|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Steve Thurston
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) has grown from a niche academic concern to a dominant paradigm shaping schools, the criminal justice system, and government policy. DEI, in theory, seeks to correct historic injustices and create a fairer, more inclusive society. Instead it has led to failing schools, rising crime, and unchecked immigration.
Generations of struggling readers
Progressive reforms in education, with DEI at their core, have radically transformed curricula and teaching methods. Rather than prioritizing basic literacy and numeracy, many schools have embraced pedagogies that emphasize identity and representation above academic rigor.
The results are difficult to ignore: declining reading scores and students ill-prepared for the demands of the modern workforce. Three generations of Americans have now grappled with functional illiteracy, a crisis rooted not in lack of funding, but in an ideological shift that places social justice ahead of scholastic achievement.
Failing to teach students the rules of language has produced generations of students who will underachieve for their entire lives. The ranks of special education students are swollen with readers ‘disabled’ only by poor teaching methods. Prisons are full of people who cannot read above fourth grade level. The cost to society has been great and DEI supporters must take responsibility, however well-intentioned they believe themselves to be.
Communities must fend for themselves against crime
On city streets, the impact of DEI-driven criminal justice reforms is painfully clear. In the name of equity, jurisdictions across the country have relaxed prosecution, reduced policing, and championed alternatives to incarceration for repeat offenders.
The result? Many urban communities have seen a surge in crime, with repeat offenders cycling in and out of the system, emboldened by a lack of consequences. While the intention is to create a fairer system, the reality is often more dangerous neighborhoods and communities left to fend for themselves. We see the results of Progressive ideology in Burlington, where the mayor has begged the governor for help because crime is out of control.
Immigration without limits
Progressive policies informed by DEI have likewise transformed the country’s approach to immigration. Efforts to dismantle barriers and open doors to marginalized groups have resulted in a lack of oversight and enforcement at the nation’s borders.
“Uncontrolled illegal immigration” is not just a talking point; it has become a lived reality in many cities, straining public resources and sowing discord between established residents and newcomers. Unvetted immigrants might be less likely to commit crimes for fear of deportation, but those who come to this country with ill-will toward America pose real threats to public safety, as we have seen in the attack on two young National Guard members in Washington DC on Thanksgiving eve. Once again, the aspiration for inclusion and compassion collides with the practical need for order and security.
Is the trade-off worth it?
Advocates of DEI argue that these sacrifices are necessary to build a more just society. But for parents whose children can’t read, for children who have been denied the potential they were born with, for residents who fear to walk their neighborhoods, and for communities overwhelmed by new arrivals, and for the victims and their families who have experienced the wrath of violent unvetted immigrants, these changes feel less like progress and more like an abdication of common-sense governance. Are we willing to pay this price? Must the pursuit of equity always entail the erosion of standards, discipline, and borders?
Perhaps it is time to reconsider whether DEI, as currently implemented, delivers on its promises. A truly inclusive society need not sacrifice excellence, safety, or the rule of law. We must find a way to encourage the diversity that has made this country great without denying reality—and to ensure that the cost of progress is not borne disproportionately by the very people DEI seeks to help.
The author is an Addison County resident.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Uncategorized
DEI was never about what it claimed to do. The intent was cultural Marxism to Marxist rule, this is the revolution our Bernie was talking about. It’s about creating division through envy.
If you look at all the founders they have something in common, communism, Marxism, chaos,friends in low places.
This ought to be a required read for every Superintendent, Principal, Board Member, PTO, Town Chair, Selectboard Member, Judge, Court Attendant, and other members of the judicial community and law enforcement system. Be sure the Academia world gets it, too. They are the ones teaching DEI to the public educators.
Share the link below with 10 of these community leaders in your town.
https://vermontdailychronicle.com/thurston-paying-the-price-for-dei-in-schools-on-streets-at-border/#respond
Headline fixed:
Paying the price for cultural-Marxism in schools, on streets, at border
The communists needed to take over the education system and they did. They have created a nation of vipers.
Our schools began failing long before DEI became a ‘thing’. The problem with DEI is how the education administration (i.e., the government) implements it. And the answer, in that regard, is clear. The government shouldn’t implement anything.
The solution to this problem is equally clear. Allow the educational free market to thrive. Yes. School Choice. Not only should parents be able to choose the school they believe best meets the needs of their children, schools (i.e., the marketplace) should also be able to choose the market cohort they best can serve.
The government should be the referee when disagreements between buyers and sellers arise. Nothing more. Because we already have laws on the books that define contract relationships and various constitutionally protected individual rights. No ‘trade-off’ required. Choose your pudding/poison.
What then is the problem? It’s called ‘regulatory capture’.
Various special interest groups (we all know who they are) impose their chosen educational mission rather than ‘selling’ it to us. If we don’t want their goods and services (DEI for example), they cram it down our collective throats by lobbying our legislators and administrators to pass regulations that benefit them, not the students. This has been going on now for 40 years.
When the incentives are perfectly aligned, year after year, decade after decade, it doesn’t matter whether you call it a conspiracy or structural design. The outcome is the same: a system that reliably converts instructional failure into labeled disabilities, then converts those labels into protected revenue and protected jobs.
The system works exactly as designed under the current funding and accountability rules. And because no one inside the system loses money or status when the caseload stays high (and many gain), the pattern has, until now, been self-perpetuating without anyone needing to send a memo saying, “keep finding more kids.”
But now, over the last 25 years or so, the kids are disappearing. Vermont’s enrollments have declined 25%, from over 100,000 to only 72,000 K thru 12th grade students because our education system is bankrupting itself and everyone else along with it. How else can anyone explain the incentivized recruitment of immigrant children?
That’s the ugliest truth of all: the most durable dysfunctions are the ones where everyone is rationally responding to the incentives in front of them. No secret meetings required.
So, change the incentives to a market-based economy and let the system fix itself. No more whines, bawls, invectives, or gnashing of teeth.
The curious aspect of all of this is that the solution is as plain as the nose on our collective faces… that true educational fulfillment comes from within and is often found in our own surroundings, rather than in distant places or external circumstances. “If I ever go looking for my heart’s desire again, I won’t look any further than my own backyard. Because if it isn’t there, I never really lost it to begin with,” – Wizard of Oz
The solution is a bill currently languishing in the House and/or Senate Education Committee. It’s called the H.89 School Choice Act. The bill doesn’t change anything. It simply makes Vermont’s oldest-in-the-nation, and popular, School Choice ‘tuitioning’ governance available to all Vermont students, not just the few who happen to live in a fortuitous zip code.
Unfortunately, our current Scott Administration and the State legislature are all addicted to their captured and ever-increasing revenue stream.
It really is just that simple. Call or write your State officials. There is a Senate Education Committee Meeting at the Rutland High School this Friday – December 5, 2025, 2:30 PM – Written testimony is welcome. You can send your comments via email to Lindsey Schreier, lindsey.schreier@vtleg.gov. Or attend the meeting at the Rutland High School.
Pass the H.89 School Choice ‘tuitioning’ bill and let our educational marketplace workout the rest.
Great posting Jay. Thank you!
The solutions school choice and the public recognizing the march to communism .
Yes, you can have school choice. Send your child to a private school and pay for it yourself.
While continuing to pay school tax for not using it
Steve Thurston is being extremely kind here. DEI was designed as a political strategy to undercut the US Constitution and all it stands for. DEI was designed without the US Constitution in mind. It is of Marxist in origin . DEI is really better defined as Divisiveness, Exclusion and Incompetence!