Diversity or discrimination?
Regarding “Stanford brats throw a tantrum at guest speaker,” (March 17): I’ve been having difficulty understanding what diversity, equity and inclusion is all about and why Gov. Abbott is determined to end these programs at Texas universities. After reading George Will’s column about the unpleasant behavior of DEI advocates, including the associate dean for DEI at Stanford University, I now have a better idea. I have no doubt DEI programs were designed and intended to improve diversity, equity and inclusion in public organizations (a laudable goal), but they seem to have morphed into enforcers of what’s commonly referred to as the woke agenda. This agenda is heavy on CRT. In practice, DEI apparently means “those with white skin or conservative political leanings need not apply.” In other words, DEI has introduced a new — but no less destructive — form of discrimination. I’m not sure how it became accepted as public policy that the best weapon to fight racial discrimination is more (but different) racial discrimination. I completely disagree with the concept, which means I disagree with what DEI has become in practice as opposed to theory which, in turn, means I agree with Gov. Abbott’s efforts to eliminate DEI.
Greg Groh, Houston
George Will is a highly respected opinion writer. A conservative leaning voice, he normally approaches his subjects attempting to show both sides of the particular issue he is writing about. But, his recent epistle about Stanford Law School violated that principle. Railing against the student protests against the appearance of Judge Stuart Duncan, Mr. Will completely failed to provide support for the students’ point of view.
Mr. Will totally ignored the Federalist Society’s involvement in the situation. Judge Duncan, serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals’ 5th Circuit, was invited by the Federalist Society for this speaking gig. The 5th Circuit is the place where all non-ultraconservative issues go to die. The Federalist Society is arguably the driving force behind the conservative stacking of the Supreme Court. Mr. Will may or may not be a fan of that situation, but totally ignored that issue in this beratement of the Stanford students. I would venture to say that Federalist Society Justices Kavanaugh, Gorsuch or Coney Barrett would receive an even worse reception.
Mr. Will was correct to chastise the free speech implications related to Judge Duncan’s appearance, but he failed miserably to acknowledge that same free speech afforded the students he called “negligibly educated brats.”
Jeff Knight, Houston