Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, along with our house DJ Tolliver, who is actually a DJ on the radio version of this show, but not on the podcast because we don't have the rights to play the music on the podcast, and so I feel like I have to occasionally remind listeners of that Tolliver in case they're wondering what it is that you do here.

Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, along with our house DJ Tolliver, who is actually a DJ on the radio version of this show, but not on the podcast because we don't have the rights to play the music on the podcast, and so I feel like I have to occasionally remind listeners of that Tolliver in case they're wondering what it is that you do here.

I told you, man, I'll make a brand new soundtrack for the Middle. Okay, don't play with me.

I told you, man, I'll make a brand new soundtrack for the Middle. Okay, don't play with me.

I'll come in and then we have the rights. Then we would have the rights.

I'll come in and then we have the rights. Then we would have the rights.

Okay.

Okay.

So this hour we are jumping into the deep end with a topic that can be tricky to talk about, and that is DEI, diversity, equity and inclusion. It has been almost five years to the day since the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, an event that shocked the world and led to widespread protests about racial justice and reckoning in America. On an institutional level, one of the biggest efforts we saw to acknowledge this was the implementation of DEI measures across all levels of business, education, and government. And while these efforts were designed with racial healing in mind. They became divisive for some, with DEI effectively turning into a dirty word for some Americans. One of President Trump's first executive orders banned it from federal programs and policies, and the President has pressured private companies to do the same, and many of them have. So our question is, if not DEI, then what can be done to reckon with injustices of the past and ensure equal opportunity for all Americans. We're taking your calls in a moment at eight four four four middle That is eight four four four six four three three five three. But first last week on the show, we heard from so many around the country about how the tariffs are already affecting them. Here are some of the voicemails we got after the show.

So this hour we are jumping into the deep end with a topic that can be tricky to talk about, and that is DEI, diversity, equity and inclusion. It has been almost five years to the day since the murder of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer, an event that shocked the world and led to widespread protests about racial justice and reckoning in America. On an institutional level, one of the biggest efforts we saw to acknowledge this was the implementation of DEI measures across all levels of business, education, and government. And while these efforts were designed with racial healing in mind. They became divisive for some, with DEI effectively turning into a dirty word for some Americans. One of President Trump's first executive orders banned it from federal programs and policies, and the President has pressured private companies to do the same, and many of them have. So our question is, if not DEI, then what can be done to reckon with injustices of the past and ensure equal opportunity for all Americans. We're taking your calls in a moment at eight four four four middle That is eight four four four six four three three five three. But first last week on the show, we heard from so many around the country about how the tariffs are already affecting them. Here are some of the voicemails we got after the show.

Hi, my name's Josephine Hall, and I live in Vermont and I work for a jewelry company where we import jewelry from China, and so all the tariffs have affected our business and we have to pay three times the price for all of the jewelry.

Hi, my name's Josephine Hall, and I live in Vermont and I work for a jewelry company where we import jewelry from China, and so all the tariffs have affected our business and we have to pay three times the price for all of the jewelry.

My name is Daniel. I'm from Loveland, Colorado, currently the VP of finance for a protein bar company. Consumers aren't going to feel the pressure that's being put on prices right now until probably almost the holiday DS, and I think it's going to be really rough for everybody.

My name is Daniel. I'm from Loveland, Colorado, currently the VP of finance for a protein bar company. Consumers aren't going to feel the pressure that's being put on prices right now until probably almost the holiday DS, and I think it's going to be really rough for everybody.

Hey, my name is Maria Louise Smith and I'm calling from Birmingham, Alabama. I'm a mom and I have a kid who's going off to college, so we bought everything that we thought he would need. And most of the items that I picked up were made in China, so I'm not sure what to expect, but we decided to stalk up as if there's a storm coming. Well.

Hey, my name is Maria Louise Smith and I'm calling from Birmingham, Alabama. I'm a mom and I have a kid who's going off to college, so we bought everything that we thought he would need. And most of the items that I picked up were made in China, so I'm not sure what to expect, but we decided to stalk up as if there's a storm coming. Well.

Thanks to everyone who called in, and you can hear that entire episode on our podcast in partnership with iHeart Podcasts, on the iHeart app or wherever you listen to podcasts. It was one of the most eye opening episodes I think we've ever done. So now to our question this hour. If not DEI, then what tolliver? The phone number please.

Thanks to everyone who called in, and you can hear that entire episode on our podcast in partnership with iHeart Podcasts, on the iHeart app or wherever you listen to podcasts. It was one of the most eye opening episodes I think we've ever done. So now to our question this hour. If not DEI, then what tolliver? The phone number please.

It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com. You can also comment on our live stream on YouTube. I'm checking them all, okay, so hit me up. I'll get you on the air.

It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com. You can also comment on our live stream on YouTube. I'm checking them all, okay, so hit me up. I'll get you on the air.

All right, joining us this hour. ACLU President Deborah Archer, author of the new book Dividing Lines, How Transportation Infrastructure reinforces Ratio. Great to have you on the show.

All right, joining us this hour. ACLU President Deborah Archer, author of the new book Dividing Lines, How Transportation Infrastructure reinforces Ratio. Great to have you on the show.

Thank you for having me.

Thank you for having me.

And Camille Foster is with us as well, editor at large at Tangle News and independent non partisan news outlet. He's also a board member at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Camill, welcome to.

And Camille Foster is with us as well, editor at large at Tangle News and independent non partisan news outlet. He's also a board member at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Camill, welcome to.

You, wonderful be with you. Thanks so much for the invitation.

You, wonderful be with you. Thanks so much for the invitation.

So before we get to the phone, Zebra Archer, your new book explores just one aspect of the infrastructure you could say that has made our country unequal. That would be transportation. You write, the nation's transportation system is a material manifestation of the structural racial inequalities built into the foundations of this country. Explain what you mean by that.

So before we get to the phone, Zebra Archer, your new book explores just one aspect of the infrastructure you could say that has made our country unequal. That would be transportation. You write, the nation's transportation system is a material manifestation of the structural racial inequalities built into the foundations of this country. Explain what you mean by that.

Yeah, I think transportation in America is a bit of a paradox. We often think of roads and highways and public transit as symbols of progress and connection, and they absolutely are.

Yeah, I think transportation in America is a bit of a paradox. We often think of roads and highways and public transit as symbols of progress and connection, and they absolutely are.

But the story that I tell in.

But the story that I tell in.

Dividing Lines is about how these same systems have also been used as tools of exclusion and displacement, especially in black communities. So transportation and movement have long been tools for enforcing white supremacy. And then as legal segregation began to crumble during the Civil Rights movement, cities across America started turning to infrastructure, and in many ways, infrastructure replaced Jim Crow, so highways were deliberately routed through black neighborhoods. City planners used things like one way streets and dead ends to physically and socially and economically isolate black communities. And then we also know how public transportation evolved under a cloud of racism, first with explicit discrimination and then more subtle dog whistle policies.

Dividing Lines is about how these same systems have also been used as tools of exclusion and displacement, especially in black communities. So transportation and movement have long been tools for enforcing white supremacy. And then as legal segregation began to crumble during the Civil Rights movement, cities across America started turning to infrastructure, and in many ways, infrastructure replaced Jim Crow, so highways were deliberately routed through black neighborhoods. City planners used things like one way streets and dead ends to physically and socially and economically isolate black communities. And then we also know how public transportation evolved under a cloud of racism, first with explicit discrimination and then more subtle dog whistle policies.

Like public transportation not going into certain neighborhoods because let's say the white people don't want the people of color coming in from those places into the center of the city.

Like public transportation not going into certain neighborhoods because let's say the white people don't want the people of color coming in from those places into the center of the city.

Yeah, we all have.

Yeah, we all have.

With the result of the discrimination in public transportation is something that we often refer to as transportation deserts.

With the result of the discrimination in public transportation is something that we often refer to as transportation deserts.

In black communities, that.

In black communities, that.

Means they don't have access to regular public transportation, and that's from disinvestment, but also transportation deserts in many white communities by design to keep black people and other people of color out, often under the guise of safety right kind of leaning into narratives of excessive black criminality.

Means they don't have access to regular public transportation, and that's from disinvestment, but also transportation deserts in many white communities by design to keep black people and other people of color out, often under the guise of safety right kind of leaning into narratives of excessive black criminality.

So, given all of your work on this book, what do you think when you see the backlash to the DEI initiatives that grew after the murder of George Floyd and the President banning DEI for in the federal government and pressure pressuring companies and institutions to do the same.

So, given all of your work on this book, what do you think when you see the backlash to the DEI initiatives that grew after the murder of George Floyd and the President banning DEI for in the federal government and pressure pressuring companies and institutions to do the same.

Yeah. So, ultimately, the book is about how racism adapts.

Yeah. So, ultimately, the book is about how racism adapts.

Right.

Right.

Racism part of its power is that it's creative, that it's evolving, that it finds its way into all the spaces right in dividing lines. That's how racism found its way into zoning boards and city planning departments. But we see this narrative repeat all around the country. The way that racism that we experienced post slavery and in the fifties and in the seventies, it's still with us. It has just evolved. It has changed shapes and uses different policies and tools and bans on diversity, equity and inclusion and related measures. Means that we can't address the ways that we continue to be impacted by racism and inequality.

Racism part of its power is that it's creative, that it's evolving, that it finds its way into all the spaces right in dividing lines. That's how racism found its way into zoning boards and city planning departments. But we see this narrative repeat all around the country. The way that racism that we experienced post slavery and in the fifties and in the seventies, it's still with us. It has just evolved. It has changed shapes and uses different policies and tools and bans on diversity, equity and inclusion and related measures. Means that we can't address the ways that we continue to be impacted by racism and inequality.

Camille Foster, you have a slightly different perspective you were critical of DEI initiatives early on. You've said the companies and people behind them may have had noble intentions, but that they may have gone too far.

Camille Foster, you have a slightly different perspective you were critical of DEI initiatives early on. You've said the companies and people behind them may have had noble intentions, but that they may have gone too far.

Yeah, I definitely say that's true. I think, in general, I appreciate many of the historic things that Deborah has outlined in her opening remarks, But I think the public debate around DEI has been dominated by a lot of euphemism and caricature. I think a lot of advocates often present it as this very obvious, straightforward, morally unassailable set of ideas, and they will often paint critics as these folks who are indifferent to injustice, or motivated by white supremacy, or ignorant of history. But I think the reality is that DEI does represent a kind of significant philosophical shift from a position of individual equality that virtually all Americans agree on pretty violently, and individual equality under the law in particular, to something like group based analysis and redistribution on the basis of equity with rests back to outcomes for particular groups that are generally regarded as as disadvantage. And this shift is not a minor policy tweak. This is a real kind of transformational sort of innovation. And I think the important thing to acknowledge is that these programs, and whether we're talking about DEI or critical race theory or racial justice, we're often redefining fairness in a way that makes a lot of people deeply uncomfortable. And the people who it makes uncomfortable aren't just white people. They're often people who like me and quite frankly like Debra. And I think it's interesting that you've got two civil libertarians talking about these issues that many of us are deeply concerned about any sort of policy approach that is going to fundamentally treat people not as individuals who are equal under the law that's equality, but as members of racial groups that it will privilege some sort of class distinction and then actually have the law or even the bureaucratic machinery of large organizations, be they campuses or corporations, prioritize people or deprioritize them on the basis of race. And we have seen these programs essentially go ry and precisely that way.

Yeah, I definitely say that's true. I think, in general, I appreciate many of the historic things that Deborah has outlined in her opening remarks, But I think the public debate around DEI has been dominated by a lot of euphemism and caricature. I think a lot of advocates often present it as this very obvious, straightforward, morally unassailable set of ideas, and they will often paint critics as these folks who are indifferent to injustice, or motivated by white supremacy, or ignorant of history. But I think the reality is that DEI does represent a kind of significant philosophical shift from a position of individual equality that virtually all Americans agree on pretty violently, and individual equality under the law in particular, to something like group based analysis and redistribution on the basis of equity with rests back to outcomes for particular groups that are generally regarded as as disadvantage. And this shift is not a minor policy tweak. This is a real kind of transformational sort of innovation. And I think the important thing to acknowledge is that these programs, and whether we're talking about DEI or critical race theory or racial justice, we're often redefining fairness in a way that makes a lot of people deeply uncomfortable. And the people who it makes uncomfortable aren't just white people. They're often people who like me and quite frankly like Debra. And I think it's interesting that you've got two civil libertarians talking about these issues that many of us are deeply concerned about any sort of policy approach that is going to fundamentally treat people not as individuals who are equal under the law that's equality, but as members of racial groups that it will privilege some sort of class distinction and then actually have the law or even the bureaucratic machinery of large organizations, be they campuses or corporations, prioritize people or deprioritize them on the basis of race. And we have seen these programs essentially go ry and precisely that way.

So, Camille, what do you think then, when you see so many DEI initiatives being thrown out the window, and people like the Secretary of Defense Pete Heggs, that's saying anyone trying to do DEI at the Pentagon will be out well.

So, Camille, what do you think then, when you see so many DEI initiatives being thrown out the window, and people like the Secretary of Defense Pete Heggs, that's saying anyone trying to do DEI at the Pentagon will be out well.

I think the characters exist on both the right, on the right and the left with respect to these issues, both among proponents and critics. To be more specific, I think it's also important to roll the clock back a little bit. As I said, this is not just a kind of this is what fairness and justice looks like. There has been a kind of c change philosophically and ideologically, and the Biden administration when they first arrived into power in twenty twenty, they actually instituted a raft of executive orders that tried to inculcate DEI into various aspects of the federal government. And for a very long time, corporations and universities were embracing these policies. And about five years ago, as we all know, the quote unquote racial reckoning occurred, and at that point there was a profound interest in trying to prioritize racial equity. So it's important to recognize that we're not just seeing the Trump administration roll something back that we'd all agreed on before that was noble and good. It's the Trump administration responding to something that began on the left with people instituting these policies and now rolling them back. And I think both sides, quite frankly, would benefit from prioritizing pluralism, where we can have meaningful disagreements and robust conversations about the role of equality and equity in the law and under the law, quite frankly, without demonizing one another and talking past one another. I think we can have sober, serious conversations about justice, about fairness, and about what the law ought to prioritize, and even the efficacy and effectiveness of DEI policies without caricatures. I look forward to having that conversation today.

I think the characters exist on both the right, on the right and the left with respect to these issues, both among proponents and critics. To be more specific, I think it's also important to roll the clock back a little bit. As I said, this is not just a kind of this is what fairness and justice looks like. There has been a kind of c change philosophically and ideologically, and the Biden administration when they first arrived into power in twenty twenty, they actually instituted a raft of executive orders that tried to inculcate DEI into various aspects of the federal government. And for a very long time, corporations and universities were embracing these policies. And about five years ago, as we all know, the quote unquote racial reckoning occurred, and at that point there was a profound interest in trying to prioritize racial equity. So it's important to recognize that we're not just seeing the Trump administration roll something back that we'd all agreed on before that was noble and good. It's the Trump administration responding to something that began on the left with people instituting these policies and now rolling them back. And I think both sides, quite frankly, would benefit from prioritizing pluralism, where we can have meaningful disagreements and robust conversations about the role of equality and equity in the law and under the law, quite frankly, without demonizing one another and talking past one another. I think we can have sober, serious conversations about justice, about fairness, and about what the law ought to prioritize, and even the efficacy and effectiveness of DEI policies without caricatures. I look forward to having that conversation today.

I know Debra is up to the task well, and I would ask Deborah for a response right now, but I'm not going to do that because I only have about fifteen seconds to get one, So we'll get it right after this book A remind so that too much. Well, that wouldn't be fair if I stopped at fifteen seconds in. But anyway, our number is eight four four middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three and Tolliver. It is interesting, given what's happening now to listen back to the discourse right after the murder of George Floyd in twenty twenty.

I know Debra is up to the task well, and I would ask Deborah for a response right now, but I'm not going to do that because I only have about fifteen seconds to get one, So we'll get it right after this book A remind so that too much. Well, that wouldn't be fair if I stopped at fifteen seconds in. But anyway, our number is eight four four middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three and Tolliver. It is interesting, given what's happening now to listen back to the discourse right after the murder of George Floyd in twenty twenty.

Yeah, back then, even Republicans were in favor of some of the DEI initiatives that were coming out, including soccer Senator Mitch McConnell.

Yeah, back then, even Republicans were in favor of some of the DEI initiatives that were coming out, including soccer Senator Mitch McConnell.

You can understand the outrage. I mean, what happened. This is a vexing issue. If you know, if we could have figured out exactly what to do, I think we'd have done it years ago. It's one of our continuing persistent problems in our society that we're all acutely aware of and searching for answers.

You can understand the outrage. I mean, what happened. This is a vexing issue. If you know, if we could have figured out exactly what to do, I think we'd have done it years ago. It's one of our continuing persistent problems in our society that we're all acutely aware of and searching for answers.

Was that Ai That's really him? But that was what things sounded like five years ago. And a reminder that Mitch McConnell is retiring next year after a forty year career in Congress. You are listening to the middle, We'll be right back. This is the middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just tuning, in the Middle is a national call and show. We're focused on elevating voices from the middle geographically, politically, and philosophically, or maybe you just want to meet in the middle this hour, we're asking if not DEI, then what can be done to reckon with the past and ensure equal opportunity for all Americans? Tolliver the phone number again, please.

Was that Ai That's really him? But that was what things sounded like five years ago. And a reminder that Mitch McConnell is retiring next year after a forty year career in Congress. You are listening to the middle, We'll be right back. This is the middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just tuning, in the Middle is a national call and show. We're focused on elevating voices from the middle geographically, politically, and philosophically, or maybe you just want to meet in the middle this hour, we're asking if not DEI, then what can be done to reckon with the past and ensure equal opportunity for all Americans? Tolliver the phone number again, please.

It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. You can also write to us to listen to the Middle dot com or on social media and some of you already have and it's scandalous.

It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four four six four three three five three. You can also write to us to listen to the Middle dot com or on social media and some of you already have and it's scandalous.

Okay, Well, and if you are calling in, and by the way, if you're hitting a busy signal, because I see the lines are all full right now, you can leave a message for us. I'm joined by ACLU president Deva Archer, author of the book Dividing Lines, and Tangle News editor a Large Camille Foster. And before we go back to the phone's Devor Archer, let's get your your thoughts on what we just heard there. And I guess I'll also ask sort of how does the acl you navigate this, because you could say you have people saying that you need DEI initiatives to reduce discrimination, and you could also say people have people saying DEI is discriminatory.

Okay, Well, and if you are calling in, and by the way, if you're hitting a busy signal, because I see the lines are all full right now, you can leave a message for us. I'm joined by ACLU president Deva Archer, author of the book Dividing Lines, and Tangle News editor a Large Camille Foster. And before we go back to the phone's Devor Archer, let's get your your thoughts on what we just heard there. And I guess I'll also ask sort of how does the acl you navigate this, because you could say you have people saying that you need DEI initiatives to reduce discrimination, and you could also say people have people saying DEI is discriminatory.

I think there's so much that kill said that we really need to break down and engage in conversation.

I think there's so much that kill said that we really need to break down and engage in conversation.

One point is that I don't.

One point is that I don't.

Think that DEI and racial justice efforts are about redefining equality. I think a lot of them about redefining merit, and that makes people uncomfortable. So a lot of what we define as merit actually are factors that consolidate and amplify access to privilege, privilege that has historically and continues to be denied disproportionately to people of color. So, for example, we have college admissions programs that require calculus, and study after study has shown that predominantly black and Latin ex schools don't have access to calculus, and therefore it makes it harder for them to get admissions. And so we need to challenge this idea that our current, our system before was based on merit and that we're doing something else. And I think in many ways it's about redefining merit. Also, when we talk about what DEI is, DEI is not just affirmative action. It is not just hiring processes. DEI is what led us to have a family and maternity leave. It is not just about dealing with the inequalities at the back end.

Think that DEI and racial justice efforts are about redefining equality. I think a lot of them about redefining merit, and that makes people uncomfortable. So a lot of what we define as merit actually are factors that consolidate and amplify access to privilege, privilege that has historically and continues to be denied disproportionately to people of color. So, for example, we have college admissions programs that require calculus, and study after study has shown that predominantly black and Latin ex schools don't have access to calculus, and therefore it makes it harder for them to get admissions. And so we need to challenge this idea that our current, our system before was based on merit and that we're doing something else. And I think in many ways it's about redefining merit. Also, when we talk about what DEI is, DEI is not just affirmative action. It is not just hiring processes. DEI is what led us to have a family and maternity leave. It is not just about dealing with the inequalities at the back end.

It is about prevention.

It is about prevention.

It is about trainings that help us understand where there are inequalities built into our system against systems that we thought were merit based but really amplify differential access. And no one's saying that there aren't challenges or problems with racial justice efforts or diversity equity and inclusion efforts. But it doesn't mean that we throw everything out. Right, we have a criminal legal system that is a rife with racial inequality, and we don't just toss the whole system out. Instead, we try to get at the problem areas.

It is about trainings that help us understand where there are inequalities built into our system against systems that we thought were merit based but really amplify differential access. And no one's saying that there aren't challenges or problems with racial justice efforts or diversity equity and inclusion efforts. But it doesn't mean that we throw everything out. Right, we have a criminal legal system that is a rife with racial inequality, and we don't just toss the whole system out. Instead, we try to get at the problem areas.

And so I'm not.

And so I'm not.

Beyond having a conversation about some of the ways in which diversity, equity and inclusion efforts might have resulted in unfairness or inequity. But that's the conversation we need to have, and that's not the conversation we're having. It's not what we're seeing. We're seeing a wholesale removal of the ability to talk about race, to address racial inequality, and a rature of people of color. And then finally, just you know, the challenge for me is the insistence on the other end of color blindness, and an insistence on color blindness does real damage in a world that's shaped by race.

