Complaint Accuses Stanford’s Diversity Program of Anti-Semitism, Creating Hostile Work Environment
DEI materials include claim that “unlike other minority groups, Jews can hide behind their white identity”
At Stanford University in California, Jewish employees have filed a complaint with state and federal authorities, alleging that the school’s diversity program has created a hostile environment for them.
They claim that the “diversity, equity, and inclusion” program does the opposite of what it’s supposed to do.
Imagine that.
Aaron Bandler reports at Jewish Journal:
Complaint Alleges Stanford’s Diversity Program “Has Advanced Anti-Semitic Tropes”
A complaint filed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) alleges that Stanford University’s diversity program “has created and fostered a hostile and unwelcoming environment for Jews.”
The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law announced on June 15 that they are among those representing Dr. Ronald Albucher and Sheila Levin, both of whom are Jewish employees at Stanford’s Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) division. According to the complaint, which was obtained by the Journal, CAPS employees were required to attend weekly meetings starting in January 2020 as part of the division’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) program.
The program “created racially segregated affinity groups” between white individuals and people of color; no such group was created for Jewish employees. Levin didn’t want to join the white group because she does not view herself as having a “white identity,” yet her colleagues continuously pressured her to join the white group. When she filed a complaint to a redacted individual, she was told nothing could be done about it.
The examples provided by Bandler in his report are despicable, and make it sound as though some members of the diversity program saw claims of anti-Semitism as a form of competition:
In February 2020, Albucher’s colleagues accused him of having “inherent privilege” and “co-opting the [DEI] meeting” because he hadn’t read Robin Diangelo’s book “White Fragility,” which the DEI program encouraged employees to read. He too filed a complaint that was not acted upon.
The complaint then addresses a May 16, 2020 virtual town hall for Stanford’s student government candidates that was interrupted, or “Zoombombed,” with swastikas and the “N-word.” In a DEI seminar addressing the matter a few days later, DEI members frequently raised concerns over the racist content of the Zoombombing, but not the antisemitism associated with the swastikas. When Albucher pointed out the disparity, DEI members accused him “of trying to derail the agenda’s focus on anti-Black racism” and that “unlike other minority groups, Jews can hide behind their white identity.”
Gabe Stutman of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency has more on this:
Stanford diversity programs are creating a ‘hostile climate’ for Jews in the workplace, staffers charge in federal complaint
Dr. Ronald Albucher, a psychiatrist and associate professor in the medical school, and Sheila Levin, a therapist specializing in eating disorders, describe being pressed into joining a “whiteness” affinity group by staffers with the school’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion program, or DEI, being told they were “privileged” and seeing antisemitic incidents downplayed…
The complaint also details other alleged incidents of harassment and intimidation, including one DEI representative stating that she “takes an anti-Zionist approach to social justice.” Both staffers say in the complaint that they eventually stopped participating in DEI seminars.
Stanford undoubtedly prides itself on its commitment to diversity.
They must address these complaints.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The Stanford Diversity, Equity and Inclusion team seems to believe that every person professing the Jewish faith is ‘white’. WTF?
Religion isn’t an immutable characteristic. One can accept or reject any religion. Adherence isn’t based upon ‘race’ or gender.
I suppose the silver lining is the DEI team making the point that the only things that do matter in their scheme is where one fits into the relationship of oppressed or oppressor.
Apparently all ‘persons of color’ are oppressed regardless of wealth, social prominence, education or political power. Conversely all ‘whites’ are oppressors regardless of religion, disability, wealth, education, social prominence ECT.
This is a very important revelation which I assume they would have preferred not become widely understood. Obviously most of the folks on LI have known this for some time. The more limousine liberal types have not IMO.
These misguided liberals believed that their ‘lived experience’ and good faith efforts to advance the CRT and equity agenda had secured an indulgence.
Now they know that they won’t be spared. While the wolves might eat them last they will be eaten when wolves they abetted choose to do so.
Jewish identity isn’t a matter of faith, religion, or adherence. Jews are not a religion, we’re a nation that has a religion. But a large majority of Jews do not profess or adhere to that religion. Indeed some percentage of them profess other religions. They are still Jews, because (at least according to both Jewish law and the antisemites, but perhaps not according to the apostates themselves), Jewish identity is an immutable characteristic.
I’m sure that’s one valid viewpoint among others whose adherents would argue just as strenuously as you. I will not attempt to do so. Nonetheless, so far as I am aware, Jewish people, no matter how defined, are not exclusively ‘white’.
More importantly the left-wing members of every ‘oppressor’ group will hopefully understand the reality of their situation. They will be judged not for their individual acts but upon their classification as oppressors. Without exception by the insane tribalism they have nurtured.
> Nonetheless, so far as I am aware, Jewish people, no matter how defined, are not exclusively ‘white’.
You are absolutely correct. Jews come in a variety of colors and races. Many if not most of the population in Israel came from Arab countries. There are Black Jews, Asian Jews, Hispanic Jews, etc.
2000 years ago the Mishnah described Jews as neither white like Germans nor black like Africans, but the color of boxwood.
Over the course of time the physical appearance of different communities changed, both through the effect of climate and that of conversion.
