Premium

Johns Hopkins in Damage Control Mode Over DEI Memo

(AP Photo/Matt Rourke)

Last week, Johns Hopkins’ Chief Diversity Officer sent an email defining “privilege.” It caused a firestorm, and the Medical School had to walk it back almost as soon as it was released.

It managed to offend nearly everyone except left-handed transgender lesbians in wheelchairs, and probably a few of them were offended because they happened to be White or middle-aged.

The reaction on social media was, let us say, very harsh. But to the elites at Johns Hopkins that wouldn’t matter much; however, the reaction at the institution itself must have been similarly harsh, or the lawyers must have had a stroke, because they are still in damage control mode.

Not one, not two, but three responses have come from the administration. The Chief Diversity Officer herself apologized; the Deans have similarly apologized, and a set of talking points was sent out to help people defend against the backlash.

The Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity is itself an entirely Orwellian name for what the DEI mavens put out, and completely misrepresents the practices at Johns Hopkins.

Let’s face it; Johns Hopkins has become one of the more racist institutions in the country, actively discriminating against the people of “privilege” the original email identifies.

How do I know? The school either gets applications only from the least capable White students, or it rejects students based primarily on their racial characteristics.

The Asian component of the student population seems to reflect their scores, but the same cannot be said of the White population. Kudos to Hopkins for not actively discriminating against Asians, but it’s pretty clear that Whites are getting the shaft.

It is in this context that the “privilege” email should be read, suggesting that the “lawyers freaked out” explanation is likelier to have played a role in the furious backpedaling of the institution’s leadership.

Now, Johns Hopkins medicine is not the same as the university as a whole, but it’s clear that Hopkins is being led around by the nose by the DEI crowd, who rule the roost.

In light of the Supreme Court’s rejection of Affirmative Action in June of last year, Hopkins has a lot to worry about, and the last thing they need to do is put together a list of people whom they consider oppressors. Especially one that explains why Hopkins seems to be discriminating against Whites.

Hopkins is among the most woke institutions in the country, pushing alphabet ideology with a vengeance.

Normal people look at this and wonder whether they can be assured that they are getting the best medical care from an institution that refuses to allow people to use the word “woman” but has discovered the importance of neopronouns.

As a practical matter I doubt the institution has reached the point where quality of care has suffered much yet–after all, most of the people there were hired prior to the obsession with “diversity” took hold. But it has begun its long slide into irrelevance unless it reverses course on policy as quickly as it reversed course on its definition of “privilege.”

Unfortunately, it isn’t just Hopkins or Harvard that have gone all-in on race privileging. It is everywhere. UW Madison is all about race too:

Ironically, the focus on “diversity” and the use of race as a qualification will have the opposite effect of that intended: nobody going to the doctor will feel assured that the person of color they are seeing is there because they are really good at their jobs or whether they skated by because of their race.

When skill and intelligence are downplayed in the selection process, it is rational to wonder whether the doctor you see is qualified.

Perhaps, though, that doesn’t matter to the DEI-obsessed, who care more about “equity” than outcomes.

I know people who have come to prefer foreign-born doctors because they trust that their educations were not driven by “woke” ideas. I am not there yet, but I have become choosier about getting recommendations from people I trust.

We will have to see if the backlash against the DEI “word of the month” will have any lasting impact. Personally, I doubt it, just as I am skeptical that the burgeoning anti-DEI movement will eradicate the ideas behind DEI. I expect it to pop up with a new name and vocabulary.

But take heart, my friends. I have a long and glorious history of making bad predictions, so let’s hope my cynicism is unwarranted.

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement