The Campus Diversity Racket
Apr 22nd, 2012 by Unamused
In “Colleges skimp on science, spend big on diversity” (Washington Examiner), Michael Barone largely rehashes Heather Mac Donald’s “Less Academics, More Narcissism” (City Journal) from July of last year, explaining that our government’s idea of “investing in education” is firstly to throw money away on a failing public school system, presumably to close the “achievement gap,” i.e., the “IQ gap,” i.e., race differences in intelligence, and secondly to shovel cash into public universities that are now little more than radical “re-education” camps that teach impressionable kids to hate the West.
Today we’re going to talk about the second colossal waste of your tax dollars.
The diversity racket at UC San Diego
“The University of California system has been raising tuitions and cutting departments,” Barone writes, but “its San Diego campus found the money to create a new post of ‘vice chancellor for equity, diversity and inclusion.'”
That’s in addition to what the Manhattan Institute’s Heather Mac Donald calls its “already massive diversity apparatus.” It takes Mac Donald 103 words just to list the titles of UCSD’s diversitycrats.
Here are Heather Mac Donald’s 103 words (City Journal):
the Chancellor’s Diversity Office, the associate vice chancellor for faculty equity, the assistant vice chancellor for diversity, the faculty equity advisors, the graduate diversity coordinators, the staff diversity liaison, the undergraduate student diversity liaison, the graduate student diversity liaison, the chief diversity officer, the director of development for diversity initiatives, the Office of Academic Diversity and Equal Opportunity, the Committee on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Issues, the Committee on the Status of Women, the Campus Council on Climate, Culture and Inclusion, the Diversity Council, and the directors of the Cross-Cultural Center, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Resource Center, and the Women’s Center.
Mac Donald quotes the job description of the new, full-time Vice Chancellor for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion: “building on existing diversity plans to develop and implement a campus-wide strategy on equity, diversity and inclusion.”
“The strategic plan,” says [outgoing UCSD chancellor Marye Anne Fox], “will inform the final organizational structure for the office of the VC EDI, will propose metrics to gauge progress, and will identify potential additional areas of responsibility.”
Gosh, that sounds critically important — almost certainly worth losing those three “prestigious cancer researchers” to Rice University, a private school in Houston which is presumably suffering greatly from its failure to maintain sufficient levels of Diversity management (and is plainly jam-packed with racist, sexist, conservative types).
It was definitely probably worth eliminating UC San Diego’s master’s programs in electrical and computer engineering (sexist) and comparative literature (antisemitic), as well as courses in English literature (homophobic), French literature (Islamophobic), German literature (HITLER), and Spanish literature (I’m pretty sure they hate “Native Americans”).
Meanwhile, at UC Berkeley…
In 2010, UC Berkeley “announced the UC Berkeley Initiative for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, funded in part by a $16 million gift from the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund.”
The “new” initiative duplicates existing “equity” projects, not least the Berkeley Diversity Research Initiative, established by Berkeley chancellor Robert Birgeneau in 2006. This latest initiative boasts five new faculty chairs in “diversity-related research”—one of which will be “focused on equity rights affecting the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community,” according to the press release, and “will be one of the first endowed chairs on this subject in the United States.”
“Area studies such as ethnic studies, queer studies and gender studies tend to be marginalized and viewed as less essential to the university than such fields as engineering, law or biology,” glumly noted the press release.
At the time, the university’s Vice Chancellor for Equity and Inclusion was already earning — well, receiving — a base salary of $194,000, and “[t]he salary and expense account of the likely new director of the UC Berkeley Initiative for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion” — note that this is apparently completely different from the Vice Chancellorship for Equity and Inclusion — “will likely dwarf anything seen so far among diversocrats, according to inside sources.”
For comparison, the starting pay for assistant professors of presumably more-or-less real subjects is $53,000.
Not UCLA, too!
UCLA’s diversity infrastructure has likewise been spared the budgetary ax. In the pre-recession 2005–06 academic year, UCLA’s associate vice chancellor for faculty diversity reported up the bureaucratic ladder to a vice chancellor for academic personnel, herself reporting to an executive vice chancellor and provost, who in turn reported to the university chancellor. Today, that associate vice chancellor for faculty diversity has been transformed into a vice provost position, while the vice chancellor for academic personnel above her has been eliminated. The new vice provost for faculty diversity will not be lonely; she can pal around with UCLA’s associate director for diversity research and analysis, its associate vice provost for student diversity, its associate dean for academic diversity, its director of diversity outreach, and its director of staff affirmative action.
Unsurprisingly, the “one observable activity performed by these lavishly funded diversity bureaucrats is to pressure academic departments to hire more women and minorities.”
Just how bad are California’s public universities?
While it was cutting programs, eliminating courses, and losing cancer researchers, UC San Diego’s Academic Senate found the time to mandate “a new campus-wide diversity requirement for graduation.”
The cultivation of “a student’s understanding of her or his identity,” as the diversity requirement proposal put it, would focus on “African Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, Hispanics, Chicanos, Latinos, Native Americans, or other groups” through the “framework” of “race, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality, language, ability/disability, class or age.”
In “The Radicalization of the University of California” (Minding the Campus), Charlotte Allen cites a very recent report by the California Association of Scholars, which found that UC Santa Cruz offers “no fewer than five introductory courses devoted exclusively to the thinking of Karl Marx.” UC Santa Barbara’s Sociology 1 course focused on “theories on globalization that portrayed Western civilization as almost demonic, heartless, and ruthless beasts that enslave the world for financial gain,” according to one student. Another student reported that instructors for a mandatory first-year writing course at UC San Diego have made “disparaging remarks about contemporary American society, the evils of our ‘imperialism,’ and Western ‘fascism’.”
The disease spreads
In “Yes, We’re Broke, But Leave the Diversity Machine Alone” (Minding the Campus) from last October, John Leo notes that the University of North Carolina, Wilmington decided “to lump together two serious academic departments (because of a shortage of funding) while once again expanding the campus diversity bureaucracy (for which no funding shortage ever seems to appear).”
[T]he university will save $80,000 a year lumping together the Physics and Physical Oceanographic Department with the Geography and Geology Department, while committing more funds to five diversity-multicultural offices, each apparently run by someone commanding a hefty salary.
This is an old story on our campuses. Colleges and universities enact severe budget cuts, dropping programs and letting teachers go, while unapologetically expanding their already swollen diversity bureaucracy. This is because diversity now has the status of an established religion on our campuses, while actual teaching deals only in mere learning.