We Democrats are continuing to struggle to figure out how we lost the support of the white working class. Most now realize that part of the reason rests with their perception that in general we libs look down on them and part rests with “political correctness”, including our emphasis on “diversity, equity and inclusion” or DEI, which naturally I am in favor of. There are certainly more reasons, but these two are important—especially DEI.
I confess. I am one of casualties of DEI orthodoxy. In the early 2000s I was fired by the University of Maryland for being “a sexist and a racist” and was warned by the Department of Public Policy where I was a lecturer never to set foot on, or even come close to, the University of Maryland campus again.
Here is my story:
When I sold Howell Associates in 1998 (which provided technical assistance to developers of affordable housing and seniors housing), I began to slow down and was looking for some ways that I might make a contribution. I had done some college level teaching before (when in 1981 I was the Benjamin Banneker Professor of Washington Studies at GW, a one-semester, temporary assignment, and enjoyed the experience) and thought I might be able to somehow get back into academia. Someone suggested the University of Maryland where I was able to land a position as lecturer in the School of Public Policy where I lectured on affordable housing finance as part of a larger course on housing. I only lectured a few times a semester but enjoyed the experience and liked the students, many of whom were already working and taking the course as part of their required continuing education.
In my fifth or sixth year of lecturing, I got a voicemail message from an administrator overseeing the program which stated the following: “Mr. Howell, there is no place at the University of Maryland for racists or sexists. You are fired! Do not come to class and do not set foot on university property again.”
I immediately dialed the callback number and was put into her voicemail. I said that I enjoyed the classes and sorry to hear I had been fired but could she please explain why I am a racist and a sexist.
The next day I received another voicemail message from her stating simply that it was because of the racist and sexist story I told in class this week. Having no idea what she was talking about, I immediately got her voicemailbox again and said, “What story are you talking about?”
The following day I received another voicemail message from her stating, “I am not sure but think it was the racist story you told about the Chinese people.”
I immediately returned the call and got her voicemailbox again. “Why was the story racist and sexist?”
The next day I received her reply in my voicemailbox, “I don’t know, but call the student that complained about you and do not bother me again. You must apologize to her, and do not come on campus again. Ever! And do not call me again!” She gave me the name and telephone number of the student, whom I called immediately. She actually answered the phone. What a relief, I thought, at least I am getting a chance to talk to a real human being. I started off by saying that I understood that I had upset her about something I had said in my class and would like to apologize and then asked her to tell me exactly what I said that offended her. She replied that she would not accept my apology and that what upset her was the racist and sexist story that I had told in class.
This story is the story I had told:
I was at a board meeting of one of my clients, the Chinese American Retirement Enterprise Nonprofit or CAREN Inc. There were six or seven people at the meeting, all Chinese Americans, all young, in their late 20s and 30s, and very enthusiastic and very smart. After I explained to them what one of the obscure HUD regulations was attempting to say, I added, “I know it may sound confusing, but it is not all that complicated. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure this one out.”
One of the people, a young women, smiled, blushed and replied, “Mr. Howell, don’t worry. We get it. We actually are rocket scientists, all of us. We work at NASA.”
I could not help asking her what about the story made me a racist. She replied that it is a racial stereotype that the Chinese are smart. “Ok,” I replied, “I guess I understand why I am a racist but why am I a sexist?”
“You are a sexist because you said a young woman asked the question. You should have said young person. And you can apologize all you want to, but I will never accept your apology.”
I tried calling the Maryland administrator back to assure her I had done my duty and understood why someone as racist and sexist as me should never be allowed on the Maryland campus but of course only got her voicemail. We had never talked in person or over the phone during the entire ordeal.
But as luck would have it, a couple of years later I got a desperate call, not from the administrator but from her assistant, saying that the person who replaced me had quit and they were having trouble finding someone to lecture about affordable housing finance. She was pleased to report that they had concluded that by now I must be rehabilitated enough to come back. Could I be there for the class next week?
I chuckled, accepted, and soldiered on for several more years. Eventually the administrator and I reconciled though neither of us ever brought up the unpleasant ordeal but I have resisted her demand never to tell the “racist and sexist story” again.
It is too good a story not to share.
Now who does not understand why some think we libs might have taken the DEI stuff a little too far?
Good (and entertaining) one Joe.
Just passing Oxford en route for London where, among other things, I shall be visiting
Ann with whom we worked in the LES
R
Joe,
I do hope many liberals begin to understand why the pushback on DEI. Like so many good things that go too far, the DEI movement became a weapon for those who wanted to use it to wield power over others. In fact, much had been written on the reversal of the power structure, where so called “victims” now had power over the so called “oppressors”. Many Universities are also coming to the conclusion that they had created a culture that had become the opposite of free speech and robust debate. UVA being one of them. A recent survey indicated that 75% of ALL Students did not feel comfortable articulating their true opinions in the class room. THAT is a problem. And the DEI movement fostered this result.
Thanks for your honesty…
John
Oh Joe. You are right. The problem you describe is absolutism —simplistic thinking. Humans have naturally lazy brains that prefer to rely on the on/off switch (or zero-1 in coding speak). Without constant practice and effort, this preference leads to mental rigidity, the inability to see shades of gray. In this case, your student was so entrenched and inflexible that she couldn’t the full meaning or message behind words, and your supervisor too lazy and fearful to listen.
Continual training in critical thinking and stretching past our comfort zones are essential to combat this tendency.
I agree the good and valuable intentions of DEI were taken too far in many instances, and the back lash is just as extreme and absolute – now that the acronym DEI is used as a slur, the path to greater diversity, equity, and inclusion has become much steeper.
Joe,
Confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, preference for echo chambers and news channels which affirm our own opinions and careful avoidance of those that challenge them. I’m thinking of our last Zoom call and how 100% of the participants were self censoring. I’ve told you before about my being branded a racist based solely on my Southern accent. This was in 1962 in Washington State.
As for the “perception” of the white blue collar folks that they are looked down on, is it really just their perception, or is it to some extent reality?
You were far, far more forgiving of your U of M supervisor than I ever would have been.
Jim
I’ve just read your DEI story. I’m saying aloud, “WHAT? WHAT?” I trust you’re recounting actual events, but…I’m finding these narrow and unfortunately powerful, decisive, responses to your statements, shocking! Shocking and. . . scary!
Kristi,
I’m sure that the main story line of Joe’s termination at U of M is true. As to the possibility of a dash of hyperbole to season the tale, well, wouldn’t that be right out of the Preface of Joe’s own literary cookbook?
Best,
JK
Guilty as charged but I tell you the story is true.