Photo from an online brochure by AliveTek.

OPINION

“Are you ready to look in the mirror in a new way? … The other way we think about ourselves is called our social identity.  Social identity refers to the set of characteristics by which the society that we live in recognizes us.” – “Brave and Bold Conversations”, Modules 1 and 2.

On September 16, 2020, and in addition to committing six figures to diversity and inclusion training in student government, former President Bob Caslen and current Vice President of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, Julian R. Williams, implemented a diversity module called “Brave and Bold Dialogues,” produced by Harbor Institute—a training module for students “to delve into the subjects of diversity, equity and inclusion through self-reflection … to increase cultural competency and lay the foundation for new and different perspectives.”

The module implicitly guides non-minority students toward the belief that they are contributing to unconscious bias and systemic racism, saying the students’ inner circles of friends and family, as well as American laws, are inherently biased against every group but their own. The modules further imply that today’s white Americans are part of the identity group most responsible for systemic oppression. Additionally, identities, according to the module, fall into five categories: “race, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, ethnicity, and gender.” An identity forged outside of these, tellingly, is not considered. USC students are being taught to focus on “social identity groups” instead of uniting on principles of virtue and academic excellence. Since when did self-reflection turn into self-loathing?

The module, for example, presents a scenario between a female Muslim named Aminah and a white male named Jason.  The module implies that people like Jason, who represent the social identity of white, middle-class Americans, believe they are superior over Muslims like Aminah as a result of unconscious bias. By suggesting that Jason’s behavior is a result of his privilege, or status in a majority social group, the module also implies that the proper corrective response to “unconscious privilege” is conscious recognition of ‘perceived’ bias and adjustive behavior. Simply, the module stereotypes the behavior of a majority as a guilt-laden behavior, while implying that minority behavior is free of the same unconscious bias. Its principle seeks to correct a perceived inequality, but it only exacerbates inequality. Isn’t it hypocritical to say perceived stereotypes should be dismantled, only to replace them with other stereotypes? Engaging in this behavior racially discriminates against a person’s race, national origin, and sex; it circumscribes certain behaviors with stereotype-driven interpretations, and violates Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. And there are many more examples just like these throughout the module.

By condemning this module, I am not trying to regulate free speech, but to correct corrosive pedagogical practices. The United States Supreme Court has concluded that, “public school teachers and professors can be limited by their officials, according to the Supreme Court cases Garcetti v Ceballos (2006) and Brown v Chicago Board of Education (2016)”, if “the restrictions are reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical concerns.” Thus, I call on South Carolina legislators to make a bill prohibiting the very practices that purport to correct bias. To hold USC accountable for violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. The South Carolina legislature is within its rights to restrict discriminatory pedagogical practices. A bill that strikes down this module will interrupt and dismantle racist violations of the Civil Rights Act and the United States Constitution of America.

I call on SC legislators to amend SC Education Laws, making Critical Race Theory (CRT), culturally relevant pedagogy, and anti-racism doctrine that discriminates against race, sex, and national origin to be illegal in pedagogical practices in every institution of learning in SC. We need to hold violators of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 accountable by protecting all Americans from discrimination based on race, sex, or national origin. If we hold to the self-evident truths that all men are created equal, we will end these mandated stereotypes in all SC schools.

John Enlow is a contributor to TheStandardSC and The Standard newspaper.

Please “like”, comment, share with a friend, and donate to support The Standard on this page. Become a Patron!

Donate Any Amount

Click the QR Code below to donate any amount.