A shining example of the failures of the relentless pursuits of forced diversity is playing out on the Ivy League campus of Dartmouth College. Students and researchers alike are witnessing a breakdown between the races and an increase in tensions among them.
The Dartmouth Review writes about the college's "seemingly endless initiatives on diversity" stemming from efforts by administration to create an atmosphere dubbed "Inclusive Excellence" and its failure to show any meaningful results in its misguided attempts.
Dartmouth's own Associate Director for Curricular and Research Programs at The Nelson A. Rockefeller Center Ronald Shaiko, has been warning about the "diversity puzzle" for some time now. His research and writing have resurfaced in conversations surrounding this new era of campus protests by the "Black Lives Matter" movement that have not only infiltrated Dartmouth's campus, but campuses nation wide.
Back in 2013, Shaiko wrote:
I can attest to the fact that the benefits of diversity do not spontaneously arise merely from the presence of a varied student body. It is amazing to me the amount of effort undertaken to create diverse incoming classes while comparatively little is done to create a "choice architecture," to borrow a phrase from behavioral economics, that would "nudge" students into interactions outside of their comfort zones. Without such nudges, students will default to sameness or, in the words of the political scientist Robert Putnam, they will "hunker down" with students like themselves.
Dartblog, a daily blog for the school, has a recent article about Shaiko's assessment and speaks from experience about how things have worsened on campus:
If you have ever wondered how it can be that two generations of affirmative action and diversity besottedness have brought us to the worst campus race relations in memory, the Senior Fellow and Associate Director for Curricular and Research Programs at the Rockefeller Center, Ronald Shaiko, has thoughts that will make blood boil in Parkhurst.
Shaiko recently spoke with The Dartmouth Review explaining what his research has continued to uncover:
- "The choice architecture that’s in place at most universities is one that facilitates the bonding side – we go out of our way to make people comfortable, give them the opportunity to be with people just like them – and I think that’s just not the way to do it… [The bonding aspect] will happen on its own – you’re going to gravitate toward people like you as a matter of human nature. So why do anything to promote that at the expense of mixing with people that aren’t just like you?"
- "In many ways it seems to be admitting failure that you have to have safe spaces on campus. It’s saying that the campus is not comfortable enough for people of all walks of life to take part in without feeling some pain or some fear… So the notion of requiring that to be a part of your experience is really a mark against the institution, that there’s a need felt by a critical mass of people that they have to have a space that’s their own, and that no one else but them can take advantage of that space."
- "Everyone’s afraid to say what he feels, and that’s terrible, that’s not a way for a university to operate, and so we’re in a tough position, where we can’t even be honest with each other. That to me is the crux of the problem. We’re not even to the point where we can have communication in an adult, rational, honest way. We can’t even articulate our own views in an honest fashion without feeling like we’re going to get our heads chopped off."
- "The more diversity you get, the harder it’s going to be to be a diverse campus. So we’ve set ourselves up for failure in that sense… What we really have is fourteen different colleges going on and they just share the same faculty. I don’t think that’s what people had in mind [with regards to creating] more diverse campuses."
There's more details to Shaiko's research, here, but Dartmouth alum are speaking out about the matter and comparing it to their experiences. One instance comes from the comments section of the Review's interview with Shaiko. User name Vox_Clams describes a very different time in the not too distant past:
Back in the 70's, we called it integration, and virtually everyone favored it. Integration efforts yielded mix results… but for the most part, the direction was positive. Students went out of their way to embrace the opportunity to become friends with someone from a different ethnic group. Integration, of course, was facilitated by the fact that the only color that mattered was Dartmouth Green.
This is a notion shared by Dartblog who echoed the sentiment: "In my time in North Fayerweather the dorm’s residents lived happily together as equals, even though many were members of groups that had at one time in the past been scorned by White Anglo-Saxon Protestants for their difference: Jews, Catholics, Swedes, Irish, Germans, Asians, Italians. Even a Canadian. Of course, at the time none of us noticed. We were all Dartmouth students."
The former student from the 1970s especially hit the nail on the head describing how diversity is fast becoming a new form of segregation:
Now we have "diversity," which has turned into a euphemism for segregation. Not surprisingly, with all this emphasis on "diversity," segregation has made a comeback that the most avid racist of the 1950's would envy. There is a movement afoot at Dartmouth and elsewhere for residences where only "people of color" are welcome. I fail to see the distinction between marking those "affinity houses" and marking the drinking fountains "colored."