Well, if you go back to antiquity, Jews were considered to be a distinct ethnic group. A “tribe,” if you will. It’s their historical immigration to sundry lands which understandably eroded their sense of national identity.
Maybe we should just let people decide for themselves which religion they choose to adopt and practice on their terms.
IMO, to suggest we should not is inconsistent with our system of individual liberties. I am certainly not going to tell someone that they can’t be a member of x religion because y. That’s between them and the Creator, my opinion is irrelevant to their beliefs.
I agree, except for sham religion created by a warlord.
Except that it hasn’t done that. Jews everywhere in the world continue to think of themselves as a nation, and to think of their fellow Jews in remote countries and with different physical characteristics as their close relatives.
The idea that Jews are not a nation but merely a religious community, i.e. that rather than French Jews and German Jews and English and Russian Jews, etc., there were merely Jewish Frenchmen, Germans, Englishmen, and Russians, etc., differing from their fellow countrymen only by happening to believe in a different religion, was an invention of Napoleon which was embraced by the German Reform movement, whose members liked to identify as “Germans of the Mosaic persuasion”. That experiment didn’t work out very well.
Wait..does that means that Jewish people in the USA seem themselves primarily as members of a Jewish rather than American?
I’ve only seen that claim made by the Jewspiricists who put ((())) around any noun when they mean Jewish people.
Speaking for myself: one of the main reasons I stepped completely away from a Jewish identity is because I consider myself American first. I have no dual loyalty.
As for some sense of unity or nationahood: my experience has been that the very first people who turned their back on me in times of need were my “fellow” Jews. In every case, it was those awful, inferior “goyim” who stepped up to the plate for me when the need arose.
I do not, and never did, feel any form of attachment to Jews elsewhere in the world beyond the fact they also happened to be Jewish.
I do not go all teary-eyed any time someone brings up Israel. It is a nation just like 100-some-odd other nations. It has accomplished a lot, but I don’t feel any extra attachment to it whatsoever.
Yes. I know. Horrors how dare I.
and yet, I am happy to admire The Friendly Grizzly’s classic Jewish beard. Mine isn’t as long in the front, fuller on the sides, and mostly whiter.
@ artichoke: hardly a “classic Jewish beard”. For one thing, I keep it groomed, for another, trimmed and shaped. I joke with my barber that I am the most handsome retired Viking in the tri-cities area.
I prefer the acronym DIE rather than DEI.
It better expresses what their intent for our American society.
DEI not only avoids the other all-too-true acronym, but it puts E in the middle, between the far less controversial D and I. Now D and I can smuggle E in like a Trojan horse.
Which is how they are introducing equity, which we used to call communism.
Diversity is fine as long as it is built with people of merit, advancing those who lack merit because of race, is racism. From my perspective, meritless diversity is a cancer which is destroying America.
Did you mean to suggest that some people due to their ‘race’ are without merit? I ask because I want to be sure that’s what you meant before I make a presumption.
I took it to mean “advancing [because of race] those who lack merit”, i.e. advancing them based on their race rather than their merit.
No, I think that every race produces some people of merit, but the proportion of people with merit may be much lower in some groups.
When I say merit, I am referring to a person’s ability and to be the best that they can, to learn, work to be productive honest citizens, and especially how they raise their offspring to do the same.
Overall, I see Jews performing very well, the same is true for many Asians. That is not to say that are not extremely bad people in all groups, there are, but the ratio of good to bad varies between different groups.
I hope that clarifies my thoughts a bit.
Justice,
Thanks. I was pretty tired when I read it last night and didn’t want to go off half cocked based on my misunderstanding.
Any ‘Diversity Department’ is inherently racist, and it shouldn’t surprise us that we find them staffed by bigots.
The one mistake that today’s “literal Hitlers” can’t afford to make is to p* off the Jews. You can never come back from the optics of that.
So why aren’t whites launching these lawsuits? Surely these diversity initiatives create a hostile work environment.
Why? Because we’ve been conditioned not to. We might be called “racist!”. In a more concrete sense, we can lose jobs, be blackballed from future hiring, and be doxxed. As for that last part, my idea on how to react to it in the manner I would normally describe it would get my comment pulled. I will couch it in these terms: don’t take it; practice self-defense..
I don’t usually think of race. I tend to see myself as an individual, rather than a member of a tribe. The group I feel most attached to is my religious identity (Chriatian).
However, that doesn’t stop people from putting the “white guy” jersey on me and telling me I’m on the bad guy team. I am a little fed up with it.
I’m a LOT fed up with it.
I was fed up with it, then I decided to learn from others. You don’t have to like people or approve of them to learn from them.
If I had it to do over again, I’d be faster with the lawsuits or at least preemptive personnel actions. Then they might back off because they don’t dare retaliate.
Because nobody gives a s* about oppressed white people. Oppressing Jews, on the other hand… that’s beyond just a meme, it’s practically a literary classic. Hanging the appropriate label on the oppressor is instantaneous and inescapable.
Just as with Mussolini in ages past fascists even if they don’t initially appear anti-Semitic will reveal their true colors.
This shows how the standards at Stanford have deteriorated since I was a student there in the 1960s. At that time, brains were most important, not skin color.