Republican Bites DEI; Democrat Bites Republican
DEI took a beating in a May 1, 2026 op-ed in the Spirit. And the person doing the beating was Pasha Majdi, president of the Jefferson County Commission. Majdi was singing the praises of Governor Morrisey, who wielded his axe against the supposed unfairness of DEI, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, programs in federal, state, and local public and private organizations. The arguments against DEI initiatives hinge on a fairness claim. That is, DEI programs, which have as their reason for being to reduce unfairness toward segments of our population, are themselves unfair toward other segments of our population. So those in favor of DEI and those opposed to it are relying on similar arguments. Some people are getting hurt.
In Majdi’s case, the people DEI disadvantages are Asians, although most anti-DEI folks, like Morrisey, see it as unfair to White people. Those in favor of DEI argue just the reverse, that DEI is intended to benefit minority people (and women) who more often have been underrepresented in this country — Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians (and women).
The interesting intersection of these two different camps are Asians. Majdi claims Asians are victims of DEI while pro-DEI people see them as beneficiaries of DEI. If you’ve come this far, you’re beginning to see the complexity of the issue. Can people of the same group be both victims and beneficiaries? This is America, so the answer is yes they can, because the issue itself isn’t all that clear in its definitions.
At root the arguments on both sides see value in the idea of a representative America, a country which is respectful of the words in our Constitution that “all men are created equal.” Today we understand that the “men” the Founding Fathers refer to also includes both male and female members of the species. And further we have amendments to the Constitution that specifically include all races, other than Caucasian, as “men.” So, according to our Constitution and rule of law, all Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, American Indians and Pacific Islanders are all equal to Whites.
But the claim of DEI proponents is that, words aside, in reality some groups of “men” are more equal than others. And the proof of that is that some groups are much better off than others. You only have to look at the demographic statistics by race in education, wellness, longevity, and poverty to see that there are major differences between groups. And of course, you have our history: the slavery of Black people, the expulsion and imprisonment of Asians, the violent elimination of Native Americans, and the disenfranchisement of women as notable examples.
“Yes, yes, yes!” the anti-DEI debaters will say, “but that was then, we don’t do those things any more; everyone today is treated the same and has the same opportunities”
“Oh, yeah?” the pro-DEI people respond, “it sure doesn’t seem that way if you look at who has what and who doesn’t.”
What’s at the root of this difference of opinion? I’m going to get myself into trouble here by claiming that it’s probably systemic racism, something Majdi denies exists. But honestly, I don’t know for sure. And yet all the other possibilities are just as indefensible. Can you just as honestly say that minority groups are really untalented, uncreative, unmotivated, uncaring, unintelligent, and unethical, as they’re often judged to be? I would say you’re exposing your racist beliefs if you say “yes” to any of these, as much as you would deny that you are a racist.
I do believe that it is okay to say you don’t understand groups other than your own or have a preference for your own group. But that’s more a matter of having been exposed to a particular variety of cultural traditions and social rules of engagement. There’s no basis for saying your way of doing things is better or worse than any other morally and ethically acceptable way.
But to get back to Majdi’s argument, he’s making a value laden claim that those favoring DEI programs are “woke,” meaning that they want to give to those who are unworthy. In fact, the goal of DEI is only to make the giving, of whatever it is, representative of the population. It’s a matter of overt fairness. If a school district has a population split evenly between four different groups (25% each), shouldn’t each group have 25% of the possibilities and opportunities available, especially if those opportunities are eventually tied to getting a good job, staying healthy and safe, living comfortably, and enjoying life?
If education is one of the those critical opportunities, which we do believe it to be, then shouldn’t educational opportunity be representative? But Majdi believes that merit should take precedence over equal representation. In other words, the kids who by virtue of their past opportunities to excel by attending well-funded schools with excellent and well paid teachers, and have had well-balanced and nutritional meals their whole life, and have family incomes to support enriching cultural and extracurricular activities, and have been tutored to ace their exams, and so on and so on, should get all the prestige placements in the best of the best schools and the best of the best jobs.
Woke means essentially that you don’t buy into the assumption that anyone who has been denied an easy trail to hike in bad fitting boots should have to cede opportunity to someone who has been outfitted all their life with the best hiking boots.
Majdi gives an example of his high-performing high school in Alexandria, VA as a victim of DEI. TJ Hi was at one time the highest rated high school in the country. There are, by the way, more than 18,000 high schools in the United States. He bemoans that fact that a DEI initiative during the 2010s sacrificed the top spot in an effort to make the school more representative of the county schools as a whole, because the initiative gave preference to more minority students. In carrying out the initiative, the school’s enrollment of Asian students decreased from about 70% to what it is now at about 63%, where Asians in the school’s catchment area make up about 17% of the population. Whites, by the way, are 50% of the population and 19% of the student enrollment. Blacks and Hispanics are likewise underrepresented in the school enrollment.
And how has this DEI initiative affected the school’s status? Majdi says this: “Now, TJ is no longer the top-ranked public high school in America. My alma mater, once a source of pride, has been tarnished.” Actually, TJ is rated by U.S. News & Reports at #5 in America. That’s out of 18,000+ high schools. Such a comedown!
And naturally, as is the practice of Republicans, Majdi blames all of this on Democrats and calls supporters of DEI a “mob.” And he demands an apology. The truth is that without DEI initiatives, West Virginia will likely lose some of its best and brightest because they know they are not valued here. This Democrat is not apologizing.
This is an edited version of an article that appeared in the Spirit of Jefferson on May 21, 2026 under the title Response to JCC President Majdi’s DEI Op-ED.
