The Truth About Diversity

What do you think? Post Comments Below! Also published here: Which Color is Missing? | Dartmouth Free Press

The celebration of diversity is hailed as an emblem of progress in the realm of race relations. But when looked at closely, it's not very progressive, or at least it's not the most progressive option. My perception of today's diversity is pointing out that you have a white, black and person of Asian descent in room without bloodshed, so yeah us! However, while pointing out diversity points out that race relations have taken a turn for the better, it only continues to draw attention to race instead of transcending it. Real diversity, which exists in the hearts of the people, does not need to be pointed out. It simply exists.

An interesting book on the definition of "whiteness" throughout history called A Paler Shade of White by Eric Arnessen¹ is written on the premise that "the very solidarity of language, of clear cut and well-understood categories and definitions of who was black and who was white, has given way to the widely accepted notion that race is not a biological category or a trans-historically fixed phenomenon, but is itself, socially constructed." Now, if this notion is true, which I believe it is, then pointing out diversity of race is also socially constructed. It is an excitement over a particular point in history where race is no longer taken as a natural indication to certain proclivities, and people of different races can exist in peace and harmony, but the troublesome notion of race still exists.

So basically, the age of diversity is not the end-all of racial history, but simply a happier period of it. It is then the imperative of a society aware of race as a social construction to progress beyond this age of celebrated diversity. The fact that diversity is held up as ideal that institutions must be pushed to attain reveals that diversity does not address the real root of the problem: the ability to still see race (as a social category). Also, the fact that diversity is applauded and pointed out shows, that we are still far from diversity being the norm. Diversity is all well and good but it is annoying to point it out with such glee as if we're being exceptionally good for exhibiting it. This means that diversity is not yet accepted as a common good.

Morgan Freeman's views on Black History Month correlate to this celebratory stance on diversity. On a 60 Minutes interview in 2005² he said "You're going to relegate my history to a month? I don't want a black history month. Black history is American history." As Freeman rightly points out there is no "white history month," for it is lauded all year long. Freeman goes on to say to the interviewer "I am going to stop calling you a white man and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man," because the labels of "white" and "black" merely bring attention to and reinforce race (or racism). Pointing out race or diversity of race does not do anything to de-construct the divides of race.

I'm not advocating silence on race or the cessation of the social and academic dialog on race; we still need such things to progress further. But we should understand that a diversity of labels is not true diversity. We should understand that it is possible to move on towards a society that doesn't need to draw attention to race, a society that doesn't need to feel good about diversity, because lack of diversity is no longer a problem.


1. University of California Press, 2002
2. "Freeman calls Black History Month ‘ridiculous’ - Oscar-winning actor says ‘black history is American history’"

For a more complete view of my stance on race, see these articles:
Dec. 2009. Realism, Relativism and Racism
May 2009. Ethnocentricity or Racism? Fun With Colors in China
May 2009. Earth's Unspoken Caste System
Apr. 2009 For the Love of Affirmative Action
Oct. 2008 Black People vs. Asian People - A Discussion Concerning Race

- Ryu