A DEI Rebuttal

by Reginald E. Butte

As I was perusing through The Havok Journal, I happened across a couple articles that I felt the need (rare as it is) to respond to. The first relates to DEI: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and is entitled “All together, a little more Kindness.” I can relate to the sentiment of the title. I think we can all agree with a little more kindness in our lives. So it is with that spirit that I did raise some spirits (of the alcoholic variety) as instructed by the author and gave him a listen.

After I finished the article (and my glass) I saw that I still agree with the title and I know the author is approaching this from a place of compassion but I disagree with the vehicle of getting us there. To quote the author: “DEI – diversity, equity, and inclusion. One entry went on to explain that they were interconnected concepts and that all three when present would encourage an environment of respect and fairness in the workplace. Heck, nothing wrong about that.”

Except, there is. How?  

Let me explain using the author’s next paragraph:

“Good teamwork in a business maximizes profit. I worked for IBM roughly 1975 – 2000. Golden years. In the local office it was like a dream machine. We all had different skills and to make a successful sale and installation we all worked together as a team and that included the customer. Race, religion, gender, political affiliation didn’t matter.” Let me underline the last part of that quote again: “Race, religion, gender, political affiliation didn’t matter.”

The problem with DEI is that it forces those last markers to matter, sometimes in the worst possible way. For a sales/installation it should not matter that I’m an Atheist Inuit non-binary libertarian. My cosmetic make up, sexual orientation, and political ideology are irrelevant to how effective a job I can do either as sales/and or installation. This is not what needs to be touted. What needs to be touted is: Am I good at my job? But in post Golden years (the author’s words, not mine) It’s not about the sales or the installations (again, using their example. You can apply this to almost any skill-based work where cosmetic differences/political philosophy are ‘enforced’)… it’s about what boxes I check for diversity. I wish I could say in checking these boxes and ensuring the pool of people around the water cooler are a veritable skittles package of diversity that nothing is sacrificed. I really wish I could say that… but here’s the problem.

In sitting around the corporate board rooms, a VP realizes that there aren’t enough Atheist Inuit Non-binary Libertarians in sales and installation. That box must be checked in order for the company to show that they aren’t Inuitist. Now what is the cause of this deficiency? Various reasons. Perhaps the majority of Atheist Inuit Non-binary Libertarian types tend towards careers in the arts instead of computer sales and installations. Whatever the reason for the dearth of Inuit professionals, I can promise you it’s not because of any company policy, local, state, or federal law that excludes and/or prohibits Atheist Inuit Non-binary Libertarians from taking those positions or being employed by the company.

In the article “Why being Woke isn’t a bad thing” (And I see it’s the same author, I promise that I’m not trying to make this personal. Again, I applaud your compassion, I just fervently disagree with your logic). The author brings up the example of a surgical triage in a foreign country and basically makes the point that we should want all types to be available to help. The thing is, in the U.S. there are ZERO restrictions for anybody achieving anything based on race, creed, political affiliation, or sexual orientation. I will not find a sign that says “Atheist Inuit Non-binary Libertarians need not apply.” I challenge the author of these articles to show any current U.S. legal code or major Company policy that outlines discrimination based upon these factors.

It doesn’t exist. 

So now, put me on that surgery table… Me: “Have you done many surgeries before?” Doc: “No, but I am (x) and I support (y) rights.” You’re going to have a very hard time convincing me that the vast supermajority of people at that point are going to care about anything after the “No.”   

I get on a plane. Do I care if the pilot checks (x) box? Or do I care if the pilot has successfully completed (y) number of flights/landings? Or air traffic controllers, or Aircraft construction/maintenance (I’m looking at you, Boeing)

Why can’t it be both? I hear you ask. It was, during your golden years. It wasn’t “enough,” I hear you retort. What is enough? Why is whatever number “enough” and are you willing to sacrifice a person who has mastered the necessary skill-set to be successful at their task in order to promote a person who isn’t as qualified but checks a cosmetic or philosophical box?  Again, sans enforceable code/policies that specifically bar individuals from partaking in said skill or being promoted the argument that they are being held back because of these differences doesn’t hold weight (again I would point to protections in the law). Nobody is stopping people who check these boxes, but lets go back to my example:

I’m Pat (good non-binary name) and I’m an Atheist, Inuit, Non-Binary, Libertarian. I’m not particularly interested in computer sales/installation but my parents talked me out of majoring in theater. I get the job in installation because of all of my boxes. On the team, I’m ok, but I’m not the best. Because of my boxes and not my merit or my skill I’m promoted. I don’t have what it takes to cut it at the higher level in managing people. (There are plenty of people of all walks of life race/creed etc. who aren’t as effective as others in doing a job)… But because I was promoted because a VP wanted that particular box checked, I’m not held accountable for my shortcomings. 

You, who are superior at your job, walk through the steps of trying to rectify any shortcomings not meaning any particular ill will, you just believe in the mission and want to succeed, are met with derision. How dare you bring up that Pat’s decisions were not the best. Are you InuitIST?? You swear that you’re not, but the damage has been done. Those checked boxes cannot be lost, but you on the other hand can be. Good Business maximizes profit? Secondary in this world. What matters is that the company can show to all the world that it supports (x) whilst upholding (y) rights and that’s worth more to them than your sales/installation.

Again if there were the barriers in which people were barred from doing things (like the foreign country example given by the author), I would whole-heartedly take up your banner. I don’t care that my surgeon/pilot/air-traffic controller/airline mechanic is an Atheist Inuit Non-Binary Libertarian and I’m a Snake-handling, Mohawked, Cis-gendered, Green Party advocate.

I. don’t. care.

Are. they. the. best/most qualified. to. do. their. job?

I just ask one thing… Please don’t let them be Bears’ fans.  

____________________________________

As the Voice of the Veteran Community, The Havok Journal seeks to publish a variety of perspectives on a number of sensitive subjects. Unless specifically noted otherwise, nothing we publish is an official point of view of The Havok Journal or any part of the U.S. government.