Examples of the DEI materials from Coca-Cola,
developed in academia and now used in corporate America

The effort nationwide in many legislatures to end the very racist “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) departments that now poison universities everywhere are not only failing, they are illustrating the emptiness of most of that effort.

In Georgia, for example, political pressure on the state’s university system forced it last year to ban DEI statements from any applicants for teaching positions. The university system was also required to “…eliminate references to ‘diversity’ and ‘diverse’ from the standards and replace them with the terms that are allegedly easier to understand.”

These mere semantic demands were quickly warped by the universities, which instead of eliminating such bigoted programs, which create quota systems that favor the hiring of some races over others, the universities simply renamed the statements and the DEI programs to meet the letter of the ban, but not its spirit.

Georgia Tech President Ángel Cabrera stated in a news release the goal was to do a better job at “weaving these programs into the fabric of the Institute.” The release added that programs and staff “will shift from the office of the Vice President of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion into the Office of the Provost, Student Engagement and Well-Being, Institute Communications, and Administration and Finance.”

At Kennesaw State University, its President Kathy Schwaig announced in a December 2023 faculty email the school will rebrand its Division of Diverse and Inclusive Excellence by renaming it to the Division of Organizational Effectiveness, Leadership Development, and Inclusive Excellence.

In the second example, the head of the renamed DEI office actually got a promotion and more power.

In Texas meanwhile the state government had passed a law that forbid universities from creating any DEI offices or requiring DEI training or statements in hiring.

So how did the University of Texas San Antonio (UTSA) respond? It first tried to get around the law by simply renaming its DEI office to “the Office of Campus and Community Belonging.”

When it was faced with strong protests and a lot of bad publicity, the university then backed down, and announced that it was going to abide by the law and close its DEI offices entirely. However, don’t celebrate just yet.

In a new letter sent out by [UTSA president Taylor] Eighmy on January 2, 2024, he wrote, “Given our evolving understanding of SB 17, as well as continuing voluntary changes in staffing and personnel reappointments from that office, it no longer made sense to launch the new office.”

It was also unclear in the new letter if all staff would still be retained.

Eighmy went on to say, “Instead, we will leverage the strong capabilities of our existing offices and divisions to realign ADA and disability services, campus climate and community engagement activities across various institutional divisions.” [emphasis mine]

In other words, Eighmy intends to do the same as university officials in Georgia, redistribute its DEI programs and the people who run them throughout the school so that they are embedded in programs everywhere. He has no intention of ending this discriminatory and bigoted program, only to hide it from state legislators so they will continue to fund it, not as a separate program easily targeted but incorporated into other programs.

These examples in Georgia and Texas are only the tip of the iceberg. Despite strong opposition in many places to DEI programs, it appears colleges and their faculty and staff are circling the wagons nationwide to keep these programs alive at any cost. When Harvard for example lost its case at the Supreme Court and was told it could no longer consider race in deciding who to admit to the college, the administration immediately responded with defiance, making it clear that it would continue to do so by finding ways around the court decision.

This resistence by academia to eliminating these ugly and polarizing programs of discrimination that do nothing to promote good will but instead instill resentment and hate in everyone proves once again that reform is impossible in the public education system that exists today. These colleges need to be shut down entirely, with the people who run them fired, and replaced with new universities run by others who put truth, knowledge, and critical thinking ahead of identity politics and racial favoritism.

Idiocracy: The future as proposed by today’s academia:
“But Brawndo’s got what plants crave. It’s got electrolytes!”

Whether there is any state legislature anywhere with the will and votes necessary to shut down its corrupt public universities however appears doubtful. Most have simply passed toothless laws that “ban” DEI programs, with no or little funding cuts, allowing the colleges to do what I describe above, work around the law by playing semantic games.

When it comes to colleges such as Harvard, which largely depend on donors and tuitions, there has been some pushback. At Harvard billionaire Bill Ackman has not only cut off donations to the college, he is leading a slate of outsiders for Harvard’s board of overseers. This slate won’t have a majority, but if elected it will at least be in a position to force some change.

The fight however will be decidedly uphill, as it will be pushing back against a monolith of leftist dogma that dominates every level of academia and will not back down without a fight.

Without some drastic change, however, American culture will continue its steady decline into a dark age of ignorance, bigotry, hate, and violence. No society can remain civilized when its so-called higher institutions of learning promote such ideas.