 |
23.09.2025 |
Is It Okay to Agree with Trump?
Some time ago, the Trump administration declared that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies and practices should be removed from U.S. schools to “restore order” in classrooms. The question is: should we agree or disagree with this policy?
The DEI framework often operates on the assumption that the percentage of disciplined students should be the same across different racial and ethnic groups. For example, if 10% of white students in a school receive disciplinary referrals, then the same percentage is expected for Black and other nonwhite students. This assumption, however, lacks sociological grounding. Misconduct and crime are always individual acts, and no social science research suggests that disciplinary ratios must be identical across groups.
The Problem in Practice
Consider how this plays out. Suppose only 10% of white students in a school are disciplined. At some point, the percentage of Black students disciplined reaches that same figure. If just one more Black student receives a referral, the percentage rises—and administrators may hesitate, fearing that it would make their leadership appear out of compliance with DEI expectations.
Here’s what often happens: a nonwhite student—let’s call him Jimmy—disrupts class to the extent that he should be removed and given appropriate consequences. Yet, if administrators act, the discipline rate for Black students will surpass that of white students. To avoid this appearance, Jimmy might be sent to the office briefly and returned to class without meaningful consequences. Jimmy soon learns that he can disrupt instruction without accountability. This may preserve statistical ratios, but it undermines not only his own learning, but also that of his classmates—including other Black and nonwhite students. In the name of DEI, especially in underfunded districts, all students end up being harmed.
Agreeing with Trump?
So, should educators agree with Trump?
Ideologically, I cannot. I am well aware of his right-wing, nearly authoritarian political agenda, and I reject it. Yet this example shows that when DEI is applied superficially, it can be counterproductive. As it currently stands, DEI neither helps Jimmy nor his peers. If DEI advocates—often in liberal and Democratic Party circles—were serious about justice and equality, they would push for alternative learning environments for students like Jimmy: one-to-one instruction, small-group programs, or specialized schools that better support student needs.
This is not the same as Trump’s solution. His approach is simply to remove disruptive students to restore order. But if DEI continues to be applied in this shallow manner, then I must reluctantly admit that Trump is correct on one point: DEI, in its current form, should be lifted. As things stand, it helps no one and leaves everyone worse off.
Beyond Cosmetic Fixes
Finally, I must add this: in the political arena, the educational policies proposed by Democrats rarely go beyond superficial, cosmetic adjustments. What the United States urgently needs is a political party and civic movement that takes the side of the working class, confronts the root causes of structural inequality across race and culture, and proposes truly radical solutions—rather than hiding behind cosmetic reforms or hollow slogans.
Edward Allen
September 2025 / California
