The tumultuous times of the 1950s and ‘60s brought us tremendous political divisions, hate and racial divide.
I am reminded by the events of that era: White hate groups; the killing of Emmitt Till in 1955; the Freedom Rider bus that was stopped, boarded up and set afire with the Freedom Riders inside in 1961; the murder of Mississippi civil rights leader Medgar Evers in his front yard while his children and wife watched in horror in 1963; the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in 1963, killing 4 teenage girls; the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968. We had riots in the streets in reaction to so many racist acts against the Black community in cities across the country.
During this time, a point arose when fair-minded people of all colors and political persuasions began to push back on hatred and divisiveness. The nation began to attempt to heal itself. Organizations, both private and public, began to hire women and people of color in professional capacities. Employers began to express that they were Equal Employment Opportunity organizations, and institutions took steps roughly similar to today’s diversity and inclusion efforts.
People are also reading…
I was a beneficiary of those positive initiatives. In 1966, I was hired by IBM, along with a handful of other Black males across the nation, in coveted marketing positions. We were pioneers and opened a new chapter of inclusiveness in IBM, Xerox, General Motors and more.
I had a very wonderful 15 years with IBM. Those positive measures throughout the country were numerous, but were met with racial bias and tremendous opposition from many political and social conservatives. Those efforts are analogous to today’s calls for diversity, equity and inclusion that also are facing pushback.
The murder of George Floyd in 2020 caused a massive national reaction. One element of that reaction was an immediate upsurge in organizations reevaluating their diversity, equity and inclusion policies and practices. Many organizations initiated internal assessments and took new actions. Today, these measures are captured in the acronym DEI.
One such response is the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s “Journey Toward Anti-Racism and Racial Equity“ and its recently released Commitment to Action.
The governor’s and other conservatives’ criticism of this plan is a throwback to the ’60s. Their pushback has tied UNL’s plan to critical race theory, a tactic that is both diversionary and a disguise of what appears to be opposition to the value of the action plan. Let me be specific:
The action plan advances diversity and inclusion across the institution. What is the opposition to that?
Excellence in learning through diversity: What is the opposition to that?
Promotion of community and a sense of belonging at the university: What is the opposition to that?
Building and sustaining accountability and eliminating racist infrastructures where they exist: What is the opposition to that?
Acknowledging the impact of COVID-19 on under-resourced communities of color: What’s the opposition to that?
What’s the opposition to any of these? Speak plainly, Mr. Governor. If you are opposed, OK, but don’t try to distract from your opposition to the policies by trotting out the national conservative talking point, CRT.
I submit that CRT has nothing to do with UNL’S action items. CRT has become a straw man for nonsensical dialogue about something that does not really exist outside of academia.
I have taught in Black Studies for seven years at UNO. The chairman of Black Studies at UNO, Cynthia Robinson, has taught the subject for 30 years, and neither of us has ever taught about CRT, and don’t acknowledge it as a real-world phenomenon. CRT as a political issue has been created by conservatives to avert serious discussion.
As University President Ted Carter stated clearly, CRT is not a part of the plan. The idea espoused by the governor, that CRT has something to do with serious dialogue about race, ignores a factual accounting of race.
A factual account of our history that includes the horror of racism is just that — a factual account of our history — whether the governor likes it or not. Instead of inventing a new Willie Horton, embrace the value of the positive initiatives.
It is unfortunate for our governor and our state to be known for being against diversity, equity and inclusion. Many potential students of color will choose another state to study. May I say to the governor, our country is too divided. It is time to heal, and that requires leadership, not political posturing.
My congratulations to UNL for attempting to become a part of the solution, instead of the problem, by standing up for the development of a better university. I applaud your positive move forward by listening, learning and acting. I say to readers, healing is in our hands. Take a stand.
Note: This article reflects the views of the author and is not necessarily representative of the views of UNO.
Â