The “Diversity” Dilemma

I suppose I should say a “diversity” dilemma, but in any event one of the biggest problems with “diversity” is that there’s never enough of it, and it’s always out of whack. No matter how much “diversity” is present in any organization, class, or setting, and no matter how conscientious the diversifiers, some groups, presumably as deserving of “representation” as others, will be altogether absent or “underrepresented,” and other groups, presumably no more entitled to “representation” than others, will be “overrepresented.”

Moreover, there is the related problem of “diversity’s” assumption that all blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc., are fungible, not only among but also within these groups. I’ve referred to this problem often, as here in discussing complaints that Duke’s forms did not allow form-fillers to specify what kind of black they are:

Although it is certainly true that not all blacks are the same (just as Japanese and Chinese and Koreans are not the same and Cherokees and Apaches are not the same), they actually are all the same in their ability to provide “diversity” to others, which is the current … justification for racial and ethnic preferences.

Perversely (or poetically justly), the more conscientious diversifiers try to be, the worse this problem becomes. Take Caltrans, the California transportation agency (no thanks, you take it). As I discussed recently, here, and will discuss again in a day or three, Caltrans has recently petitioned the U.S. Dept. of Transportation for permission to violate the California constitution by awarding contracts on the basis of race. (Your guess as to why the U.S. DOT might have that authority is as good as mine.)

With respect to this request, AsianWeek (“The Voice of Asian America”) predictably declares “CalTrans Needs More APA Contractors.” Let us pass up the almost (but not quite) irresistible urge to ask “Why?” and move on. (For those of you not completely conversant with the jargon of “diversity,” “APA” means Asian-Pacific Americans.) But a closer look, which AsianWeek happily provides, reveals that Caltrans doesn’t need just any APA contractors. Indeed, it already has too many of some and not enough (for whom?) of others. Referring to the “diversity index” of underrepresentation in a Caltrans study, AsianWeek noted:

Hispanic-owned firms showed great improvement. Some APA firms, those owned by South Asian Americans, were actually overrepresented.

The study used a disparity index, where a score of 100 constitutes parity. Indian- and Pakistani-owned contractors rated 124. Latino firms rated 81. An index below 80 is considered “substantial disparity.”

Even among those groups underrepresented, the range was huge. African Americans were the most disadvantaged, scoring only 15. Chinese- and Filipino-owned firms fared little better with a score of 31.

Presumably a close look at other categories would reveal similar “disparities” within groups — too many Mexicans, not enough Guatemalans; too many Carribean blacks; etc. In short, as AsianWeek astutely observed, simply

[i]nstituting an across-the-board policy to hire more minority contractors would not be an improvement, particularly if the same minority contractors ended up being hired over and over, simply to fill artificial quotas.

Alas, AsianWeek did not inform us how to distinguish “artificial quotas” from genuine, legitimate quotas.