Just WHY "Diversity?"

Articles

David Allen Jared

Just WHY "Diversity?"
May 23, 2003

The left (and some on the right as well) have adopted a new mantra. "We must strive for diversity in our workplaces/universities/political lives." My question is "Why?"

Of what value is "diversity" in the workplace, for example. Does a workforce comprised of 12% blacks, 2% homosexuals, 13% "Hispanic," 5% "handicapped" and 50% women improve the production of a business' goods or services over a workplace comprised of, let's say, 75% Anglo males and 25% women, blacks, Hispanics, etc.? Of course it doesn't. "Diversity," as the term is used in modern politics, means, in effect, proportionality. In other words, the ideal workplace would be one in which the jobs were doled out on a quota basis, using ethnicity, sexual orientation or sex or degree of disability on a proportional basis reflecting those various categories' representation in the local community involved.

But what is the main PURPOSE of a business. Contrary to what passes for current liberal "thought," it's NOT to provide jobs. It's to provide a product or service for sale at a price that will make it affordable yet provide the business with a reasonable profit. Anything that doesn't enhance a business' ability to do that is useless eyewash, at best, and counter to good business practice. If you'll agree that what I've described above is the purpose of any business, of what possible use is a "diverse" workforce in achieving those goals? The answer is, of course, nothing whatsoever.

No sane person can possibly make the argument that a "diverse" workforce is more productive, efficient, honest or trustworthy than one that's not so diverse. Workers should be hired on the basis of their diligence, honesty, trustworthiness and competence--NOT on their ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation or degree of disability.

That's not to say that a "diverse" workforce can't also be comprised of all of those desirable traits; just that "diversity" can't possibly be the primary goal of a business--atleast not if it intends to stay in business for any length of time.

There's nothing inherently WRONG with a diverse workforce or student body. It's just that diversity should NEVER be a goal in and unto itself. It serves no useful purpose, either in the workforce OR in a student body.

Oh, I know that some academecians who've lived their entire professional lives within those academic ivory towers will insist that a "diverse" student body serves a useful social purpose, but social engineering is NOT the purpose of a university (or ANY school for that matter.) The purpose of a university it to educate people and prepare them for entering the workforce as productive citizens. Sitting in class next to a gay black man or a woman with spina bifida and therefore confined to a wheelchair will do nothing to enhance that purpose.

Let's get over this "diversity" kick and start talking about what we SHOULD be talking about-- the U.S. "melting pot" and total integration into a color/sex-blind uniquely AMERICAN society.

------------

Email David Allen Jared: Pappadave@sbcglobal.net

Comment on this column in the forum.
------------