David B. Oppenheimer is the author of the new book The Diversity Principle: The Story of a Transformative Idea. He is a clinical professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley.
Q: What inspired you to write The Diversity Principle?
A: I wrote this book because too many people were describing diversity as something new, or worse, as a political trend that could be turned on or off depending on the moment. That did not match the history I uncovered, nor what I knew from my work in constitutional law and anti-discrimination law.
The idea that diversity has value did not begin with modern DEI programs. It has a long intellectual and legal history. It shaped how universities were designed, how courts came to understand free speech, and how we think about liberty, democracy, and equality.
I wanted to show that history clearly and make the case that diversity is a principle with deep roots, not a passing policy choice.
Q: How did you research the book, and what did you learn that especially surprised you?
A: The research grew out of years of teaching, writing, and collaborating with my remarkable UC Berkeley research assistants.
They helped me uncover original sources through which we traced the idea from the founding of the modern research university, the University of Berlin, in 1810, through the work of philosophers John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill, who connected diversity to liberty, and then into American law through figures such as Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Felix Frankfurter, who embraced the diversity principle as an essential part of First Amendment doctrine.
What surprised me was how consistent the idea was across time and place. Different thinkers came to the same conclusion from different directions. Exposure to people with a range of backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives improves decision making and strengthens institutions.
That insight appeared in academic theory, in free speech law, and in the arguments used to dismantle segregation. It was not invented in the late 20th century. It was rediscovered again and again.
Q: The author Richard Rothstein said of the book, “David B. Oppenheimer’s comprehensive tour of diversity’s advocates provides essential armor against those who would now dismiss its value.” What do you think of that assessment?
A: I take that as a very generous reading of what I hoped to do. My goal was not to offer a slogan in favor of diversity, but to show the record. When you look closely at the history, you see that diversity has been defended by some of the most careful legal and philosophical thinkers we have.
If the book helps people understand that dismissing diversity means turning away from a long line of reasoning about how institutions function at their best, then I think it is doing useful work.
Q: What do you see looking ahead for diversity initiatives?
A: I think we are going to see a period of confusion, especially as institutions try to interpret the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in light of the Trump administration’s anti-diversity overreach.
Some programs will be scaled back or ended. Some will simply be renamed. Still others will be redesigned to fit within the current legal framework. Many (perhaps most) are perfectly legal under existing law but will be subjected to intense political pressure.
But the underlying idea is not going away. We know empirically that diversity matters, and that it is too valuable to abandon it.
Q: What are you working on now?
A: I continue to teach Civil Procedure, Evidence, and comparative equality law, and to work with students on pro bono cases. I continue to co-direct our center on comparative equality law. I have three books under contract on different elements of how different countries approach questions of equality and discrimination.
Q: Anything else we should know?
A: One thing I would emphasize is that the debate over diversity often becomes abstract or polarized. The history shows something more practical. Institutions perform better when they are open to people with a broad range of backgrounds, perspectives, and experiences.
That is not a new idea, and it is not limited to any one political moment. It is a principle that has been tested over time.
--Interview with Deborah Kalb
No comments:
Post a Comment