Beyond having a conversation about some of the ways in which diversity, equity and inclusion efforts might have resulted in unfairness or inequity. But that's the conversation we need to have, and that's not the conversation we're having. It's not what we're seeing. We're seeing a wholesale removal of the ability to talk about race, to address racial inequality, and a rature of people of color. And then finally, just you know, the challenge for me is the insistence on the other end of color blindness, and an insistence on color blindness does real damage in a world that's shaped by race.

Ignoring race doesn't make racism go away.

Ignoring race doesn't make racism go away.

Race continues to matter, It continues to constrain the opportunities of some and expand the opportunities for others.

Race continues to matter, It continues to constrain the opportunities of some and expand the opportunities for others.

So at the ACLU, we.

So at the ACLU, we.

Are fighting to make sure that everyone has equal access to opportunity. And so for us, tearing down some of the real barriers that we see that prevent access to educational opportunity and economic opportunity and good health, strong communities, that's what we're fighting for.

Are fighting to make sure that everyone has equal access to opportunity. And so for us, tearing down some of the real barriers that we see that prevent access to educational opportunity and economic opportunity and good health, strong communities, that's what we're fighting for.

Well, okay, let me let me say. You say, you know, don't want to throw everything out. It certainly does seem like that that is exactly what the Trump administration is doing right now. And Camille Foster, let me ask you briefly, because I do want to get to some of these callers as well, is there a replacement for DEI initiatives that you think would be more useful.

Well, okay, let me let me say. You say, you know, don't want to throw everything out. It certainly does seem like that that is exactly what the Trump administration is doing right now. And Camille Foster, let me ask you briefly, because I do want to get to some of these callers as well, is there a replacement for DEI initiatives that you think would be more useful.

Well, I want to just clarify something here, and I think it's pretty important. I, for one, am not a proponent of colorblindness. Quite frankly, I'm an individualist, which I think is fundamentally different. I'm for something. What I am opposed to is a kind of racial primacy with respect to our analysis and attempts to understand a really complicated, multivariate were world. I love the example that Debora Pride in a moment ago of calculus programs and access to them being something that is absolutely essential to being able to attain a higher education and succeed in various fields. It does seem to me that there is a real question about the efficacy of prioritizing racial disparities versus prioritizing access to the actual programs that are likely to get one the kind of advantages that we're all we'd all like to see conferred upon every student. And from my standpoint, when I see a child is either going to be enrolled in a program in Appalachia or in Baltimore City, I know that those students might look different from one another, but the deprivation that they're going to suffer is identical. And I think the rather subtle implication of the social justice this kind of dei worldview, and I hate to even use the word because it's so confusing at this point, is that there is a suggestion that I ought to be disproportionately concerned about someone in a particular circumstance on the basis of their race, and I'm just not I am far more concerned with actual deprivation and individual people's lives than I am racial disparities. I think if we obsess over disparities, we run the risk of living in an Harrison Bergeron type world where success can be defined as either raising the ceiling for everyone or lowering it on everyone, and that can't be what we actually want. Racial parity is not my goal. My goal is a free and prosperous society, and I think we only get there by prioritizing individualism and human dignity as the basis for individual as the basis for human dignity. That has always been the prize. And I think the mistake that's been made by many, many well intentioned people is to confuse this project of trying to adjudicate these past harms on the basis of racial lines. That they don't appreciate that there are inherent disadvantages that are associated with that, like the reification of these racial categories, which I think, quite frankly five the last five years tell us pretty clearly that an emphasis on race here the capitalization of B in black, for example, may actually be driving us apart and concretizing these racial identities as opposed to helping us identify what we have in common.

Well, I want to just clarify something here, and I think it's pretty important. I, for one, am not a proponent of colorblindness. Quite frankly, I'm an individualist, which I think is fundamentally different. I'm for something. What I am opposed to is a kind of racial primacy with respect to our analysis and attempts to understand a really complicated, multivariate were world. I love the example that Debora Pride in a moment ago of calculus programs and access to them being something that is absolutely essential to being able to attain a higher education and succeed in various fields. It does seem to me that there is a real question about the efficacy of prioritizing racial disparities versus prioritizing access to the actual programs that are likely to get one the kind of advantages that we're all we'd all like to see conferred upon every student. And from my standpoint, when I see a child is either going to be enrolled in a program in Appalachia or in Baltimore City, I know that those students might look different from one another, but the deprivation that they're going to suffer is identical. And I think the rather subtle implication of the social justice this kind of dei worldview, and I hate to even use the word because it's so confusing at this point, is that there is a suggestion that I ought to be disproportionately concerned about someone in a particular circumstance on the basis of their race, and I'm just not I am far more concerned with actual deprivation and individual people's lives than I am racial disparities. I think if we obsess over disparities, we run the risk of living in an Harrison Bergeron type world where success can be defined as either raising the ceiling for everyone or lowering it on everyone, and that can't be what we actually want. Racial parity is not my goal. My goal is a free and prosperous society, and I think we only get there by prioritizing individualism and human dignity as the basis for individual as the basis for human dignity. That has always been the prize. And I think the mistake that's been made by many, many well intentioned people is to confuse this project of trying to adjudicate these past harms on the basis of racial lines. That they don't appreciate that there are inherent disadvantages that are associated with that, like the reification of these racial categories, which I think, quite frankly five the last five years tell us pretty clearly that an emphasis on race here the capitalization of B in black, for example, may actually be driving us apart and concretizing these racial identities as opposed to helping us identify what we have in common.

Most fundamentally, I want to stop you there. I think we've actually set a record now for the longest period without getting to any callers. And we could just go back and forth between the two of you for the entire show, but I do want to get to some callers. Let's get to candas in Salt Lake City, Utah. Candas, go ahead with your thoughts.

Most fundamentally, I want to stop you there. I think we've actually set a record now for the longest period without getting to any callers. And we could just go back and forth between the two of you for the entire show, but I do want to get to some callers. Let's get to candas in Salt Lake City, Utah. Candas, go ahead with your thoughts.

Oh.

Oh.

I am a fam tender queer tenured professor at the University of Michigan pronounced say them. I have benefited from diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, and as many of you know, the University of Michigan recently dismantled DEI initiatives across all three Michigan campuses. Faculty, staff, and students are furious about this decision. The question is what do we do instead of DEI? And I have to call upon black feminist scholarship for this and Ruhab Benjamin's imagination of manifesto who Benjamin is really not a proponent of DEI within institutions, and she sees it as a placeholder. Really, what she believes is we should focus on hyperlocal organizing, So that could include creating imagination collectives dedicated to generating and implementing alternative futures, and I think systems and institutions could do this too, or freedom laboratories, which are spaces to experiment with new social arrangements technologies where communities can try out alternatives to current systems. So I guess bottom line, d I didn't go far enough.

I am a fam tender queer tenured professor at the University of Michigan pronounced say them. I have benefited from diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, and as many of you know, the University of Michigan recently dismantled DEI initiatives across all three Michigan campuses. Faculty, staff, and students are furious about this decision. The question is what do we do instead of DEI? And I have to call upon black feminist scholarship for this and Ruhab Benjamin's imagination of manifesto who Benjamin is really not a proponent of DEI within institutions, and she sees it as a placeholder. Really, what she believes is we should focus on hyperlocal organizing, So that could include creating imagination collectives dedicated to generating and implementing alternative futures, and I think systems and institutions could do this too, or freedom laboratories, which are spaces to experiment with new social arrangements technologies where communities can try out alternatives to current systems. So I guess bottom line, d I didn't go far enough.

