within particularly ideological and obsessive monocultures. “We warn that such interventions may encourage authoritarian thinking,” the study said. “The drive toward absolute impartiality can undermine pluralism and create a (potentially violent) desire for ideological purity.”
The paper concludes, “Evidence presented in these studies suggests that some anti-oppressive DEI discourses, while purporting to combat bias, can lead to hostile attribution biases, racial suspicions, and prejudice.'' “We find that this can increase support for abusive attitudes, authoritarian policing, and punitive actions in absentia.” Evidence of a punishable violation. ”
Do you like Blaze News? Avoid censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get articles like this delivered straight to your inbox. Please register here!
