is the word “diversity.” And from the context in which it's usually used,
it's viewed by its supporters as the cure-all for which people have been
searching lo these many millennia. Do you want to put an end to war-making?
Simple. Diversify. Do you want to eliminate social inharmony? Same thing.
Diversify. Do you want to make racial strife a thing of the past? Elementary,
my dear Watson. All you have to do is diversify. Yes indeed, to its protagonists,
diversity and Nirvana seem to be two sides of the same coin. You do one,
you reach the other.
But this is superficial thinking at its best. Or worst, depending how
you look at it.
For one, diversity — which really means different, distinct, separate,
nothing more — has always been around. And yet there have always been wars,
social inharmony, and racial strife.
And for another, from the context in which the word diversity is usually
used, its proponents are talking about physical or material diversity —
such as diversity of dress, of cuisine, of skin color, of ethnicity. But
nowhere among the seekers of diversity do I find expressed the need for
intellectual diversity. The diversity of ideas.
Indeed, it seems to me that some of the more fervent supporters of material
diversity are some of the more fervent oppressors of intellectual diversity.
You see, some of us don't think that diversity is all that it's cracked
up to be. And, therefore, its promises have no way of being realized.
But we're not allowed to say that. Why? Who knows? Maybe it's because
the proponents of diversity believe that anyone who thinks that way is
just too diverse.
Sounds crazy? Well, it it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, you
know the rest.
Think about it. |