Interesting, interesting perspective. Candice, thank you very much for that. Let me get another one in here. And Gabe, who's in Charleston, South Carolina, Gabe your thoughts.

Interesting, interesting perspective. Candice, thank you very much for that. Let me get another one in here. And Gabe, who's in Charleston, South Carolina, Gabe your thoughts.

Hi, thank you for having me. Yeah, we I go to the college or I'm not I shouldn't say, but I'm in college. And they also dismantled like all the d I initiatives. I'm an education major and one of the it's it's not like it's been this is this thing called call me mister. And the Sisters of Septima are two fellowships for like black educators, and uh they essentially got their uh, their funding cut. And also like the previous college said like we had a pride center, we had this multicultural center. Those are completely eradicated. Not really, I mean, I think the legislation was so vague that uh that uh the board that the Board of Trustee is kind of like, just decide to cut it, you know, so gave.

Hi, thank you for having me. Yeah, we I go to the college or I'm not I shouldn't say, but I'm in college. And they also dismantled like all the d I initiatives. I'm an education major and one of the it's it's not like it's been this is this thing called call me mister. And the Sisters of Septima are two fellowships for like black educators, and uh they essentially got their uh, their funding cut. And also like the previous college said like we had a pride center, we had this multicultural center. Those are completely eradicated. Not really, I mean, I think the legislation was so vague that uh that uh the board that the Board of Trustee is kind of like, just decide to cut it, you know, so gave.

Do you have a you have a do you have a better solution than de I than if it's been cut? Where you are.

Do you have a you have a do you have a better solution than de I than if it's been cut? Where you are.

A better solution? I I can't really think about a better solution. I don't. I don't really think of the harm that's being done either. I say, just reinstate it.

A better solution? I I can't really think about a better solution. I don't. I don't really think of the harm that's being done either. I say, just reinstate it.

Reinstate it, okay? Interesting? Uh devor Archer, what do you think about that? Two people who say it didn't didn't go far enough and reinstate it where they are where it's been cut.

Reinstate it, okay? Interesting? Uh devor Archer, what do you think about that? Two people who say it didn't didn't go far enough and reinstate it where they are where it's been cut.

I appreciate that because I think it recognizes that without the you know, we saw a lot of progress on racial inclusion, and that was because of a lot of these efforts that we had not about giving people access to spaces and opportunity that they didn't deserve. It is about about making sure that we were taking down unnecessary barriers. And without the DEI efforts, I think people in institutions, that colleges and universities and companies are seeing the division come back, where we are going to resegregate in many ways, and so it cannot be that we have no tools, and so I appreciate the folks that say it didn't go far enough, focusing on other ways that we build power, we create access. I don't disagree with Camille that we need to make sure that everyone has access, but racism is a real thing that helps to continually find its way into all of the solutions and reinforce these inequalities. So yes, let's make sure that children have access to educational opportunities all children. We fight for all children, not just my children. I want to fight for everyone's children. But somehow in that fight, we still end up in places where they're is deep racial inequalities. And either we're going to end up in a place where we think there's something wrong with black children and black families. They don't value education, they don't believe in taking advantage of economic opportunity, or we have to recognize there are deep, deep problems within our systems, not historical ones but current ones as well. And so whatever we do, it cannot be to turn our backs on racial justice efforts. And why I appreciate that sentiment in both of the callers.

I appreciate that because I think it recognizes that without the you know, we saw a lot of progress on racial inclusion, and that was because of a lot of these efforts that we had not about giving people access to spaces and opportunity that they didn't deserve. It is about about making sure that we were taking down unnecessary barriers. And without the DEI efforts, I think people in institutions, that colleges and universities and companies are seeing the division come back, where we are going to resegregate in many ways, and so it cannot be that we have no tools, and so I appreciate the folks that say it didn't go far enough, focusing on other ways that we build power, we create access. I don't disagree with Camille that we need to make sure that everyone has access, but racism is a real thing that helps to continually find its way into all of the solutions and reinforce these inequalities. So yes, let's make sure that children have access to educational opportunities all children. We fight for all children, not just my children. I want to fight for everyone's children. But somehow in that fight, we still end up in places where they're is deep racial inequalities. And either we're going to end up in a place where we think there's something wrong with black children and black families. They don't value education, they don't believe in taking advantage of economic opportunity, or we have to recognize there are deep, deep problems within our systems, not historical ones but current ones as well. And so whatever we do, it cannot be to turn our backs on racial justice efforts. And why I appreciate that sentiment in both of the callers.

Let's get to Ryan who's in Pittsburgh. Ryan, Welcome to the middle. Go ahead with your thoughts.

Let's get to Ryan who's in Pittsburgh. Ryan, Welcome to the middle. Go ahead with your thoughts.

Hey, thank you for having me this evening. I'm a former educator of twelve years in Chicago public schools and now work at the University of Pittsburgh. I really wish in looking back at DEI, there had been a more explicit focus on socioeconomic issues, and when we talk about diversity, you know, people that don't have college educations or people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. I really felt like the socioeconomic messaging that was there in DEI was not forefront. And you know, in looking back at like Martin Luther King's last moments, you know, his Poor People's campaign, he really emphasized there's no going after racism and sexism and other issues without that economic issue. And if there's an e I two point zero, I really hope that at the forefront we see that socioeconomic message of social justice.

Hey, thank you for having me this evening. I'm a former educator of twelve years in Chicago public schools and now work at the University of Pittsburgh. I really wish in looking back at DEI, there had been a more explicit focus on socioeconomic issues, and when we talk about diversity, you know, people that don't have college educations or people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds. I really felt like the socioeconomic messaging that was there in DEI was not forefront. And you know, in looking back at like Martin Luther King's last moments, you know, his Poor People's campaign, he really emphasized there's no going after racism and sexism and other issues without that economic issue. And if there's an e I two point zero, I really hope that at the forefront we see that socioeconomic message of social justice.

Thank you so much, Thank you, Ryan Camille.

Thank you so much, Thank you, Ryan Camille.

Yeah, well, there's a couple of things I'd like to say. First, the caller from Michigan, it's very ironic that that is the particular program that was referred to because the New York Times Nicholas Confesssori wrote a pretty extensive and devastating piece back in October of last year about Michigan's efforts in DEI and underscored the fact that the spending was pretty profound, that they doubled down on the program, and that their enrollment did not budge in terms of black student enrollment. It stayed at about six point one percent. Despite the fact that they doubled the spending, About fifty six percent of the spending actually ended up going into salaries and benefits for the staff who are working on these programs. And it's really important to underscore this that these programs are not just a kind of mixed quality. Many of them fail in really profound ways. We see so many stories about these anti racism centers that are going out of business in various ways. And the reality is there's a question that has to be asked which actually mirrors what the last caller was just referring to. Here, are these programs generally benefiting the most needy? Are they actually serving the interests of the people who most need help, or are they helping people who are already going to be going to pretty good universities perhaps go to better universities who are already in the C suite get a slightly better job, And are they helping people essentially get really great, high paying jobs in the industry that is supposed to be delivering a greater diversity in not so much serving the interests of the people in those programs. And quite frankly, I think there's a lot of evidence that calls into question the quality of these programs, So simply doubling down on it would be a profound error in my estimation, and it would probably be an error that is motivated by attention to the stated goal and purpose of these programs, not attention to whether or not they're actually working.

