Wednesday, December 12, 2012

A Note about "Diversity"

One of the primary reasons that Mitt Romney - and, by extension, the Republican Party - lost the 2012 Election is that nearly all the dominant segments, or "People groups", of our modern culture appear to believe that he (and the GOP) does not represent them.  Voters, these days, seem to desire, above all else, that the government LOOK like them, SOUND like them, and VALIDATE their Person-hood (whatever they choose to make that mean).

If you weren't already aware of it, Minority groups throw much of their collective energy behind various "Diversity" campaigns, where "Diversity" usually means merely the PRESENCE of Persons of Color on school boards and Boards of Directors, in Governments (at every level), behind the Tellers desk at the Bank, and in any other place where they see (what they believe to be) a lack of "Diversity"...

But where is the sense in this?  Once the proper Seating arrangements are all made at the table, what then?  Isn't the MEAL, itself, a great deal more important than the Attendees list?  Indeed, if there IS no Meal, isn't the rainbow of Color all around the table a pointless achievement?

If a Black (or Female, or Gay) president ruins the country even as he is celebrated for "looking like" the electorate, is this a good thing?  If the Teller at the Bank often makes errors with my money, does it matter that she's Female?  Where is the value in having a Gay swimmer on the Olympic Swimming Team who rarely wins a meet?  The examples are endless, and the point is clear:  "Diversity" only has meaning if the PURPOSE of the organization, or the movement, or the establishment, or the country, or the business, is fulfilled...  Failure by a "diverse" group of people is still Failure.

Additionally, there have been numerous reports of how White -- and more qualified -- candidates for various things (a promotion at a Fire Department, acceptance into a Law school, and similar stories in recent news) have been spurned in favor of the Black or Female candidate, demonstrating that the quest for "Diversity" can become so spell-binding that it actually produces a new kind of Discrimination...

To all those who clamor for "Diversity", who have some primal Need to "see themselves reflected" in their leadership, I would pose this question:  Just before your beautiful, sweet, beloved Daughter were to be wheeled into a life-saving, critical Surgery, would you stop the hospital staff and insist that the Team of doctors working on her be comprised of a "Diverse" group of folks "just like you"?  I doubt it.  I think you would want, with all your heart and soul, to have the VERY BEST TEAM AVAILABLE for the operation, whether or not they were White or Black, Gay or Straight, Male or Female, Alien or Human.

"I just want my dear Daughter to be HEALTHY and HAPPY", you would say.


The same goes for all of these other concerns.  If Success can be achieved and still include the "Diversity" element, so much the better.

1 comment:

Greg Kern said...

Yet another instance of this "Diversity" concept came out in the news today: Dianne Feinstein commented in an interview that though there is a record number of Women in the U.S. Senate, "there is still a problem" until that number is 50 (half of the 100 Senate seats).

Really? So GENDER is the Goal we ought to reach for, in determining whom to send to the Senate?

And doesn't that discriminate against OTHER groups who want to see THEIR members reflected in the makeup of the Senate? Where does Race fit? Religion? Sexual Orientation?

Are Handicapped citizens fairly represented in the Senate?

I mean, really, how far do we want to parse this "Diversity" mantra??

The entire effort is ludicrous. What OUGHT to be guiding our decisions is, Who can we put in office (or on the School Board, or the Board of Directors, etc.) -- Man or Woman, Black or White, Gay or Straight, Jew or Gentile -- that can help ALL of us achieve Peace and Safety and Prosperity and Self-Fulfillment?

Which Candidate is best for our ORGANIZATION (country, company, church, school district, etc.), not just for my preferred People group?

Ironically, a "Diversity" focus like the one I've described here does more to DIVIDE people than it does to UNITE them.