Complete destruction of their agenda and replacement of it with sanity
By Selwyn Duke
What has so often struck me, and irked me, about the embrace of “diversity” dogma is how profoundly unintellectual it is. A wiseguy might say it’s really a simple IQ test, though a wise guy understands it’s a soul and sagacity test. To wit:
Two recent examples are disgraced ex-Harvard president Claudine Gay and Johns Hopkins Hospital’s chief diversity officer Sherita Hill Golden, now infamous for disseminating a “privilege hit list.” Affirmative-action hires both, each one is the kind of woman about whom ex-radio giant and now podcaster Michael Savage would say, “In my day, the highest she would’ve gone is owning a brassiere store on Queens Blvd. — and after 19 years, she’d have had two brassiere stores.”
What’s simultaneously so laughable and so sad about all such people, supposedly the crème de la crème of the intelligentsia (I call them pseudo-elites), is that they will obediently disgorge the latest word-salad-replete, cock-and-bull academic theory like part of a hive mind. But that’s the problem with elevating empty vessels on identity bases: You get no creativity, just craven conformity.
This is what political theorist Hannah Arendt called “the banality of evil.” If, however, you merely seek conduits through which to push an agenda no virtuous, thinking person would push, such people are precisely who you recruit.
For they’ll accept Diversity™ — they’ll even worship the DEIty — no questions asked. They won’t wonder why diversity should be considered desirable, a good, without proof; they won’t demand data. They’ll just repeat, mindlessly, “Our strength lies in our diversity!” because they’ve heard it so much. Repetition imprints most effectively with soft heads.
This brings something to mind, too: an old Twilight Zone episode that wonderfully places diversity calls in perspective. Titled “Eye of the Beholder” (1959), it features a demagogic leader who repetitively issues his own slogans. A clip follows (note: It is a spoiler of sorts), and pay attention to the segment beginning at 0:27 and, in particular, the several seconds starting at 1:10.
