Racially Correct Definition of Diversity

Diversity used to be a perfectly good and descriptive word which meant "variety". In the 1990's the racial quota industry co-opted the term Diversity to have a distinctly political, pro-quota meaning.

What the racial special interests specifically mean when they refer to Diversity is actually Forced Diversity or Artificial Diversity, i.e., the hiring or admission of the government-defined correct numbers of certain protected classes, i.e., supposedly "disadvantaged" persons of color.

See Especially: Ward Connerly's Comments on "Forced Diversity", below.

Thus, in context, Diversity (forced or artificial diversity) means "having the government-approved number of each race, gender, and ethnicity" in your work force or student body.

The racial special interests want you to believe that forced diversity (a.k.a. artificial diversity) is a high-minded, inclusive concept denoting one, big, happy, multi-ethnic, multi-racial, cooperative, tolerant family.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Look out when applying to an employer or a school that boasts "We value diversity!" This is code for "we have an aggressive, pro-quota policy in place to hire -- or admit -- the right number of each protected race, gender and ethnic group." A careful reading of their affirmative action policy (a government-required document which they are required to show you upon request) will reveal the truth behind their diversity slogan.

Diversity ("forced diversity" or "artificial diversity" vs. "voluntary, natural diversity") is defined strictly in terms of an official government list of protected races and ethnicities.

Diversity Training is a truly awful outgrowth of forced / artificial diversity. Such training is nothing more than dreary, guilt-ridden sensitivity training designed to properly politically educate you about the value of forced / artificial diversity.

The content and style of such trainings varies widely, but the central theme is to sell you on the dubious notion that forced / artificial diversity is in and of itself a desirable thing. Some trainers attempt to convince you that forcibly (artificially) diverse companies are happier more profitable places than voluntarily diverse companies. But what they don't tell you is that voluntarily diverse companies are harassed and fined by the government, and are subjected to economic boycotts and lawsuits by the NAACP and other members of the quota industry. (And by the way, there is little or no hard economic evidence that forcibly diverse companies are more profitable in any sense than voluntarily diverse companies.)

In general, Adversity.Net strongly recommends that you do whatever is necessary to avoid Diversity Training. Any excuse will do, such as breaking your leg or being in a body cast at the time of the training. This may also be a good time to schedule that major surgery you've been putting off.

Finally, in today's political climate, Diversity Training is almost exclusively a political re-education process which attempts to sell a particular political agenda which promotes forced diversity (i.e., racial quotas, i.e., artificial diversity). As such it is completely inappropriate for an employer to subject you to such propagandizing. However, if you want to keep you job you should use one of the former excuses to not attend (broken leg, major surgery, etc.).

The Value of Forced / Artificial Diversity: NONE! Forced / Artificial Diversity for its own sake is absolutely without value. Well, OK, you can avoid a lot of government harassment by being forcibly diverse, but that is hardly what we would call a positive motivation.

Conversely, there is a great deal of value to treating all employees fairly and without discrimination. This is not the same as forced diversity, however.

Forced Diversity vs. Non-Discrimination: The two terms are totally unrelated! Non-discrimination means treating everyone fairly without regard to race, gender or ethnicity. Conversely, Diversity (Forced Diversity or Artificial Diversity) means hiring or promoting based upon race, gender or ethnicity until your business has employed the "right" numbers of each protected group as defined by the government.

Ward Connerly Comments on the Politically Correct Definition of Diversity:

Ward Connerly

Ward Connerly writes: If ever there was a term that makes me nauseous, "diversity" is such a term. But, believe me, this term is more than nauseating; it is dangerous. "Diversity" is the antithesis of merit.

The pursuit of "diversity" by the government is legally sanctioned discrimination to achieve a fuzzily defined quota that is known only to [educational] admissions officers and other bureaucrats who want to play God with our lives.

"Diversity" makes a mockery of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and it's command that the government treat all of us equally "without regard" to the factors of race, gender and ethnicity. "Diversity" is an excuse to discriminate.

-- Ward Connerly, as published in The Egalitarian, August/ September 2005, Volume 8, Issue 3.

Related Reading:

The "D" Word -- Avoid using the word altogether, and live a happy life!

Risk Factors Quiz -- What are the odds you will experience reverse discrimination at your job?

The Preferred List -- Here are the races that your government feels should receive special privileges.