response pod-01

According to the readings, the concept of “diversity” has multiple definitions. However, at the root of diversity is the idea of membership in different groups generally based on demographic groups such as race, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. It is important to provide as much clarity as possible to the concept of diversity because, as Nauert (2012) discussed, diversity can be defined in such a broad, nebulous manner that the entire concept loses meaning. The ambiguity resulting from a broad, nebulous definition can be used to justify preexisting preferences and prejudices.

Healey (2010) explores the relationship between different groups, the characteristics that define those groups, and theories that are useful in examining our understanding of diversity in American politics. Concepts such as institutional discrimination, the unequal treatment based on group membership, that is built into the day-to-day functions of society are necessary to understand disparities in knowledge acquisition and political life.

Healey (2010) also discusses the importance of not treating social labels as true labels for all groups. People do not always think of themselves in the same terms society uses as descriptors. Each level of a person’s identity has different weight in their own understanding, simply stated, race may be the most important descriptor for one member of a group but another member may place more importance on their sexuality as their dominant identifier. Demographic descriptors are useful for loosely grouping people together but no person belongs to only one group. There will be overlap and intersections that increase the complex relationship between diversity and American political life.

Diversity is approached in a number of ways, as discussed by Castania (1996), people often approach diversity from the perspective of tourists and seeking only the obvious differences in a search for the exotic. However, diversity is very much a domestic issue with differences not only evident between groups, but among groups. These differences make most people nervous and hesitant, as noted by Jonas (2007) but the gaps between groups are eventually bridged creating an environment of understanding rather than fear.

People do not approach American political life or knowledge in a vacuum, life experiences inform how people utilize knowledge and understand the political sphere. While no two people have identical experiences, creating a multitude of ways to approach knowledge and politics, it can be assumed that a broad enough group would have a similar approach. The differences that encourage an atmosphere of creativity and innovation (Lambert, 2016) can also be the basis for rifts in how people understand and approach politics. While it is impossible for people to know or understand exactly what motivates others in political life, or any other area, it is possible to understand that all people approach the same situations and issues from different places.

That being said, when people who are members of different groups socialize and interact on a personal level, there is an opportunity to learn about concepts like institutional discrimination and how society maintains divisions at a systemic level as they impact people with different experiences. Socializing with people outside the normal comfort zone provides a context in which people can have positive interactions with one another without the institutional or societal expectations blocking opportunities to make positive individual changes in how diversity is viewed (Antonio, 2001).

Understanding how the concept of diversity impacts the way people approach political life is necessary to begin bridging the gaps in how American political life is understood, approached, and applied. Diversity is important for creativity and innovation, understanding the differences between groups is not pursued to eliminate the differences but to find where and how different groups can work together to complement and enhance each other.

References

Antonio, A. L. (2001). The role of interracial interaction in the development of leadership skills and cultural knowledge and understanding. Research in Higher Education, 42(5), 593-617. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1023/A:1011054427581 Retrieved from  https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.apus.edu/docview/763669951?accountid=8289

Castania, Kathy. “What is Diversity?”  Cornell Cooperative Extension, 1996,  http://extension.usu.edu/diversity/files/uploads/diversity704.pdf  (accessed March 5, 2018).

Healey, Joseph F. “Diversity in the United States: Questions and Concepts,” In Diversity and society: Race, Ethnicity and Gender, Thousand Oaks: Pine Forge Press, 2010.

Jonas, Michael. “The Downside of Diversity.” The Boston Globe, August 5, 2007, News section,  http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/ articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full  (accessed March 5, 2018).

Lambert, J. (2016). “Cultural Diversity as a Mechanism for Innovation: Workplace Diversity and the Absorptive Capacity Framework”. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 20(1), 68-77. Retrieved from  https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy1.apus.edu/docview/1851028857?accountid=8289 .

Nauert, Rick. “Diversity Defined in Part by Ideology”. Psych Central (March 2, 2012),  http://psychcentral.com/news/2012/03/02/diversity-defined-in-part-by-ideology/35517.html  (accessed March 5, 2018).

Our notes define diversity as “the demographic differences within the American population.”  Dr. Nauert, who referenced an article by Miguel Unzueta, identified diversity to mean “inclusiveness toward historically disadvantaged groups.”  Webster’s dictionary defines diversity as “a point or respect in which things differ.”  Robert Putnam, author of “Bowling Alone,” identified the opposite of what I thought diversity to mean.  Putnam says that greater diversity in communities causes negative social effects.  He found that more diversity causes people to adopt what he termed a ‘turtle effect’ which makes communities less healthy.  Putnam says, greater diversity causes fewer people to vote, give less to charity, volunteer less for community services, and produce less trust as in most homogenous settings.”  Diversity to me means inclusiveness, it means that people should not be separated by the color of law.  It means actors of different disciplines can work together towards a common goal, it means athletes compete together or against each other fairly.  It means equal justice under the laws of our nation.

