Last week marked the 19th annual DU Diversity Summit. Over the course of three days, from Jan. 21 to Jan. 23, 22 events were held that discussed diversity and the theme for this year: How do we get to “WE”?
One of the final events of the summit was entitled “Society Evolves, Our ‘We’ Changes; Diversity and Inclusion Can’t Remain the Same.” The hosts were Brian Gonzales—LCSW, LAC, Clinical Assistant Professor and Assistant Dean for Academic Affairs at the Graduate School of Social Work (GSSW)—and Heather Arnold-Renicker—MSW and Clinical Assistant Professor at GSSW.
Before Gonzales and Arnold-Renicker began speaking, they played a video to introduce their topic. In the video, people held up signs that described their experiences with discrimination. After a swell in the music, the people in the video held up new signs describing their personal commitment to inclusion. The video concluded that “inclusion starts with ‘I’.” According to the video, inclusion can start, and be completed, simply by making a commitment to it.
Gonzales and Arnold-Renicker stepped to the front of the classroom and asked the room if they thought the video’s conclusion was correct. They did not agree entirely with the video’s message and drew upon possible parallels to DU, the Diversity Summit and diversity and inclusion at large.
The theme of the Summit was “How do we get to ‘WE’,” and they posed: What is “WE” in reference to? Who decides “WE?” They suggested that the video offers a simplistic solution to marginalization and exclusion, which can often result from well-intended missions and initiatives. The suggested that DU was falling victim to the same simplicity. They are making a rhetorical commitment to inclusion with the title of the Summit, but should also appreciate the nuances and complexities involved. Arnold-Renicker stated that in her experience, “Organizations… want diversity without all the difficult parts.” Becoming a holistic community is unquantifiable and complex, and rhetorical commitments are only part of the process.
The hosts then prompted discussion by asking questions of the audience. Small groups were formed and answered the question: Is America divided? Many concluded that America was divided, and reasons ranged from ignorance of similarities to increased empowerment of minority identities. Then the hosts asked if DU could ever get to “WE?” After more small group discussions, audience members shared their doubts about DU’s chances of becoming an inclusive community. Many answered no, giving reasons like the continued use of the Pioneer mascot, lack of progress, lack of participation in diversity workshops and leadership’s lackluster commitments. Arnold-Renicker reaffirmed the sentiments in the room by referencing a quote by Derrick Bell, the first Harvard University tenured African American professor of law, when he argued that white people will not bring about racial equality because it is not in their self-interest because white people benefit from their privilege and power. The group drew on this quote and speculated about DU’s trajectory, suggesting that it is doubtful that DU is prepared to commit to “WE” because they are not ready to give up power. Change will not just happen if individuals rhetorically commit to it, it requires that DU institutions change and give up their dominance.
The hosts went on to articulate more complexities of achieving “WE,” at DU and at large. They provided current projections about the rapidly changing world. Here are a few: Generation Z averages nine hours of screen time a day, by 2030 about 14 percent of the global workforce may have to learn new job skills due to artificial intelligence, in 2040 Islam may be the second-largest religion in the US and by 2045 white people may become the minority population in the US. They argued that these factors will alter the way we see inclusion, and “WE” will have evolved.
The hosts asked the group: fast forward to 2045 where white people may be the minority in the US, does that change your “WE” based on the identities you hold? After small group discussions, audience members wondered aloud if institutions and power structures would reflect the change in demographics. Arnold-Renicker elaborated on that, pointing out the many ways discussion and implementation of diversity are flawed. For instance, discussion on race is frequently about making white people feel better instead of calling them out for being incorrect; discussion on micro-aggression rarely focuses on the “victim,” focusing instead on the “perpetrator” and their reparative actions and future prevention; conflicts about race are avoided by the dominant culture; and white people may distance themselves from racial injustices instead of using their privilege to address and call attention to racism.
The hosts argued that there are so many barriers to “WE,” and leadership in schools, businesses and government can be reluctant to confront such challenges. Arnold-Renicker concluded the event by saying, because of the incredible institutionalized barriers and lack of genuine commitment from those in power, “We will never really get to ‘WE’… so what is the goal?”
