‘Diversity’ creates conflict, not strength

JAMES NIILER | EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

The Crimson White, the flagship newspaper of the University of Alabama, recently published a lengthy feature bemoaning the lack of ‘diversity and inclusion’ the University has offered to minority students.

Such an accusation is no longer viable. The University has come a long way in many years in becoming an inclusive community. Despite accusations the University is ‘racist’ for occasional bizarre and condemnable incidents (which are by no means confined to Southern colleges), the modern University of Alabama falls in the elite group of being one of the most welcoming, tolerant places in the entire world.

The University has more than made up for its controversial past. Memorials have been erected; commemorations have been made. There have been countless panel discussions; race and gender studies lectures; seminars and other activities in remembrance of the University’s history.

The University honors Hispanic Heritage Month and LGBTQ History Month, among others. Ethnic celebrations are held at the Ferguson Center, and the University already possesses a diversity initiative and sustained dialogue initiative in the Crossroads Community Center. Affirmative action, in all but name, is practiced for both students and faculty. And as has been recently demonstrated, students who do behave irresponsibly towards others are punished severely, and appropriately (though not always).

This campus is perhaps the most diverse locale in the state of Alabama. Indeed, there is so much diversity, that it is a wonder that interracial conflict and strife do not occur more frequently.

What the University administration and many liberals do not realize is that diversity inherently breeds conflict. This is not an excuse, a condemnation, or a rationalization. This simply is a fact of human nature.

One need only look to the history of our country to see this realized. Traditionally home to three races (whites, Natives, and blacks), the United States has witnessed slavery, institutionalized segregation, crime, wars and civil unrest occurring over a span of a few centuries—all over the issue of race. Over the past 50 years, as our society has transitioned from being a majority-white to ethnically pluralistic one, it is only rational to assume this conflict will continue.

If three races living in the same continent can’t even coexist without this level of conflict, how does the University expect students of multiple ethnicities, religions and worldviews to live together in a much more confined area without any conflict whatsoever?

Despite all of this, the University is now hell-bent on hiring a full-time ‘diversity director.’ The University cannot expect to admit students from across the globe based on quota; continually emphasize the differences between them; have an overpaid ‘diversity director’ who is to make everyone treat each other well; and expect the campus environment to remain tolerant and peaceful. Yet it does expect this.

This is madness.

In this era of racial division, the worst it has been since the Civil Rights Movement, Americans of all races and religions must unite around a common identity in order to flourish and live side by side in peace. Yet in its well-meaning naivety, the University seeks to subvert our common American identity in order to—what? No one knows. Only the motto ‘Diversity is our strength!’ matters.

If the University truly wanted to create a welcoming environment for its students and faculty, it would disavow its adherence to this cult of diversity, and cease its patronizing pandering to minority students—for that is exactly what it is.

But if the example of the recent past is anything to go by, the University will continue down the destructive path it has set for itself and its students. The fact that an increase of diversity is directly responsible for an increase in conflict will fall on deaf ears, to the detriment of all.

3 thoughts on “‘Diversity’ creates conflict, not strength”

  1. James, you’ve really fallen off of the deep end. The gross over-generalizations about “them liberals” (as if they are all a bunch of thoughtless idiots who can’t think for themselves just because they disagree with you and your Breitbart garbage) is ridiculous. You’re articles contain no actual thinking. Just being because you are a self-fashioned contrarian doesn’t excuse you from requiring, evidence, reason, and non-emotional argument. Just the act of being contrary is not any kind of “brave intellectual step in the dark.” It’s just being immature like a kid.

  2. Hello. I Russian exchange student study at UA. Friend showed me blog. I agree with article, but at UA there not enough diversity for Russians. Everybody here hate my country and my leader, Vladimir Putin.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *