Creating Real Diversity

Diversity involves more than skin color and sex. True diversity also considers a person’s political and social ideology. Sadly, that does not seem to be the case at Harvard University.

In a recent class, my professor took a blind poll of all the students’ political affiliations. Of the 40 students polled, I was the only conservative Republican. The vast majority of the class was liberal, including the professor—he had served in the Clinton administration. In my short time at Harvard I have taken courses at the law, business, government, and education schools, and every class has had a similar make-up.

I felt alienated as usual, but I had to laugh as I looked around the room. Thirty of the 40 students were female, and almost 50 percent, including myself, were “students of color.” President Faust would have been overcome with euphoria to walk into our lecture and observe the “diversity.” As I sat alone in a classroom of peers, I realized that diversity at Harvard is an intellectual joke.

I was deeply concerned with President Faust’s recent letter in which she boasted of her own leadership and the great strides that she has made to promote diversity.  I applaud her efforts—they have resulted in several impressive gains.  However, President Faust mentions only “women and minorities” as her focus for diversity.  She naively assumes that more females and minorities will automatically guarantee different ideologies in the classroom.  This is trickle-down diversity, and it does not work.

It seems that in her mind, irrespective of your way of thinking, if you have colored skin or two X chromosomes, then you are diverse.  This is an incomplete and prejudicial definition of diversity.  If there are 10 Black, 10 Latino, and 10 Native American students (with an equal number of males and females) all of whom are conservative Republicans, then do you really have diversity?  At our nation’s most esteemed academic institution, the answer should be an impassioned “NO!”

Furthermore, attaching a personal characteristic to an externality is the beginning of bigotry. To say that Native American equals alcoholic, or White equals can’t jump, or female equals diverse; all of those statements have prejudice at their roots.

Is there some value to giving special treatment to race, culture, and gender? The Supreme Court thinks so (Grutter v. Bollinger), and I completely agree. But I am also proposing a paradigm shift to the view that political and social ideologies are equally important factors in true diversity.

President Faust’s letter references Harvard’s 2005 task force that conducted two comprehensive surveys of diversity.  The conclusions of that research focused exclusively on race and gender.  Harvard spent $50 million on this task force.  However, not a dime has ever been authorized to study Harvard’s disparate inequity in political ideology.

Shouldn’t our country’s greatest minds place a higher value on diversity of thought? We see the viewpoints of our administration in their political affiliations—on July 26, 2004, President Faust contributed $2,000 to John Kerry’s campaign.

I know I am not the first conservative to bemoan the liberal bias of the Ivy League. It is also true that more liberals than conservatives choose careers in academia. Nevertheless, Harvard is cheating their liberal students by having an overwhelmingly liberal faculty, because neither must vehemently research and defend their views during class debates. Recently I had a face-to-face meeting with Dr. Lisa Coleman, our new Chief Diversity Officer, and I was very encouraged by her willingness to listen and consider these points. I implore her and President Faust to include “political and social ideology” in Harvard’s official definition of diversity. This would be the first step toward Harvard intentionally hiring more conservative professors. Such a balance would behoove Harvard’s faculty, students, and reputation.

Finally, instead of surrounding himself with a team of rivals, it is well documented that George W. Bush’s cabinet was filled with like-minded individuals. There was not enough diversity of thought or opinion, and many consider this a fatal flaw of his administration. Does Harvard’s leadership realize that they are making the same mistake?

I yearn for the day when our school becomes a beacon to the world by proclaiming to students that their minds are more important than their skin or sex. As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another. Unfortunately, when it comes to diversity of thought, Harvard University is dull indeed.

David R. Dixon is a master’s candidate at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and an active member of the Choctaw Indian Nation.