Yeah, well, there's a couple of things I'd like to say. First, the caller from Michigan, it's very ironic that that is the particular program that was referred to because the New York Times Nicholas Confesssori wrote a pretty extensive and devastating piece back in October of last year about Michigan's efforts in DEI and underscored the fact that the spending was pretty profound, that they doubled down on the program, and that their enrollment did not budge in terms of black student enrollment. It stayed at about six point one percent. Despite the fact that they doubled the spending, About fifty six percent of the spending actually ended up going into salaries and benefits for the staff who are working on these programs. And it's really important to underscore this that these programs are not just a kind of mixed quality. Many of them fail in really profound ways. We see so many stories about these anti racism centers that are going out of business in various ways. And the reality is there's a question that has to be asked which actually mirrors what the last caller was just referring to. Here, are these programs generally benefiting the most needy? Are they actually serving the interests of the people who most need help, or are they helping people who are already going to be going to pretty good universities perhaps go to better universities who are already in the C suite get a slightly better job, And are they helping people essentially get really great, high paying jobs in the industry that is supposed to be delivering a greater diversity in not so much serving the interests of the people in those programs. And quite frankly, I think there's a lot of evidence that calls into question the quality of these programs, So simply doubling down on it would be a profound error in my estimation, and it would probably be an error that is motivated by attention to the stated goal and purpose of these programs, not attention to whether or not they're actually working.

Telliver some comments coming in online.

Telliver some comments coming in online.

Yeah, so McDuffie from Georgia shout out to McDuffie listens every week, says, when your only option is accept DEI or get canceled, what do you think the result is going to be the case for any kind of diversity program. Programming needs to be presented much differently to get meaningful acceptance. And then Candy and Dallas says, I'm a retired female engineer. DEI allows those who wouldn't otherwise get a chance at a position, even if they have equivalent education experience to have that shot. De program train hiring managers to be aware of unconscious bias. I'm gonna stop there so we don't go too long. But I wanted to ask our panel because my impression of DEI was that it doesn't have anything to do with quotas. Were just expanding the pool of applicants, and so I have trouble seeing the negative side of that debora.

Yeah, so McDuffie from Georgia shout out to McDuffie listens every week, says, when your only option is accept DEI or get canceled, what do you think the result is going to be the case for any kind of diversity program. Programming needs to be presented much differently to get meaningful acceptance. And then Candy and Dallas says, I'm a retired female engineer. DEI allows those who wouldn't otherwise get a chance at a position, even if they have equivalent education experience to have that shot. De program train hiring managers to be aware of unconscious bias. I'm gonna stop there so we don't go too long. But I wanted to ask our panel because my impression of DEI was that it doesn't have anything to do with quotas. Were just expanding the pool of applicants, and so I have trouble seeing the negative side of that debora.

If you wanted to, Yeah, well, I think that's right.

If you wanted to, Yeah, well, I think that's right.

Warrants clarification because quotas have been illegal for quite some time. Reserving spots has been illegal since Baki, and so we've always had that, and people should challenge programs that are engaged in using quotas, that are engaged in reserving spots and all of those things. And so DEI again, is far more expansive and inclusion inclusive than we make it out to be. You know, talking about enrollment is often the focus, or hiring is often the focus. But I think spending some funds for DEI programs on staff is important because it's not just about the diversity, it's about the equity and the inclusion. And at the institutions that I've been in a lot of the DEI staff, and folks who focus on that are about making sure that once students are there, once folks are inside that institution, that we are making sure that they are supported. So I think that that is an important aspect, and the socioeconomic issues. I'm so glad that Ryan raised that because it is important. It is a challenge for my parents, for our immigrants to this community. I'm the first generation American citizen, first person in my family to graduate from college, and those efforts to support folks from different socioeconomic backgrounds help me get to where I am today.

Warrants clarification because quotas have been illegal for quite some time. Reserving spots has been illegal since Baki, and so we've always had that, and people should challenge programs that are engaged in using quotas, that are engaged in reserving spots and all of those things. And so DEI again, is far more expansive and inclusion inclusive than we make it out to be. You know, talking about enrollment is often the focus, or hiring is often the focus. But I think spending some funds for DEI programs on staff is important because it's not just about the diversity, it's about the equity and the inclusion. And at the institutions that I've been in a lot of the DEI staff, and folks who focus on that are about making sure that once students are there, once folks are inside that institution, that we are making sure that they are supported. So I think that that is an important aspect, and the socioeconomic issues. I'm so glad that Ryan raised that because it is important. It is a challenge for my parents, for our immigrants to this community. I'm the first generation American citizen, first person in my family to graduate from college, and those efforts to support folks from different socioeconomic backgrounds help me get to where I am today.

And we're losing those as.

And we're losing those as.

Well well, Tolliver. We heard from Mitch McConnell earlier, but we ultimately saw a lot of backlash a DEI, even from politicians on the left.

Well well, Tolliver. We heard from Mitch McConnell earlier, but we ultimately saw a lot of backlash a DEI, even from politicians on the left.

Yeah, former Transportation Secretary Pete Budages among them. Here he is speaking back in February.

Yeah, former Transportation Secretary Pete Budages among them. Here he is speaking back in February.

We believe in the values of we care about for a reason, and this is not about abandoning those values. What do we mean when we talk about diversity? Is it caring for people's different experiences and making sure no one's mistreated because of them, which I will always fight for or is it making people sit through a training that looks like something out of Portlandia, which I have also experienced, and it is how it is how Trump Republicans are made. If that comes to your workplace with the best of intentions. Actually, if we thought about it a little bit differently, things like diversity would be actually an example of how we reach out beyond our traditional coalition.

We believe in the values of we care about for a reason, and this is not about abandoning those values. What do we mean when we talk about diversity? Is it caring for people's different experiences and making sure no one's mistreated because of them, which I will always fight for or is it making people sit through a training that looks like something out of Portlandia, which I have also experienced, and it is how it is how Trump Republicans are made. If that comes to your workplace with the best of intentions. Actually, if we thought about it a little bit differently, things like diversity would be actually an example of how we reach out beyond our traditional coalition.

It's interesting to see so many Democrats like Pete Buddha Judge and Gavin Newsom, who are clearly running for president move to the right instead of to the left in the pre primary stage.

It's interesting to see so many Democrats like Pete Buddha Judge and Gavin Newsom, who are clearly running for president move to the right instead of to the left in the pre primary stage.

Well, Portland, I don't know, port landy is pretty quiet.

Well, Portland, I don't know, port landy is pretty quiet.

Yeah, oh that was a good show. We'll be right back with more of the middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, and this hour we're asking you. If not DEI, then what you can call us at eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com. I guess our Tangle news editor at large Camille Foster and ACLU President Deborah Archer. Her new book is called Dividing Lines. The phone lines are full. Let's get to Joseph in Saint Louis, Missouri. Joseph, welcome to the middle.

Yeah, oh that was a good show. We'll be right back with more of the middle. This is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, and this hour we're asking you. If not DEI, then what you can call us at eight four four four Middle that's eight four four four six four three three five three, or you can reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com. I guess our Tangle news editor at large Camille Foster and ACLU President Deborah Archer. Her new book is called Dividing Lines. The phone lines are full. Let's get to Joseph in Saint Louis, Missouri. Joseph, welcome to the middle.

