The DEIter Principle
On the use of intersectional victimhood identities in tenure and promotion
In 1969, Lawrence Peter wrote “The Peter Principle”. This book about organizations observed that promotions of competent people occurred. However, if a person was competent at one level, this did not always translate into competence at a higher position. Eventually, a person would be promoted into a position in which he was not competent. Thus, with the Peter Principle, organizations would often be run by those who were less competent than was necessary.
Today, the Peter Principle still works. But it has been supplemented by an even more important principle. This is the “DEIter Principle”. In the DEIter Principle, people are promoted in a manner due to their intersectional worthiness. Intersectional worthiness is unrelated to actual credentials. In fact, when a “DEIter Principle” promotion occurs, the person being promoted need not have credentials.
The logic of intersectionality and the logic of victimhood leads to the use of the DEIter Principle. Using the DEIter Principle, candidates for high office are sought who “check the boxes” of LGBTQ+, race (preferably visibly black), inter-racial marriage, immigration, and of course sex (that is, being female - being male is a strike against the individual). These items can be termed the “intersectionality checklist”. Candidates who check more than 1 of these boxes are, basically, untouchable. Those who check more than 1 of these “intersectional checklist” items are similarly untouchable. Once promoted, they are set for life.
DEIter Principle Example: Claudine Gay
The prime example, for the moment, of the workings of the DEIter Principle is Harvard President Claudine Gay. She became President of Harvard in July 2023. In December 2023, she appeared before the House of Representatives, and was unable to state that calls for the extermination of Jews were wrong.
Her academic record is, to use a clear term, mediocre. She has 13 publications. Her publications occurred between 1998 and 2016. She was named “Dean of the Social Studies at the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS) and the Wilbur A. Cowett Professor of Government and of African and African-American Studies. In 2018, she was appointed Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences.” (Wikipedia entry on Claudine Gay, retrieved 2023-12-27 12:11 AM). She simply stopped publishing at the time of her appointment as Dean, and has published nothing since 2016 (7 years, a long time in academia to have no publications).
More importantly, there are multiple charges of plagiarism which have been raised against her. Christopher Rufo, in a blog column of Dec 10, lists multiple examples of plagiarism. Questions were directed to Harvard University about this issue from the NY Post on Oct 13 in which an “anonymous source” had raised questions. Plagiarism is copying words without a clear indication of the source of those words, which in turn means that the words are set off by quotation marks and the source is given as a citation. The number of words which are required to be quoted is not clear; sources indicate that 5-8 words are enough to require explicit citation. In Gay’s case, in her dissertation, entire paragraphs were copied. An even more serious charge indicates that she copied the entire appendix in her dissertation from a published book by her dissertation advisor verbatim and completely unattributed. These are not minor issues. If the standard for plagiarism Is 5-8 words not enclosed in quotation marks, she has violated this rule on multiple occasions.
The career of Claudine Gay
The process of gaining tenure for Gay appears to be singularly eased by the DEIter Principle. She was on the Faculty of Political Science at Stanford University from 2000-2006. Gaining tenure requires publications in core journals. She took a sabbatical from 2003-2004, and obtained tenure in 2005. She published 3 articles in core journals before 2005. Articles published before she joined the faculty are usually not counted. The calendar of obtaining tenure on the Faculty of Political Science at Stanford (one of the top universities in the US) in 3 years on the basis of 3 articles is astonishing, and raised important questions about both the individual and the Political Science Department.
The Faculty of the Department of Political Science at Stanford have their CVs posted. In examining these, it’s possible to see what leads to tenure in this department (promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor). The number of publications for 5 individuals were counted, where the person started as an Assistant and was promoted to Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at Stanford University. This examination revealed that other persons in this department had 7, 12, 14, 10, and 5. Gay’s count of 3 is well short of the normal process at this prestigious department.
Hiring as Harvard’s President
The press release from Harvard University about the appointment of Gay as president should be examined. In this release, much is said about her “leadership” in developing new programs, in sheparding Harvard through COVID, in leading the Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Almost nothing is said about her scholarship – to be fair, there is a 1-sentence reference to her body of work. Her status as the child of immigrants is mentioned. There are several comments which tangentially note her involve in issue of “diverse” voices: “She has a bedrock commitment to free inquiry and expression, as well as a deep appreciation for the diverse voices and views that are the lifeblood of a university community.” While she appears to be a valued member of the Harvard Community, her scholarship is thin and not impressive.
The DEIter Principle
The committee that hired her to be the President of Harvard University made a bold bet that a person checking multiple boxes in the “intersectionality checklist” would bring Harvard into the new multicultural Woke future. They bet big on Claudine Gay, and now are seeing the consequences of this failed gamble. When a big bet is made, and shown to be a bad bet, the first instinct is to “double down” and protect the hiring committee decision. The DEIter Principle means that a Woke intersectional gamble will be defended even more strongly.
The Presidency of Claudine Gay has been dealt a severe blow, but was flawed from the start. The consequences of this failed choice are beginning to manifest themselves. Law firms have pulled back from hiring Harvard Law graduates. The Lauder Business School in Vienna, Austria has cut ties with Harvard University.
Claudine Gay stepped down from the Presidency of Harvard University on January 2, 2024.
An alternative credentialing system
Essentially, what is going on with the DEIter Principle is that the “intersectionality checklist” is that these are an “alternative credentialling system”. To obtain tenure, a person can either get a lot of articles into refereed high-quality journals, or that person can be in a “intersectionality checklist” group. The process really kicks in when a person is in 2 or more of the “protected categories”. If that person is, their road to tenure, and to the keys to the “academic easy street” is far easier and simpler. If you are in the ”intersectionality anti-checklist” (white, male, straight, born in the USA), you must be even MORE within the standard guidelines.
Final thoughts
The Presidency of Harvard University is one of the most prestigious academic leadership positions in the US. The President should be a preeminent scholar without serious concerns about the academic record of the President. Gay’s record has multiple serious consequences. In a similar case, the President of Stanford University recently resigned over the retraction of several articles which were written based on research in his laboratory. The President of Stanford University resigned despite only modest evidence of his personal responsibility in the matters leading to the retractions.
Claudine Gay’s resignation as President of Harvard University was overdue. Now, Harvard University must return to a former approach, in which academic merit or other accomplishments lead to high position.
Great comparison with the Peter Principle. I remember when that concept was introduced. The DEIter principle is a huge step backwards.
People who rail against inclusiveness are simply revealing that they are prejudiced. We do, in fact, live in a diverse country. We have people of all races, religions, national origins, sexes and sexual persuasions. That being the case, if we don't have inclusiveness in our governments, businesses and other organizations, then what does that mean? It means that certain people are being favored while other people are being left out. The people who are favored are -- you guessed it -- white, male, Christian and heterosexual. (White women are included by virtue of being the partners of white males.) This favoritism of white people has become ingrained into our society over the centuries through white bigotry and control of the economy. But that is hardly fair.
The larger question is, Why shouldn't we have a diverse society? I can't think of any reason. My greatest concern is that some foreign countries -- I'm thinking now about very poor countries and very conservative societies like you find in the Middle East -- have cultures that are incompatible with liberal democratic values, but even people from those cultures who immigrate here eventually become Americanized.
If there is an ongoing conversation in this country about DEI, it is because we need more of those things. Diversity, Equity ane Inclusion are good things, not bad things. And encouraging DEI has nothing to do with victimhood. Let me add, by the way, that people who ARE discriminated against (for their race, religion or sexual orientation, etc.) ARE being victimized!!! If white people like you don't like the "culture of victimhood", then perhaps you should stop trying to exclude people from our society who aren't like you.