Blog

Emil Guillermo: Stefanik's attack on diversity is the start of a new anti-civil rights movement

Image for Emil Guillermo: Stefanik's attack on diversity is the start of a new anti-civil rights movement
Photo via ABC News

If you haven’t realized it yet, the congressional hearing last week that continues to make news wasn’t about solving rising antisemitism in America in the shadows of the Israel-Hamas war.

That was the given pretext for the hearing, but it really served as a platform for an outright attack by right-wing MAGA-types on the thing they believe has destroyed higher ed–and all of American society—over the last 30 years.

What would that be?

Diversity, of course, and the undoing of racial discrimination under the Civil Rights Act.

Asian Americans most certainly have benefited from this and should be alarmed by what happened in Washington.

With that single word, “diversity,” comes all that detractors believe has crippled our country, starting with our colleges and universities. It includes everything from admissions, to hiring, and extends to a curriculum that has seen the emergence of race, gender, and equity studies. It has made everyone more aware of issues that have been largely ignored in our society.

What better way to bring about its reversal but in a high-profile congressional hearing attacking three elite university presidents?

The main instigator was fourth ranking Republican, Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York–a Donald Trump acolyte and an Ivy League-educated Marjorie Taylor Green wannabe.

Stefanik is a Trump enabler who voted to invalidate the 2020 election and has maintained the “Big Lie” on election fraud.

That puts her low on any sane person’s credibility scale–unless you’re Donald Trump.

At the hearing, Stefanik was given extra time by fellow Republicans who yielded to her so she could wail at the college presidents, demanding they give yes/no answers on complex matters of free speech and discrimination. It was a textbook example of why politics is sometimes called “show business for ugly people.”

Still, it’s hard to believe that elite college presidents, who themselves oversee sometimes treacherous academic office politics, could have been taken by surprise. Surely, they’ve seen Congressional hearings run by MAGA loyalists like Jim Jordan (R-Ohio)?

But when Penn’s Elizabeth Magill, Harvard’s Claudine Gay, and MIT’s Sally Kornbluth came to Congress, they just didn’t seem to realize they were being teed up by the conservative right.

They thought it was a serious inquiry into antisemitism and responded as such. They were going for nuance when asked if calls for genocide against Jews constituted harassment under university policy.

Yes or no?

The presidents didn’t want to respond to hypotheticals. They said it depends on the context. They were being academics.

That wasn’t good enough, so the political right bullied and harangued them.

Despite more than five hours of hearings, most people only saw the micro-clips showing the three presidents respond in a collegial and legalistic way, respectful of the inquiry.

They did not match the volume, ire, and fake passion of Stefanik.

These hearings are used by some members of Congress to demagogue and beat up on their invited guests, all while the cameras roll and create viral clips for the politicians’ own re-election campaigns.

It’s the politics of a divided America. Aside from the college presidents, the House just approved an impeachment inquiry on President Biden despite having no evidence of wrongdoing.

At some point you wish they’d stop wasting time and spend their mental energy coming up with solutions to real problems, like real comprehensive immigration reform.

But this is what we’re stuck with.

From the hearing, Stefanik got the newsclips she wanted on every major network. But she also re-opened an old wound about America’s reckoning on race.

Over the weekend, the key takeaway from the hearing wasn’t about rising antisemitism in society or on campus. Indeed, one major cable network suggested the hearings showed why the public has lost faith in higher ed, claiming it has become the home of dogmatic ideology and social engineering, not academic merit.

But Rep. Mark Takano (D-Calif.), who was on the committee, saw through it all. He told the Harvard Crimson that the Republicans “were not really interested in the topic of antisemitism and antisemitism on campus.”

Takano simply saw it as more divisive MAGA politics.

“My own sense is that the Republicans are spring-loaded to enact a narrative that universities are bastions of liberal progressives,” Takano told the Crimson. “They wanted to present an opportunity for their members to portray universities in a certain way.”

He was also critical of Stefanik, whom he observed as taking a “hard turn to the right.”

But Stefanik’s stunt appears to be working.

While MIT President Sally Kornbluth has received some support on her campus, Penn’s President Magill was forced to resign last weekend.Harvard’s Gay apologized for her performance on Friday but was still under pressure to resign from some alumni and donors.To counter, Harvard faculty members circulated a letter of support on Sunday. There were also attacks on whether as Gay, an African American woman, was even qualified for the job. Conservative outlets reported on her scholarly work that showed minor examples of plagiarism.

Fortunately, Harvard’s board wasn’t swayed and this past Tuesday voted to “unanimously stand in support of President Gay.”

All this from an inquiry into fighting antisemitism.

Instead, the hearing exposed the bitterness and resentment that some still have over a move toward diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).

Stefanik’s stunt worked so well, expect more of it. Not just in higher ed but at the workplace, and everywhere the right wants to reverse gains we’ve made against discrimination.

Asian Americans beware.Political conservatives have jumpstarted a new anti-civil rights movement against racial equality.

That’s the bottom line after the hearings with the college presidents. Yes, we’re all against antisemitism; that was never in doubt.

But as we see, in 2023, some people hate diversity, equity and inclusion efforts even more.

# # #

NOTE: I will talk about this column and other matters on “Emil Amok’s Takeout,” my AAPI micro-talk show. Live @2p Pacific. Livestream on Facebook; my YouTube channel; and Twitter. Catch the recordings on www.amok.com.