Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter
“You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but you are to judge your neighbor fairly.” - Leviticus 19:15
The purpose of a decision is to solve a problem. If a problem is solved in one part of a system but creates worse conditions in another, it’s not wise. It’s not optimal because it’s inconsistent with Systems Thinking. Furthermore, decisions which benefit only one party at the expense of another (who absorb all or most of the risks) are evil. They violate the Seventh Commandment (Thou shall not steal).
Decisions based on Affirmative Action, Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) and Disparate Impact are therefore evil. The political left knowingly punishes one group to reward another. The evil perpetrated on white males in the entertainment industry over the past 60 years is just one small example.
White Male Writers Reverse Discrimination
In the 1960’s, whites made up about 70-90% of the population. Today it’s about 35%. Therefore, today one would expect the percentage of whites employed in the entertainment industry to be 35%. Because of Affirmative Action, Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI) and Disparate Impact, it stands at only 9%. According to Jacob Savage, a war has been declared on an entire generation of whites. This is not the only industry impacted by this evil.
What’s the Difference Between Disparate Treatment and Disparate Impact
Disparate Treatment is flat out racism in action. It’s an attack on the dignity of others based on differences in physical characteristics such as skin color or other physical traits and characteristics. Disparate Treatment is overt, intentional, and unacceptable.
“Disparate Impact discrimination occurs when a seemingly neutral policy or action causes a disproportionate and unjustified negative harm to a group, regardless of intent.” - Anderson
Disparate Impact is covert, unintentional and ignores systems thinking. For example, the military created the Army Physical Fitness Test (APFT) for all combat recruits. It caused a significantly higher failure rate for women (44%) vs. men (7%). Disparate Impact threatened a discrimination claim so the Army (under Biden) changed the test to gender-neutral which lowered the standards for women to allow a greater percentage to pass. If lower combat readiness standards for women cause harm to all soldiers, the policy is unwise and inconsistent with systems thinking and must be avoided.
Disparate Impact began with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and a Supreme Court case in 1971. It assumes a certain policy or circumstance causes unintended harm to those with differences (race, sex, physical, etc.). In the 1971 case, SCOTUS ruled that employment requirements discriminated against a certain race. The company was forced to change its policies.
With Disparate Impact, any policy that 'limits' can be interpreted as discriminatory. Therefore lawsuits, costs to business and attorney wealth all increase. If a problem is solved in one part of a system but creates worse conditions in another, it’s unwise and inconsistent with systems thinking. It’s also evil because it steals from one part of the system to reward another.
DEI: The Evil “Brother” of Disparate Impact
Disparate Impact is a first cousin of DEI. DEI is a comprehensive approach with the purpose of creating environments of fairness. The purpose of DEI is for individuals, regardless of background (race, gender, sexual orientation) to feel valued and to have equal outcomes. DEI contradicts the Constitution because the Bill of Rights and the rule of law call for equal opportunities not equal outcomes.
DEI has its roots in the 1960’s anti-discrimination legislative movement when laws like the Equal Pay Act of 1963, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 addressed labor issues based on protected classes. Although DEI policies have good intentions, we all know good intentions are worthless unless the outcomes are consistent with wisdom (biblical principles) and systems thinking.
“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Saint Bernard of Clairvaux
Proponents of DEI claim it benefits employers by creating a more engaging and productive workplace. They claim it lowers employee turnover, improves decision making and creates higher productivity. Can we agree to treat these claims with a healthy dose of skepticism? Here are two reasons: 1) The philosophical foundation of DEI is evil; 2) Those who do not have the preferred characteristics experience reverse discrimination.
The Foundation of DEI
Marxism is the philosophical foundation of DEI. Marxism encourages division and envy between two disparate groups, the oppressed and oppressors, and creates victims and the victim mentality. Marxism creates and promotes division, not unity. It’s anti-American. The Great Seal of the United States, E Pluribus Unum, means “out of many one”. This contradicts the Marxist philosophy.
“We don’t treat anybody different because of their race or their sex,” the vice president told the crowd. So, we have relegated DEI to the dustbin of history, which is exactly where it belongs… In the United States of America, you don’t have to apologize for being white anymore.” – J.D. Vance AmericaFest 2025
The political left claims DEI initiatives aim to tackle disparities. They even claim that efforts to abolish DEI are racist. Yet after 61 years of the Civil Rights Act and $22 trillion taxpayer contributions for example, the wealth gap is the same.
The Reverse Discrimination of DEI
DEI promotes incompetence because it lowers performance standards and excellence prioritizing skin color, sex, and age etc. instead. Disparate impact justifies this unwise decision. Do you want your airline pilot to be a DEI hire or performance-based hires? Do you want your surgeon to be a DEI hire or a performance-based hire?
Recruiting in the Military
Is it fair to say that missing recruiting goals in the military can put American security at risk? Under Biden, Lloyd Austin, previous Secretary of Defense (now DOW) made endless excuses for the recruitment failures while focusing on DEI policies.
Pete Hegseth and Trump’s Department of War (DOW) shifted its strategy from a DEI focus to a merit-based lethality focus. In just 11 months it has exceeded all recruiting goals.
State Police Recruiting
Maryland State police leadership assumed that basic reading skills were an important performance characteristic for new recruits. Because black applicants got much lower scores, the test was ruled racist and was halted. Will poor reading skills of the Maryland State Police put citizens at higher risk?
Yale Professors
Yale reported zero faculty as Republican. Wouldn’t diversity of thought be an asset for an academic institution? Will purposeful lack of diversity of thought affect the quality of education?
Harvard Professor Whistleblower
A Harvard University Professor is leaving after 40 years in part because the school is using Disparate Impact to justify the discrimination of white male graduate student applicants.
MIT Discrimination
Two student organizations have filed a complaint because of alleged sex discrimination against white males in graduate programs.
LGBTQ FDNY Fire Chief
The new Mayor of NYC Zohran Mamdani has picked an openly gay female for administration’s Fire Chief. Lillian Bonsignore served as EMS Chief but has no experience as a firefighter. Is this a DEI hire? Will she increase safety for New Yorkers or just meet a quota?
Summary
Disparate Impact and DEI policies lower performance standards, cause unsafe conditions, and create victims (not leaders). In 2025 the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order ending liability for disparate impact discrimination in the federal government. The administration has also taken an ax to DEI.
Trump is using executive orders to eradicate these evils and to reduce government overreach. Isn’t it important to make these changes permanent? One way to do that is by supporting a Convention of States. One purpose of The Convention of States initiative is to eliminate government overreach with amendments to the Constitution. If you agree DEI and Disparate Impact need to be permanently eradicated, please consider supporting the Convention of States.
Stay updated with the latest in the Constitution State with The CT Centinal
