I often admire Jamelle Bouie’s work, so I was deeply disappointed that his recent New York Times articleincluded a gross mischaracterization of my thinking on Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies.
Bouie writes:
Consider this line of thought from Richard Kahlenberg of the Progressive Policy Institute, a curiously named group founded as the primary think tank of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council in 1989. According to Kahlenberg, observations that the Trump administration is not interested in fairness as such are “over the top.” To him, the president simply wants the government to “treat different racial groups the same.”
If someone didn’t click to the link Bouie provided to my report for the Progressive Policy Institute, “A Way Out of the DEI Wars,” a reader might reasonably assume I’m some sort of Trump apologist who agrees with his approach on DEI. The reader would presumably be surprised to learn that in the report, I’m deeply critical of Trump. I write:
After a tragic airplane crash, at a moment when the president should have been consoling the country, Trump cast blame on DEI policies despite lacking any evidence. The administration also hired an acting Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy who wrote in October, “Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work.” As outlined below, Trump issued anti-DEI executive orders that were vague, and his purge of DEI staff in the federal government swept up some people who had merely attended DEI sessions. He has targeted for elimination not only racial preference policies, but also President Lyndon B. Johnson’s requirement that, before firms evaluate candidates in a race-neutral fashion, they engage in outreach efforts to make sure a diverse group of applicants are aware of opportunities. Trump has claimed to defend “merit” and then appointed cabinet members who are utterly unqualified. In short, if one wanted to find someone to make a principled case against DEI excesses, it is hard to think of a worse candidate than Donald Trump.
In the report, I called Bouie’s critique of Trump’s opposition to racial preferences “over the top” when he compared it to the actions of President Woodrow Wilson. Bouie wrote that Trump’s “move to end D.E.I. is of a piece with Woodrow Wilson’s successful effort, in his first administration, to resegregate the federal workforce.”
Wilson’s horrific policy included racially segregated lavatories and lunchrooms. In one case, a Black postal worker “had the humiliating experience of being surrounded by screens so that white workers would not have to look at him.” I disagree with Trump’s excesses on DEI, but I doubt those subject to Wilson’s vicious behavior would find Trump’s actions equally troubling.
In my DEI report, I call for a new program of “Integration, Equal Opportunity, and Belonging.” Unlike many on the right, I’m in favor of proactive programs to bring students of different racial and economic backgrounds together in education settings. I’m for genuine equal opportunity, which requires investments in schooling and housing. And I’m for creating a sense of belonging on campuses for students of all backgrounds. That doesn’t sound like the ideas of a Trump apologist. It sounds like a good faith effort to get beyond the DEI wars.
