Students taught the key ideas in “anti-racism” and “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) efforts are more likely to imagine the presence of racism when there is no evidence for it.
This is one important conclusion of a recently released psychological study from Rutgers University and the Network Contagion Research Institute.
This academically rigorous investigation provides the latest confirmation that “education” in DEI concepts produces utterly perverse outcomes. People subjected to DEI indoctrination become more likely to imagine the presence of bigotry where none exists, more willing to punish those who have done nothing wrong, and more open to agreeing with claims that certain groups are “parasites,” “a virus,” and “the devil personified.”
It’s worth briefly summarizing the details of this important study.
Researchers had college students read one of two essays. The first essay discussed the production of corn in the United States. It had nothing to do with race or racism. The second essay was adapted from the writings of Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo, two of the leading authors in DEI pedagogy. This essay claimed that “white people raised in Western society are conditioned into a white supremacist worldview. Racism is the norm; it is not unusual.”
Students were then asked to evaluate the following scenario: “A student applied to an elite East Coast university in Fall 2024. During the application process, he was interviewed by an admissions officer. Ultimately, the student’s application was rejected.”
Despite the scenario providing no evidence of racial bias or discrimination, students who read the Kendi/DiAngelo essay perceived more bigotry in the encounter than those who read the corn essay. The Kendi/DiAngelo readers reported that the student experienced more “microaggressions,” that the student experienced more harm, and that the admissions officer was more biased. Amazingly, the Kendi/DiAngelo readers were more likely to report that the student was “a person of color,” despite the scenario providing zero information about the student’s race and ethnicity.
And it gets worse. Despite a total lack of evidence that the admissions officer treated the applicant in a biased fashion, Kendi/DiAngelo readers demonstrated more willingness to punish the officer by demanding a public apology or forcing the officer to take a DEI course.
Finally, in a follow-up study that exposed participants to DEI-infused materials on the supposed caste oppression in Hindu culture, those who read the DEI materials were more willing to endorse eliminationist claims adapted from Adolf Hitler. Researchers replaced “Jews” in Hitler quotations with “Brahmins,” a particular caste charged with oppressing other castes. Those who read the DEI materials were much more likely to agree that “Brahmins are parasites,” “Brahmins are a virus,” and “Brahmins are the devil personified.”
This result disturbingly suggests that “education” in DEI concepts prompts the endorsement of violent “resistance” against groups deemed “oppressors,” without regard for an individual’s guilt or innocence.
Suddenly, the celebration of the October 7 attacks against Israel at elite campuses—with Israelis and Jews cast in the role of “oppressors”—doesn’t seem so strange.
This academic study only confirms what common sense and plain observation suggest. By teaching that modern American society is systemically bigoted against various minority groups, DEI trains Americans to view themselves as victims of a rigged system. Indoctrinating students with this poisonous ideology during their formative years in school and college destroys any chance that they will develop an informed appreciation of American institutions, including our magnificent Constitution.
And nearly every day, more evidence comes to light that demonstrates the destructive nature of DEI on college campuses in particular. A recent blockbuster report on the University of Michigan revealed that, similar to the findings of the Rutgers study, surveys showed that students perceived the campus climate to be less welcoming than in the years prior to the creation of a gigantic DEI apparatus. The University System of Georgia recently became the latest of many prominent universities to drop the use of faculty “diversity statements,” which coerced applicants to pledge fealty to the DEI program as a condition of hiring and advancement. Many schools across the country have shut down their DEI offices.
But while actions like the ending of diversity statements and the closing of DEI offices are welcome, they fail to address the destructive presence of DEI in college classrooms.
It’s bad enough that a university forces any student or faculty member to undergo mandatory DEI training. It’s even worse that, according to a recent study by Speech First, over two-thirds of major universities require students to take DEI courses that instruct them in the loathsome ideas of figures like Kendi and DiAngelo.
The Goldwater Institute has made similar findings. At the University of Arizona, students must take courses in “Diversity and Equity” as part of their general education program. As a Goldwater report revealed, a course fulfilling this requirement taught that “Racism is deeply embedded in U.S. history, society, and institutions. It is systemic … White people hold unearned privilege while people of color have not had equal access to the ‘American Dream.’” Another Goldwater study found that a required course for journalism students at Arizona State University contained readings that advised students to avoid purportedly racist “microaggressions,” such as the innocuous statement, “I believe the most qualified person should get the job.” According to the course reading, this statement communicated that “people of color are given extra unfair benefits because of their race.”
Of all the important figures, books, and ideas that students could conceivably study in college, it is a travesty that universities force them to spend time and tuition dollars on ideological indoctrination that destroys trust and a sense of belonging. As the authors of the Rutgers study wrote, “Educational materials from some of the most well published and well known DEI scholars not only failed to positively enhance interracial attitudes, they provoked baseless suspicion and encouraged punitive attitudes.”
If public universities insist on forcing students into these courses, then elected officials in the states must act. Fortunately, Goldwater and Speech First have developed the Freedom from Indoctrination Act, a reform that puts an end to DEI course requirements. Furthermore, it prevents universities from compelling professors to include DEI content in their courses, a clear violation of academic freedom. Finally, the Freedom from Indoctrination Act requires public universities’ general education programs to provide basic instruction in important elements of the American system of self-government, including the Constitution, the separation of powers, freedom of speech, and landmark Supreme Court cases.
Academic studies are now confirming what should have been clear in the beginning. DEI doesn’t just fail to make people kinder and more tolerant. It most likely leads to more hatred, more distrust, and greater willingness to punish the innocent.
In a nation made up of people from a staggering array of backgrounds and cultures, this poisonous ideology will destroy the bonds that unite us as Americans—if we allow it.
Timothy K. Minella is Senior Constitutional Fellow at the Goldwater Institute’s Van Sittert Center for Constitutional Advocacy.
