Special Contributor: John J. Maddente
Diverse and inclusive bodies of people make for a unified, strong and just society, but we need more sunlight on exactly what is meant and by whom, in the practice of D&I — particularly during this post-election season while Americans remain enormously polarized.
The underpinning of D&I efforts is morally unimpeachable and embraced by all reasonable citizens. We need to strive for enhanced representation of individuals in government (or industry) with due consideration to race, gender, creed and sexual orientation.
However, we also must have diverse views as part of our D&I ethos for governing. Is a group or individual that passes every measure of diversity including race, gender, creed and sexual orientation — but tolerates only a progressive viewpoint — one that supports liberty?
No, and that’s precisely the fear many Conservatives and Independents hold regarding the far Left today. Ideological box-checking is not a practice that engenders diversity or inclusion; rather it spawns resentment and mistrust.
For Democrats to find common ground with 71 million Americans voting for President Trump; they’ll need to fend off polemicists in their party who are devoid of any tolerance for intellectual diversity and inclusion. If reasoned Dems don’t curb radical voices clamoring for radical change; we could see a tragic conflict between Americans worse than anything we’ve witnessed since the 1860s. That’s a scenario I’ve been fearful of for years. A broader definition and practice of D&I — which some might call ideological compromise — is a peaceful remedy.
John J. Maddente maintains a website to post opinions on a variety of topics and as an archive for articles or comments published in print or on other web sites. He can be contacted at email@example.com — or visit http://twitter.com/johnmaddente
To read more of John’s work visit. http://Maddente.com