What do you think, good evening, I think that the best way to ensure equality of opportunity is to ensure equality of opportunity. I mean, given that we live in a diverse society, given that identities are important to people, we should really strive to kind of especially in the context of employment contracts or government policy, like how orchestras do blind auditions where race, sex, age doesn't matter. And you know, that's not to say that race doesn't matter in life, but just in these legally binding contractual obligations that we all enter into. And we really need to get rid of the disparate impact theory, which is just so silly on its fafe that we're gnashing our teeth and pulling our hair that there aren't enough Guatemalans in the NBA, or that there's not enough women coders, or too many black children are suspended from school, or you know, not as well.

What do you think, good evening, I think that the best way to ensure equality of opportunity is to ensure equality of opportunity. I mean, given that we live in a diverse society, given that identities are important to people, we should really strive to kind of especially in the context of employment contracts or government policy, like how orchestras do blind auditions where race, sex, age doesn't matter. And you know, that's not to say that race doesn't matter in life, but just in these legally binding contractual obligations that we all enter into. And we really need to get rid of the disparate impact theory, which is just so silly on its fafe that we're gnashing our teeth and pulling our hair that there aren't enough Guatemalans in the NBA, or that there's not enough women coders, or too many black children are suspended from school, or you know, not as well.

So, Joseph, let me ask you this. Clearly, you're not a fan of the DEI efforts that existed before. Did it factor into your vote in the last election? Did you vote for Trump.

So, Joseph, let me ask you this. Clearly, you're not a fan of the DEI efforts that existed before. Did it factor into your vote in the last election? Did you vote for Trump.

I did. And yeah, I mean I like, for like the Buddha Jedge comment that you said, where it's like a Portlandia's sketch. I've had to sit through some of these struggle sessions that the irony is they make people really, as one of your guests has, concretize their identities as separate from each other. And it makes the people who didn't get the job, even if they didn't deserve it, feel resentful that they didn't get it, and then the people who did get the job are looked at as, oh, you're just a DEI affirmative action higher. So I mean, in a diverse society like this, we really need to struggle to just kind of individual marriage.

I did. And yeah, I mean I like, for like the Buddha Jedge comment that you said, where it's like a Portlandia's sketch. I've had to sit through some of these struggle sessions that the irony is they make people really, as one of your guests has, concretize their identities as separate from each other. And it makes the people who didn't get the job, even if they didn't deserve it, feel resentful that they didn't get it, and then the people who did get the job are looked at as, oh, you're just a DEI affirmative action higher. So I mean, in a diverse society like this, we really need to struggle to just kind of individual marriage.

Okay, Joseph, thank you very much. Camille Foster, I'm glad we got a call like that because it is representative obviously of people who who voted on this issue for Donald Trump.

Okay, Joseph, thank you very much. Camille Foster, I'm glad we got a call like that because it is representative obviously of people who who voted on this issue for Donald Trump.

Yeah, i'd say that's right, And I think it's it's just imperative to acknowledge the various ways and perhaps to find find some specific examples of where these programs run a foul of a lot of people's just deeply inborn sensibilities about what fairness looks like. And it is important to acknowledge that those blind auditions, for example, have been criticized on the grounds that they don't take into consideration racial equity, that what some people would prefer to see is something akin to quota systems, And it is it's important to acknowledge that a lot of the co consternation currently aimed at Harvard not from the administration, who I think has made any number of profound errors and is kind of running a foul of various civil liberty principles that are very important to me. That there are various ways in which schemes have been implemented in order to try and limit the number of Asian students who are being enrolled in schools because they are overrepresented quote unquote's respect to their share of the demographic population. And I just think that that's wrong. A person should not be penalized for their individual success on account of happening to belong to the wrong racial group. There's too many of you people here is not the sort of sentiment that anyone should be promoting. And if it, I know that it sounds perhaps a bit crass to put it that way, but that literally is the direct impact of a policy of prioritizing people for admittance on the basis of their race, even if they're a member of an underrepresented group. So I do think that has pernicious consequences, and we've seen that over the course of the last five years or so. And there is an alternative. We could simply look at a policy of trying to make our society one that is treating people on an individual basis, in as much as that is a possibility, and it's hard to optimize for that. If we continue to reiffy race and continue to double down on a kind of soft essentialism, I think it is. It's a profound mistake, and in many instances it's not even so soft.

Yeah, i'd say that's right, And I think it's it's just imperative to acknowledge the various ways and perhaps to find find some specific examples of where these programs run a foul of a lot of people's just deeply inborn sensibilities about what fairness looks like. And it is important to acknowledge that those blind auditions, for example, have been criticized on the grounds that they don't take into consideration racial equity, that what some people would prefer to see is something akin to quota systems, And it is it's important to acknowledge that a lot of the co consternation currently aimed at Harvard not from the administration, who I think has made any number of profound errors and is kind of running a foul of various civil liberty principles that are very important to me. That there are various ways in which schemes have been implemented in order to try and limit the number of Asian students who are being enrolled in schools because they are overrepresented quote unquote's respect to their share of the demographic population. And I just think that that's wrong. A person should not be penalized for their individual success on account of happening to belong to the wrong racial group. There's too many of you people here is not the sort of sentiment that anyone should be promoting. And if it, I know that it sounds perhaps a bit crass to put it that way, but that literally is the direct impact of a policy of prioritizing people for admittance on the basis of their race, even if they're a member of an underrepresented group. So I do think that has pernicious consequences, and we've seen that over the course of the last five years or so. And there is an alternative. We could simply look at a policy of trying to make our society one that is treating people on an individual basis, in as much as that is a possibility, and it's hard to optimize for that. If we continue to reiffy race and continue to double down on a kind of soft essentialism, I think it is. It's a profound mistake, and in many instances it's not even so soft.

Let's hear from Harry in Missouri City, Texas. Hi, Harry, Welcome to the middle. Go ahead with your thoughts.

Let's hear from Harry in Missouri City, Texas. Hi, Harry, Welcome to the middle. Go ahead with your thoughts.

Well, my thoughts are I agree with Camille Foster and Deb Archer and some of the callers. I don't really agree with that last caller who voted for Trub. I think the trub administration is trying to resegregate America because he came out of segregated society, and I just think that what he's trying to do is he's just trying to say white privilege. First. You know, with this DEI issue, it's difficult. You have to work at it. If not EI what people what the question is, you're going to have to put people have to put their prejudices aside because a lot in this society racism is taught at a very young age, and it's very difficult for people to put that aside. When you when people come in for they want to apply for a uh uh, they want to go to IVY school whether it's or they want to apply for corporations, uh and then and we want equal opportunity if you if they have the credentials, then their ethnic background should not matter. Because if you UH in a corporation or any of these schools, if you have mostly white people in it, then you're not really practicing the I because the people of color are being left behind because you're you we live in a diversity of society and you're not you're you're you're not practicing where it is diverse in corporations and in UH universities if you have mostly white people. And I think that's what Donald Trump replisites, Yeah.

Well, my thoughts are I agree with Camille Foster and Deb Archer and some of the callers. I don't really agree with that last caller who voted for Trub. I think the trub administration is trying to resegregate America because he came out of segregated society, and I just think that what he's trying to do is he's just trying to say white privilege. First. You know, with this DEI issue, it's difficult. You have to work at it. If not EI what people what the question is, you're going to have to put people have to put their prejudices aside because a lot in this society racism is taught at a very young age, and it's very difficult for people to put that aside. When you when people come in for they want to apply for a uh uh, they want to go to IVY school whether it's or they want to apply for corporations, uh and then and we want equal opportunity if you if they have the credentials, then their ethnic background should not matter. Because if you UH in a corporation or any of these schools, if you have mostly white people in it, then you're not really practicing the I because the people of color are being left behind because you're you we live in a diversity of society and you're not you're you're you're not practicing where it is diverse in corporations and in UH universities if you have mostly white people. And I think that's what Donald Trump replisites, Yeah.

