DEI Programs: A Result of Government Overreach?

UNC-Chapel Hill Diverts DEI Funding to Campus Safety

On May 13, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Board of Trustees announced its decision to divert $2.3 million from its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies to campus safety. This decision came amidst protests over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. UNC-Chapel Hill now joins other universities, such as the University of Florida and the University of Texas, that have also eliminated their DEI programs, partly due to pressure from lawmakers.

Protests and Vandalism Lead to DEI Program Elimination

Protests have been escalating on college campuses, with students accusing their schools of supporting the Israeli war effort in Gaza. At Chapel Hill, an administration building was vandalized on May 11, the same day as its commencement ceremony. In response to these events, the school decided to eliminate its DEI program and focus more on campus safety.

Why Are Universities Invested in DEI Programs?

While protests and lawmaker pressure have led to the elimination of DEI programs, the question arises as to why universities became so invested in these programs in the first place. These programs often seem to exist merely to stir racial tensions on campuses. Ludwig von Mises, in his 1944 book Bureaucracy, suggests that government intervention caused universities to shift from profit management to bureaucratic and often pseudo-Marxist management.

Universities as Businesses

Universities, like all institutions dealing with scarce resources, are essentially businesses. They offer educational services in exchange for tuition fees. They need to hire professors, obtain buildings, and secure educational materials. Most students view their education as a means to achieve their career or financial goals. Therefore, universities are businesses, plain and simple.

Government Intervention and Bureaucracy

However, government intervention and spending have blurred the perception of universities as businesses. Politicians often justify subsidizing higher education and setting controls on it by citing the necessary research conducted in universities. This leads to the creation of nonproductive employees and activities that slow down businesses. It also transforms profit-seeking firms into bureaucratic entities that focus on satisfying ends for which there is no profit to pursue.

The Birth of DEI Departments

Government regulations and compliance costs lead firms to establish compliance departments. These departments, which owe their existence to government mandates, must justify their existence by inventing ideals to strive towards. DEI becomes a perfect fit for this role. These departments, while creating no value for the universities, are born of bureaucracy. They ensure compliance with government DEI edicts and are given the room to push their own social causes.

Government Overreach and DEI Programs

Government overreach has allowed DEI programs to flourish. Mandates that force compliance rather than cost-cutting create an environment conducive to the growth of bureaucracy and its ideals. As a result, we are forced to view people through the narrow lenses of social activists hired to satisfy government compliance.

Conclusion

It's not surprising that some firms, realizing they must cut costs, have decided to reduce or eliminate their DEI programs. As the DEI ship sinks, one can't help but wonder if it will take university bureaucracies down with it. What are your thoughts on this issue? Do you agree that government overreach has led to the rise of DEI programs? Share this article with your friends and let's have a discussion. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, which is every day at 6 pm.