By Carmen Villani, Jr.
Virginia Military Institute 1976
Those of us who are old enough to remember can recall the 1988 vice-presidential debate between then Senator’s Dan Quayle and Lloyd Bentsen. After Senator Quayle commented he had “as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency,” Senator Bentsen’s response was: “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy.”
When it comes to taking bold action to rid the Commonwealth of Virginia of “inherently divisive concepts” such as Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), “you’re no Ronald Reagan” Governor Youngkin.
In his first year as President, President Reagan was confronted with the Air Traffic Controller’s strike. After the controllers refused to return to work, he took the bold action of firing thousands of them.
His “tear down this wall” speech was another bold action which helped to end the Cold War.
Contrast that with Governor Youngkin’s response to the mandate given to him by the voters of Virginia to remove “inherently divisive concepts” from public schools.
While his very first executive order called for that, what followed could be viewed as an abysmal failure.
His administration has failed to take bold action and put an end to DEI, which experts like Christopher Rufo and Dr. Carol Swian tie to Critical Race Theory (CRT).
To make matters worse, his director of Diversity, Opportunity, and Inclusion, Mr. Martin Brown, went to the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in April of this year and announced that “DEI is dead.”
According to a recent article by Dr. Jay Greene and Mike Gonzalez of the Heritage Foundation, the “DEI bureaucracy” is not only alive and well in Virginia but thriving.
They make the following point in the article: “Surprisingly, public universities in Virginia have larger diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) bureaucracies than taxpayer-funded universities in any other state.”
At my alma mater, VMI, it has been rebranded as Diversity, Opportunity, and Inclusion or Inclusive Excellence.
So, what bold action could Governor Youngkin take?
According to Virginia Law § 23.1-1300 (C), the governor has the authority to remove “members of governing boards of public Institutions of higher education” for “malfeasance, misfeasance, incompetence, or gross neglect of duty.”
Merely appointing new members to the governing boards at duly designated times at Virginia “public universities” is failing while also giving the impression that these boards are “snubbing their noses” at Governor Youngkin.
If the governor has any aspirations for higher office, be “Reaganesque” and call for the resignations of the presidents for these governing boards.
This country is in dire need of leaders willing to take bold actions like President’s Kennedy and Reagan, not more calculating politicians seeking to advance their political careers.
The Dangerous DEI Bloat at Virginia’s Public Universities | The Heritage Foundation
Surprisingly, public universities in Virginia have larger diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) bureaucracies than taxpayer-funded universities in any other state.
George Mason University, which has a reputation as a right-of-center institution, has 7.4 DEI personnel per 100 tenure-track faculty, which is the highest of any public university in the country analyzed in this Backgrounder.
These bloated DEI staffs are wasteful, associated with worse campus climates, and are found at universities that promote radical ideologies. Virginia policymakers must rein in this dangerous DEI expansion.
- Virginia leads the nation as the state with the largest diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) bureaucracies in its public universities.
- DEI staff and departments urge students to embrace radical leftwing ideologies, including that people should be treated differently due to their race.
- Ideological indoctrination is utterly unacceptable at taxpayer-funded universities, and Virginia lawmakers must abolish the DEI bureaucracy in state-funded schools.
. . . . DEI Bureaucracies Promote Radical Ideologies
Diversity and inclusion are nice-sounding words that people might associate with positive activities, like the assimilation of immigrants, welcoming people from different backgrounds, and facilitating mutual understanding.
The reality of DEI as it is currently defined is that these activities are functional opposites of traditional definitions.
Take just the “E” word—equity—for example, it means that government and the private sector must treat Americans differently due to their race, which is the opposite of equality or equal treatment.
DEI bureaucracies are better understood as an academic version of a political commissariat that articulates and enforces an ideological orthodoxy on campus.
That orthodoxy tends to make many groups of people feel unwelcome, promotes division, and encourages conformity rather than diversity on various social and political issues. . . . (read more)