Okay, Harry is for Yeah, I think we've got it. Harry, thank you very much for that. Debora Archer, I'll go to you for for your thoughts on those calls.

Okay, Harry is for Yeah, I think we've got it. Harry, thank you very much for that. Debora Archer, I'll go to you for for your thoughts on those calls.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So I do want to stress that no one supports or I certainly don't support discrimination against Asian students. But I think thinking about how we challenge negative action, which is direct discrimination against Asian students because of their race, is different than affirmative action programs, because affirmative action programs have actually shown to support the admission of lots of folks who are Asian who are underrepresented, and so it is we have to think differently about, you know, be careful about how we have that conversation. The last caller was talking about idly universities and some of it. Camille raised this issue abou whether we're trying to get people at better colleges and universities those who are just getting into colleges and universities. And I think that's important too. We shouldn't have a two tier system of higher education. We know how important it is to have access to Ivy League schools. Right the number of Supreme Court justices that came from Yale or Harvard is meaningful and it shows to us that within our system, access to the most elite institutions is also important.

So I do want to stress that no one supports or I certainly don't support discrimination against Asian students. But I think thinking about how we challenge negative action, which is direct discrimination against Asian students because of their race, is different than affirmative action programs, because affirmative action programs have actually shown to support the admission of lots of folks who are Asian who are underrepresented, and so it is we have to think differently about, you know, be careful about how we have that conversation. The last caller was talking about idly universities and some of it. Camille raised this issue abou whether we're trying to get people at better colleges and universities those who are just getting into colleges and universities. And I think that's important too. We shouldn't have a two tier system of higher education. We know how important it is to have access to Ivy League schools. Right the number of Supreme Court justices that came from Yale or Harvard is meaningful and it shows to us that within our system, access to the most elite institutions is also important.

We should have access to all of those levels.

We should have access to all of those levels.

And then I think it was Joseph who talked about getting rid of disparate impact, and I just had to speak to that because we have to if we want to fight racism, we have to fight racism in all its forms and its manifestations. And disparate impact is one of the ways that we get at racism.

And then I think it was Joseph who talked about getting rid of disparate impact, and I just had to speak to that because we have to if we want to fight racism, we have to fight racism in all its forms and its manifestations. And disparate impact is one of the ways that we get at racism.

Because racism today.

Because racism today.

Is not bull connor with dieting dogs on black kids trying to go to school. It manifests in different ways, and disparate impact helps us get at that. And then finally on the blind auditions. Piece was of interest to me in you know, thinking and learning about those blind auditions was that at first they there were many folks who did not see differences with the blind auditions on gender. They still had disproportionate numbers of men in orchestras and it wasn't until they realized that they should carpet the floor so you cannot hear the person walking in and in auditions blind auditions where there was carpeted floor, you saw more gender diversity than you did if it was uncarpeted, and people suspect it's because you could hear the clicking of high heels differently than other shoe wear.

Is not bull connor with dieting dogs on black kids trying to go to school. It manifests in different ways, and disparate impact helps us get at that. And then finally on the blind auditions. Piece was of interest to me in you know, thinking and learning about those blind auditions was that at first they there were many folks who did not see differences with the blind auditions on gender. They still had disproportionate numbers of men in orchestras and it wasn't until they realized that they should carpet the floor so you cannot hear the person walking in and in auditions blind auditions where there was carpeted floor, you saw more gender diversity than you did if it was uncarpeted, and people suspect it's because you could hear the clicking of high heels differently than other shoe wear.

And so, you know, just to me shows that we.

And so, you know, just to me shows that we.

Have to keep stay vigilant because inequality and discrimination finds its way into our systems.

Have to keep stay vigilant because inequality and discrimination finds its way into our systems.

If we let down our guard, we're going.

If we let down our guard, we're going.

To be a resegregated country on many, many levels.

To be a resegregated country on many, many levels.

You know, you say, it's not just bull Connor. There's a there's a something in your book, a double archer that I had never even thought about before, which is your book of course about transportation. You write that if you get a parking violation these days, you get a ticket. If you jump a turnstile in a subway, you can get arrested. And what you say is the people that are going to jump the turnstile and get arrested or maybe more often to be people of color rather than they sort of like white collar crime of a parking ticket.

You know, you say, it's not just bull Connor. There's a there's a something in your book, a double archer that I had never even thought about before, which is your book of course about transportation. You write that if you get a parking violation these days, you get a ticket. If you jump a turnstile in a subway, you can get arrested. And what you say is the people that are going to jump the turnstile and get arrested or maybe more often to be people of color rather than they sort of like white collar crime of a parking ticket.

Yeah, So there have been studies that show in public transportation systems where a large percentage of the writer's majority of writers are black and brown folks, that we're more likely to bring the criminal legal system into that public transportation system. So if you look at parking violations as theft, right, you're not paying your meter, you get a ticket.

Yeah, So there have been studies that show in public transportation systems where a large percentage of the writer's majority of writers are black and brown folks, that we're more likely to bring the criminal legal system into that public transportation system. So if you look at parking violations as theft, right, you're not paying your meter, you get a ticket.

You can pet at your leisure.

You can pet at your leisure.

You can get twenty tickets and still be able to park. But if you jump a turnstyle in New York City, the police are engaged, and it's different in public transportation systems where the majority of writers and the old longing enjorities writers are white.

You can get twenty tickets and still be able to park. But if you jump a turnstyle in New York City, the police are engaged, and it's different in public transportation systems where the majority of writers and the old longing enjorities writers are white.

Let's go to Stan, who's in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Hi, Stan, go ahead with your thoughts.

Let's go to Stan, who's in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Hi, Stan, go ahead with your thoughts.

If Trump got rid of DEI, who is that supposed to help?

If Trump got rid of DEI, who is that supposed to help?

Stan? Would you mind me asking your age? I am fifteen fifteen awesome. I love it when we get I love it when we are not under Okay, So his question, Camille Foster, what do you think about that getting rid of DEI? Who does that help?

Stan? Would you mind me asking your age? I am fifteen fifteen awesome. I love it when we get I love it when we are not under Okay, So his question, Camille Foster, what do you think about that getting rid of DEI? Who does that help?

Yeah?

Yeah?

I know what.

I know what.

Two callers ago, someone was speculating about the motivations of the Trump administration, and I think ascribing the worst possible motivations to people's probably not the best idea. I also think it's generally not the best idea to imagine that most people are motivated by the worst possible thing. In general, I suspect. Most of the people who are skeptical of a lot of these programs are more like me. They They generally have a sense that fairness and justice under the law means that people are treated equally irrespective of their particular background. And it's people like me who appreciate that the dimensions of difference are illimitable, which is to say that the number of ways that I could be discriminated against in any context is not limited to my race, or gender or ideology. It could be virtually anything. And it's imperative that we not be so particular particularly consumed with racial disparities and the notion of race, or gender or even sexuality, that we can't see that maybe the correlation between arrests and fair beating might have something to do with the fact that there is more likely to be criminality of various other sorts that's associated with fair beating that is happening en mass whereas when we're talking about a proliferation of parking tickets, you're not necessarily going to see the same dynamic. It certainly could be the case that race is driving these things. It's also the case that the dynamics are far more complicated as they usually are.