Frederick M. Hess, director of American Enterprise Institute Education, recently wrote in the Washington Examiner that public universities that use taxpayer funds for DEI initiatives, abandoning a pursuit of free inquiry and going about a political aim, should require oversight. He argues that lawmakers should seek to create new institutions that are committed to free inquiry and the free exchange of ideas.
“Universities receive vast sums and various privileges because they’re thought to provide a unique good: Unfettered inquiry and thought. If they’re no longer inclined to do so, taxpayers and policymakers should respond accordingly,” Hess wrote in an Oct. 18 Twitter post while attaching his article from the Washington Examiner.
Dr. Jonathan Haidt, an NYU professor, announced his resignation from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP) when he discovered they were requiring statements on how a particular project would advance “the equity, inclusion and anti-racism goals of SPSP,” Hess wrote in his article. Haidt declared his refusal to submit such a statement and decided to leave the SPSP.
According to Hess, there is a bigger problem with the SPSP requiring this oath. “It demands that scholars not only kowtow to the amorphous agenda of ‘diversity, equity and inclusion’ but to the nakedly ideological, totalitarian dogma of ‘anti-racism.’” He argues that things that qualify under “anti-racism” can sometimes be “toxic.”
Hess goes on to mention Ibram X. Kendi’s work “How to be an Antiracist,” which according to Hess, states that “everything — every action, idea, thought and policy — is either ‘racist’ or ‘anti-racist.’” He quotes Kendi: “There is no such thing as a not-racist idea.” In turn, anyone who disagrees with this claim is a racist, Hess said. He argues that such “anti-racists” believe science is a “white supremacist construct” and “objectivity is a myth” and therefore can only be judged from political or ideological sides. Hess claims, “‘Anti-racism’ is a frontal assault on the institution of higher education, all the more so when it is being mandated by renowned institutions and scholarly authorities.”
Colleges and universities are moving past the goal of free inquiry and instead pursuing “social justice” aims, Hess said. He mentions the frequency of DEI statements being required for faculty positions and claims faculty candidates who submit DEI statements are scored on rubrics based on “answers that embrace race-based ideologies and penalize those that do not.” DEI statements are now required for 1 in 5 academic jobs.
Hess states another statistic: 25% of universities are requiring DEI statements for tenure evaluations. Wharton School at Penn State recently introduced DEI as a major concentration, “where a new generation of aspiring academics and managers will be trained in the fine points of ideological gatekeeping.” He argues that academic institutions have disregarded research when in 2020, the American Educational Research Association and the National Academy of Education issued a statement in support of anti-racist education so that researchers “must stand against the notion that systemic racism does not exist” declaring the issue settled.
Using science, or scientific research for political ends, undermines science itself, Hess said. He claims the mission of higher education has drastically changed, and offers reprimanding solutions to public universities that have embraced DEI standards.
“Colleges that choose to abandon their unique mission in service of ideological agendas should be treated accordingly,” Hess said. “They should be stripped of public largesse and rendered ineligible for taxpayer-provided student loans. Their privileged tax status and regulatory privileges should be reexamined. Public institutions should be subjected to rigorous oversight. Officials should bar academics from using public funds to pay dues, fees or travel expenses to ‘scholarly’ associations that have abandoned their scholarly purpose. And policymakers and thought leaders should seek ways to create new institutions and associations that are committed to free inquiry, truth-seeking and the robust exchange of ideas.”
The University of Texas System and the Texas A&M University System have both introduced Offices of DEI, hired staff to address the issues of racism at their respective universities and committed to highlighting DEI as a main institutional goal for the future.
