DEI, an abbreviation standing for “diversity, equity and inclusion” is, according to those who promote it, a program to “institutionalize” and “promote” the “fair treatment and full participation” of traditionally “underrepresented groups.” It seeks to find “underrepresented” groups, set up programs to specifically recruit potential employees from these groups, and when it comes to government services, these programs attempt to “identify unique concerns” of these groups and tailor the administration of the government programs to address these “unique concerns.”
The groups are usually identified by their racial background, that is, African American, Hispanic, Native American or Asian and Pacific Islander or by the sexual orientation of the groups. Sometimes these groups are further segmented by racial background and sexual orientation (gay or lesbian African Americans as an example), and the programs of recruitment or service delivery are further segmented and “tailored” thus delivering a different program or service to these segmented populations than others of a different race or sexual orientation.
Has there ever been a time in this country when government services and laws were used to separate races, and used racial characteristics to justify the application of separate rules, facilities, or other institutionalized efforts to benefit one group over another?
In fact, there was. These laws institutionalized discrimination on the basis of race, mainly in the South, and were called Jim Crow laws. According to several sources, Jim Crow was a fictional caricature from the 1830s, a black faced white guy portraying a African American man to entertain audiences during that time, taking advantage of the racial prejudices of the time. Jim Crow laws arose after the end of reconstruction in the South after the Civil War, mainly as a reaction to the actions of the occupying federal military forces, who offered special consideration to the freed slaves to employment in government and other settings to “make up” for their former enslaved status. Many of those put in positions of authority at that time were not ready for the responsibility they were given due to their race, and ended up being taken advantage of by certain white northerners referred to as “carpetbaggers.”
As the occupying forces left the South, the whites, angry at how they had been treated during reconstruction, passed many laws providing for “separate but equal” public services and institutionalized the division based on race “for the good of” both the whites and African Americans. When the Supreme Court, in 1896, said that “separate but equal” was Constitutional, the discriminatory “Jim Crow” laws multiplied throughout the South. They were wrong, discriminatory and totally unjustified by the Constitution or any scientific facts, but they existed and continue to be a blight on our history.
Throughout that history, Republicans opposed Jim Crow laws as institutionalized racism. They fought that discrimination at every turn, in the military, in the federal government, and in other settings, calling for equal treatment of all races in all settings. In 1954, the Supreme Court declared that separate was “inherently unequal” and Democrats in office were drug kicking and screaming by the Republican Party, and a few members of their own party, into a policy of equality, when finally Congress passed and Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, finally eliminating Jim Crow.
However, in the wake of that Civil Rights Act of 1964, courts once again started institutionalizing racial discrimination, this time called “affirmative action” programs. The same forces that opposed Jim Crow, that is, discriminatory laws and programs in favor of whites, also opposed discriminatory laws and programs in favor of other races. In the 1960s, the Supreme Court said affirmative action was constitutional, and that policy became the law of the land, just as Jim Crow had been law of the land in 1896. Affirmative action may be a pretty name, but that name were merely a pretty dress for the same old ugly human behavior, that is, favoring one race or another in government or institutional programs and policies. Worse than that, just like the carpetbaggers profited from the racist policies of reconstruction, and many whites profited from the racist political structure of Jim Crow, a whole new brand of racial hucksters figured out a way to profit from affirmative action through lawsuits or greenmail, threatening businesses and government with lawsuits, unless they got paid. They would millions of dollars to “consult” with businesses and government on the best way to implement affirmative action programs and policies.
When the Supreme Court changed its mind and declared affirmative action to be discriminatory, the race baiters had to figure out another way of continuing the policies of racial discrimination. So, just as affirmative action was born out of, and supported by the same political forces that supported Jim Crow, who saw political and economic benefits to Jim Crow, and then saw the political and economic benefits to affirmative action, came up with the new laws based on the same old policies of hatred and discrimination. They needed a new set of pretty words to hide the ugly truth of those policies, so they called their new program “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” (DEI) policies. These policies do not promote diversity, equity or inclusion. They once again divide people on the basis of race and sexual orientation, and give a “leg up” to certain groups over others, just like Jim Crow did. Same effects, same supporters, different generation. DEI is the true grandchild of Jim Crow.
It was ugly then, it’s ugly now. President Trump is on the right track to work to eliminate this discrimination in federal law, just as the Republicans in the early part of the 1900s worked to eliminate Jim Crow. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter which race it benefits.