The University of Michigan has dug its own DEI grave.

University of Michigan’s Head of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Is Outraged New York Times and with the Heritage Foundation (which rarely happens at the same time). The newspaper published an article from which it is clear that diversity, equity and inclusion flopped in Ann Arbor, and he was quoting Heritage. That was enough to make Tubby Chavous throw a fit.

Chavous, the University of Michigan’s vice provost for equity and inclusion and chief diversity officer, criticized the newspaper and the foundation in a published letter. on her LinkedIn page.

Article The newspaper’s “Nicholas the Confessor” speaks for itself, and I encourage people to read it. However, the point was hardly new to critics of DEI, who have been highlighting the ideology’s shortcomings for years.

Essentially, because DEI is inherently divisive, it creates resentment and more division. It’s that simple.

However, it was important that in this case The New York Times said it.

“Michigan’s own data shows that in an effort to become more diverse and equitable, the school has also become less inclusive,” Confessor wrote. “IN survey released in late 2022, students and faculty reported a less positive campus climate than at the start of the program and a lesser sense of belonging. Students were less likely to interact with people of a different race, religion, or political views—the very type of interactions that are theoretically designed to foster.”

“Michigan DEI efforts have created a powerful conceptual framework for student and faculty complaints, as well as enormous bureaucratic mechanisms for addressing them,” he added disapprovingly. “Daily campus complaints and academic disagreements, professors and students told me, are now perceived as crises of inclusion and harm, each requiring further administrative intervention or expansion. On a campus engulfed in institutional self-criticism, the only thing that seemed to escape true reckoning was DEI itself.”

The confessor worked on his article for several weeks, interviewing, in his own words, more than 60 people. One of them was my colleague at Heritage. Jay Greenwhose revolutionary report for 2021 on DEI found that the University of Michigan has the most bloated DEI bureaucracy of any major university, with all of them increasing their DEI numbers over the past decade.

Green and co-author James Paul, director of research at the Institute for Educational Freedom, analyzed publicly available information at 65 universities to measure the number of people who have “formal responsibility for delivering DEI programs and services” at those universities.

The authors limited their attention to universities that were members of the then-Power Five athletic conferences (the number has been reduced to four since the article was published in 2021). This allowed them to focus not only on large public universities, but also on the student body, which chose them largely based on geographic proximity and then inadvertently indoctrinated them with DEI.

They found that “the average university has 3.4 people for every 100 tenured or tenured faculty working on DEI promotion.” On average, DEI has 4.2 times the number of employees who assist students with disabilities (which, unlike DEI, is actually required by law under the Americans with Disabilities Act) and “1.4 times more than the number of professors in the respective universities of these universities.” history departments,” which, again, unlike DEI, promotes higher education’s mission to uncover truth. In total, the researchers found that the average university has 45.1 people working to promote DEI.

By almost every measure, Chavous’ University of Michigan was the most overhyped. It had 163 DEI officers, compared to an average of 45.1 DEI officers among the universities studied. The University of Michigan listed 14.8 people promoting DEI for every person working with people with disabilities. The University of Michigan also had 5.8 DEI staff for every 100 core professors, nearly double the average of 3.4.

And has this brought racial peace to the University of Michigan? Not by numbers. Doing the same thing as Confessor presented three years later, Green and Paul found that “the size of the DEI bureaucracy has little effect on students’ satisfaction with their college experience in general—or their diversity experience in particular. The DEI bureaucracy appears to be increasing administrative bloat without furthering the stated goals of diversity, equity, and inclusion.”

Not surprisingly, Chavous particularly focused on Heritage in her attack on the newspaper.

“The article raises many concerns about political bias. For example, the reporter cites the Heritage Foundation as the primary source of data to support claims that DEI efforts are failing,” she wrote, then went ad hominem. “The Heritage Foundation is a policy organization, not a research organization or think tank using empirical standards, and is the architect of Project 2025, which is strongly opposed to DEI. However, the article presents the organization as an objective and key research body.”

Understood? We can’t be trusted because we point out that DEI is a Trojan horse, decked out in “social justice” bells and whistles to hide the fact that it is bringing culturally Marxist ideas into schools, universities and workplaces that would fail at the ballot box. Only researchers who present DEI as a solution to racial inequality can be trusted.

If only we could all use this kind of circular logic.

In any case, Greene elsewhere writes a direct response to Chav in which he recounts his years of academic scholarship and empirical research, so I’ll leave him to the pleasure of addressing that part of her nonsense.

I will rather focus on another excerpt from Chavus’s blanket. About halfway through his post, Chavous calls out the Confessor for allegedly relying in his arguments on incidents that are “unrelated to any DEI efforts and making causal claims about DEI.”

As an example, she said, “DEI programs are wrongly accused of providing community engagement and activism in response to major national and international events involving long-standing social inequalities, tensions, and conflicts (such as the murder of George Floyd and the current war in Israel and Gaza ). Let me be clear: DEI work is not responsible for global social issues, as some would have us believe. Instead, DEI efforts are often part of the solutions to these problems.”

Chavus must make this statement because it’s 2020 Black lives matter The unrest and, more recently, the response to the massacre of 1,200 Israeli civilians on October 7, 2023, have been major reasons why the scale has fallen from the eyes of many Americans when it comes to DEI. They were able to witness the moral confusion and chaos that we have created by presenting the world as a scene of heroic struggle between oppressors and oppressed, where the winner takes all.

That, in a nutshell, is what DEI is. DEI creates the opposite of inclusion and diversity precisely because it teaches children and adults that the world is divided into a dominant class and a subjugated class. It builds up discontent, creating enough social upheaval to fuel the conditions that will lead to a desire to overthrow the entire system, and from that frustration we get things like the 2020 BLM riots.

Sometimes this leads to results that can be peaceful if misguided, such as the idea that dominant categories owe special benefits, even monetary reparations, to those called marginalized Americans.

Often the result of this Manichaean division of God’s entire creation is far from peaceful, such as the idea that the oppressed have the right to take any action. This is how you get students and other young people to support Hamas’ murderous riots and gang rapes and cruel indifference to suffering Israeli civiliansincluding women who were abused before being killed.

That’s why Chavus, whose meaning of existence At the University of Michigan, Confessor and Greene have the apparent audacity to ask questions and are forced to issue a disclaimer. But the BLM riots and the response to October 7th have a lot to do with DEI, no matter what she says.

Originally published by Restoring America.