Wednesday, November 27, 2024
Elder of ZiyonA new study found that diversity, equity, and inclusion materials have a wide range of negative consequences, including psychological harm, increased hostility, and greater agreement with extreme authoritarian rhetoric, such as adapted Adolf Hitler quotes.Both the New York Times and Bloomberg were preparing stories on the findings, but axed them just before publication citing editorial decisions.The Network Contagion Research Institute, or NCRI, and Rutgers University Social Perception Lab released the study “Instructing Animosity: How DEI Pedagogy Produces the Hostile Attribution Bias” on Monday. The study examined whether the themes and materials common in DEI trainings foster inclusion or exacerbate conflicts, and whether such materials promote empathy or increase hostility towards groups labeled as oppressors. The study consisted of three experiments — one focusing on race, one on religion, and the last on caste.Although proponents of DEI trainings claim that they are designed to educate individuals about biases and reduce discrimination, the study found that participants primed with DEI materials were more likely to perceive prejudice where none existed and were more willing to punish the perceived perpetrators. In one experiment, the DEI materials made people more willing to agree with Hitler quotes that substituted “Jew” with “Brahmin,” the highest caste in the Indian caste system.“Participants exposed to the DEI content were markedly more likely to endorse Hitler’s demonization statements, agreeing that Brahmins are ‘parasites’ (+35.4%), ‘viruses’ (+33.8%), and ‘the devil personified’ (+27.1%),” the study reads. “These findings suggest that exposure to anti-oppressive narratives can increase the endorsement of the type of demonization and scapegoating characteristic of authoritarianism.”
The study itself had people look at a fictional court case involving two individuals—Ahmed Akhtar and George Green—both convicted of identical terrorism charges for bombing a local government building. Even though the situations and descriptions of the case were identical, people exposed to anti-Islamophobia materials beforehand were significantly more likely to say that "Ahmed Akhtar" was treated unfairly at trial.
What strikes me most is that the anti-Islamophobia material that the subjects were exposed to was only three paragraphs long. Here they are in their entirety, all taken from popular training materials by the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding (ISPU).
Islamophobia in the U.S. manifests in many ways – harassment and violence by anti-Muslim hate groups, institutionalized anti-Muslim legislation, and bias in the justice system. The U.S. has a long history of the legalized othering of Muslims, with legislation like the anti-terror Patriot Act targeting Muslims as dangerous outsiders whose actions should be surveilled and their movements curtailed.Anti-Shariah, anti-immigration, and voter-ID legislation go hand in hand in manufacturing bigotry and creating fear. Such restrictive measures limit the freedoms of Muslims and minorities. Muslims are also subject to harsher criminal charges and sentenced up to four times longer than non-Muslims.U.S. officials openly exhibit Islamophobic views, with Islamophobic rhetoric being linked to violent crime. Anti-Muslim hate groups have gained traction, driven by a well-funded Islamophobia network fueling anti-Muslim activity like mosque vandalism and arson.
The subjects became measurably less objective in judging others after reading only these three relatively sober paragraphs a single time.
The India caste materials were similar. The study asked people this question, which is all the information they had:
“Raj Kumar applied to an elite East Coast university in Fall 2022. During the application process, he was interviewed by an admissions officer, Anand Prakash. Ultimately, Raj’s application was rejected.”
The names, which were flipped on half the questions, do not indicate caste.
Reading two paragraphs about the historic India caste system made the subjects significantly more willing to assume that caste was the reason the admissions officer rejected the student. Worse, the subjects were more likely to want the admissions officer to be punished. And even worse, the exposure to the short essay made the subjects more likely to agree with Hitler quotes demonizing Jews, changed to Brahmins, describing them as "parasites," "a virus" and "the devil personified."
The study indicates that exposure to these materials can actually increase authoritarian tendencies and the willingness to punish those who are perceived as being discriminatory - even when there is no discrimination at all.
This is only from reading a couple of paragraphs.
The study notes that ISPU has trained FBI employees. The safety of Jews is
Now, imagine what a full year of people screaming about Israeli "genocide," "Jewish supremacism" and
"Islamophobia" can do to otherwise disinterested observers. On college campuses, city centers and social media, the daily barrage of lies about Israel has a huge impact in creating and increasing antisemitism. There is no way it cannot.
As usual, this is not only because people are exposed to anti-Israel lies. They are also not exposed to any facts about Israel that contradict the lies.
ISPU uses this slide in their training materials:
They are using this to highlight how well integrated Muslims are in Michigan and how important they are to the state. One out of every six doctors being Muslim is pretty high, right?
It just so happens that the percentage of doctors in Israel who are Arab (most of whom are Muslim) is higher than Muslims in Michigan, about 20%. And the percentage of pharmacists in Israel who are Arab was 38% in 2017. Both those numbers are increasing to way beyond their proportions in the general population, with a nearly half of graduates from medical schools being Arab and 57% of new pharmacists.
In the medical field, Israel is a paradigm of inclusivity and integration. A 2017 report says that Arab doctors and nurses in Israel do not feel their cultural origin hinders promotion. Arabs are the heads of surgery and of other departments in Israeli hospitals, and no one there blinks an eye.
Students in colleges are not exposed to information like this. All they see is wall to wall hate, falsehoods and slanders about Israel - and, specifically, Israeli Jews. Sometimes from their own professors.
As usual, these are crimes both of commission and of omission. Both of those lead inevitably towards increased hate - and attacks on - Jews, by people who would swear they are only trying to do the right thing. As the Brahmin example shows, even small exposure to one-sided materials can easily lead to hate: Constant exposure to the lies leads directly to incitement and ultimately, violence.
DEI isn't the solution. It is part of the problem.
