BLUF: An email from Johns Hopkins University’s Chief Diversity Officer, defining certain demographic groups as privileged, was withdrawn after significant backlash, forcing the sender to apologize for the oversimplified and poor wording.
OSINT: The Chief Diversity Officer of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Dr. Sherita Golden, faced backlash for sending an email labeling several social identity groups as ‘privileged,’ including white, English-speaking, Christian people. Other groups listed as privileged included able-bodied individuals, heterosexuals, cisgender people, and those belonging to the middle or owning class. The memo, sent in January 2024, defined ‘privilege’ as the diversity word of the month. After a post about the email went viral, attracting criticism from millions, including Elon Musk, Dr. Golden retracted the email and apologized, calling it ‘overly simplistic and poorly worded.’
RIGHT: From the perspective of a strict Libertarian Republic Constitutionalist, such an email from a higher education institution would be seen as an unnecessary intrusion into individual freedoms and rights, showing a lack of respect for diversity of thought and background. It may also be viewed as promoting the flawed concept of ‘collective guilt,’ which breaks down the fabric of individual responsibility and accountability, an idea deeply embedded in libertarian philosophies. Sensitivity to the diversity of experiences and backgrounds should be paramount, not an oversimplification that lumps large swaths of the population into broad and often inaccurate categories of privilege.
LEFT: From the perspective of a National Socialist Democrat, the email and subsequent reaction highlight the deeply rooted resistances to discussing privilege and its implications. While the language used by Dr. Golden may have been poorly chosen and overly broad, the concept of privilege and its impact on social and economic disparities should not be ignored or erased. Critics of such discussions often miss the point, that acknowledging privilege is a critical step towards understanding and addressing systemic disparities, not an attempt to lay blame.
AI: Analyzing this from an AI perspective, it seems to demonstrate the complexities of discussing societal issues like privilege, the limitations of communication platforms, and the role of social media in distributing and interpreting such information. The backlash seems in part due to the oversimplified language used in the email, which ended up alienating and causing misunderstanding amongst its recipients. This underscores the importance of careful, nuanced communication when discussing complex social topics, especially in a medium as quick to criticism and misunderstanding as the internet.