DEI may be done at UofM or about to get a name change and be squirreled away until the Dems are again ascendant, we shall see.
But for the now, the sad and oft-overeaction of the progressives to the loss of one of their treasured tools is enjoyable to watch.
The Detroit Free Press: Decision to scrap DEI leaves U-M students and faculty scrambling to respond
As a policy of discrimination and racial graft may be coming to an end at the University of Michigan, those who benefited from it aren't very happy.
The decision is certainly causing much sadness and anger among the bien pensants of the left who claim ending it is all about the hobgoblin of white supremacy:
Professor Rebekah Modrak, the chair of the Faculty Senate, called for the meeting after Thursday's announcement and said the federal government is trying to control higher education in America.
"They are using the power of the government to engineer a sweeping culture change towards white supremacy," she wrote in an email inviting people to the meeting.
Well no, no it is not. But then again when anything one doesn't like is white supremacy, well, what can you do?
Verily, ending this discriminatory program is the same thing as losing civil rights on campus, as per the local ACLU.
Some scholarships based on DEI are being properly cancelled, to some beneficiary chagrin:
“LEAD scholarship was for students who demonstrated leadership in high school,” Trujillo Garcia said. “I felt it was merit-based. Yeah, there was a significant diversity component to it, but there was a merit component, too. You had to show leadership and achievement.”
Ah, "a significant diversity component" In other words, it was awarded based on "diversity" first and foremost, hence why it is being done away with now.
Meanwhile, a lack of DEI is apparently causing trouble with progressive jargon-filled activities
"Jade Whittaker-Mitts, a 21-year-old senior from Cadillac, agrees."
. . .
“A lot of my work in those organizations has been, like DEI-focused, in a kind of adjacent way,” she said. “Doing a lot of food sovereignty work, that doesn't exist if you don't have DEI.”
Interesting the claim of how the concept of "food sovereignty" doesn't work without DEI.
Apparently "food sovereignty" is progressive jargon for Marxist food policies - food policies that, you know, typically lead to starvation in socialist systems that adopt them, for the people, naturally:
“Food sovereignty is the right of peoples to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound and sustainable methods, and their right to define their own food and agriculture systems. It puts the aspirations and needs of those who produce, distribute and consume food at the heart of food systems and policies rather than the demands of markets and corporations.”
It gets more jargon-y form there.
Progressives really hate free markets in absolutely anything, and the Food Sovereignty movement is yet another leftist globalist intersectional approach to nowhere good. If DEI ends it at UofM that's a positive thing.