I was raised in the sixties when segregation was the law.  Like the lesson notes states, there is still a great fear of a racially diverse nation in the Southern part of our country where I reside.  The local politics here are hindered with diversity issues and a lack of trust among council members.  The 2000 citizenship census report identified Latinos as the largest minority group in the United States, a diversity issue in politics today.  Dr. Nauert says, “everyone is comfortable talking about diversity, but not everyone is comfortable when it comes to discussing the issues of race and gender.”  I believe that to be true in today’s environment, and in my experiences, our American “social capital” has a distinct technological tone to it now, called social media, which provides a cyber blanket for diversity to be camouflaged even more.  This technology enables and facilitates new networks to organize and communicate in real time either for or against issues of diversity and has no physical barriers to infiltration.  Diversity is an evolving issue, continually expanding, and being used to refer to people who are different in personality traits, their tastes in foods, and their right to gender neutrality decisions.  The civil rights movement was a strong influence on what I thought diversity to be.  It was a time when the United States and the Soviet Union were locked in a cold war for super hegemon status.  Communities of like color did not hunker down as Robert Putnam states because of segregation laws limiting interactions.  Putman says, “people now, living in ethnically diverse settings appear to ‘hunker down’ and retreat inward like turtles,” and further states, “diversity, in the short run, brings out the turtle in all of us.”  Our nation has a history of domestic and foreign political issues.  On the foreign front, we face evolving threats of Nuclear Warfare and nuclear proliferation, just like our current international relations situations around the world.  Domestically, past and present political presidencies were involved in scandals, and segregation laws, both public and private were being challenged by minority groups. Diversity was a race to put a man on the moon before the USSR, and perhaps the most captivating domestic political struggles involving diversity issues were the assassinations of major political figures like President Kennedy, and civil rights leaders Dr. King, and Malcolm X.  It was enough to effect change of laws that suppressed diversity.  The meaning of diversity was mainly racial when I was younger, but as I’ve grown, it has become much more than the pigmentation of skin. Military service was a major reason the meaning has more to it than just a racial connotation.   Diversity now means, gender, housing, labor, religion, work, and many more things that must be considered besides the obvious issues of race relations.  Michael Jonas, author of, “The Downside of Diversity” says, “diversity makes us uncomfortable, but that discomfort, isn’t always a bad thing.”  He goes on to state that “culture clashes can produce a dynamic give-and-take effect in a work environment by producing competition to solve complex problems before other groups or genders solve them first. 

Even though I wore the same uniform as my comrades in arms while serving, there were times when we were separated politically by issues of diversity (a sort of give and take) that were masked by uniformity.  It taught me to see past the obvious!  My ‘social dominance orientation’ motivated me to try to change the status quo, myself.  Take our current political climate concerning the rights of legal and illegal immigration.  Our  countries Diversity Immigrant Visaprogram is a program designed to give a permanent resident (green) card.  It’s a diversity lottery system operated by the State Department.  The immigration and nationality act (INA) makes available 50,000 visas annually, with a goal of diversifying the immigrant population in the United States. Immigrations applicants can apply at the State Department’s website, free of charge.  Since Latinos have surpassed African-Americans as a major minority group, then congressional action is needed?  Politically, how can a government allow illegal immigration to get so out of control.  It’s not lawful, and constitutionally it creates a political problem for the nation on both sides of the issue?  The thirteenth amendment to the constitution abolished slavery, and involuntary servitude.  The fourteenth amendment defined citizenship along with due process, and equal protection.  The fifteenth amendment prohibits the denial of the right to vote based on race, color or condition of servitude.  Our constitution is a document that deals with diversity issues of inclusiveness. It was created to guard against tyrannous leaders who lacked the discipline to diversify. I once believed that I had a good grasp of the diversity issues, not!   I’m still learning how to diversify my portfolio, and we all know how important finances are, at least to me!

References:

Nauert, Rick, Diversity Defined in Part by Ideology, March 2012,  http://psychcentral.com/news/w012/03/02/diversity-defined-in-part-by-ideology/35517.html

Jonas, Michael, The Downside of Diversity, The Boston Globe, August 5, 2007, News section,  http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edeas/articles/2007/08/05/the-dowside-ofdiversity/ ?

Castania, Kathy, what is Diversity, Comely Cooperative Extension, 1996,  http://extension  usu.edu/diversity/files/uploads/diversity 704.pdf