The Diversity Myth: Dr James Allan, By James Reed
The article by Dr James Allan, Garrick Professor of Law at the University of Queensland, titled "What's So Great About Diversity?" (published in The Spectator Australia on March 19, 2026, under the headline "Divisive diversity divas"), delivers a sharp, unapologetic takedown of the ubiquitous slogan "diversity is our strength." Allan argues it's not just empty rhetoric — it's actively harmful, enforced through elite propaganda, and riddled with contradictions that undermine merit, cohesion, and free thought. He extends the critique to show how "diversity, equity, and inclusion" (DEI) initiatives in practice exclude ideological diversity while prioritising superficial traits like skin colour, gender, or identity group membership.
The Core Argument: The Slogan is Unsubstantiated Propaganda
Allan opens by noting the relentless repetition of "diversity is our strength" in Australian universities and beyond — levels of propaganda he compares to totalitarian states. Yet proponents never specify how diversity strengthens society, economies, or institutions. We're asked to accept it on faith from the same elites who:
Imposed draconian COVID lockdowns (weaponising police, closing schools, suppressing speech, transferring wealth from poor/young to rich/old via inflation and spending).
Failed to define "woman" amid transgender activism.
Abandoned scepticism on climate policy, pushing costly renewables despite evidence they're not cheaper overall.
Why trust these same voices on immigration, hiring, or university admissions? Allan invokes Mark Twain: we're coerced to "believe what you know ain't so."
Genetic vs. Cultural Diversity: A Minimal Benefit
He concedes a narrow, biological point: modest genetic diversity in mating avoids inbreeding defects (e.g., no siblings or first cousins). But that's tiny — anyone outside immediate family suffices. Add shared culture, commitment to Western values, free speech, and gender roles? That's ideal for healthy offspring and stable societies. The propaganda doesn't stop at biology; it pushes large-scale cultural/ideological mixing as inherently superior, without evidence.
Where Diversity Actually Weakens: Cohesion and Competence
Allan flips the script on high-stakes roles:
Elite military units (e.g., historical British regiments from the same region) thrive on tight bonds — shared background fosters sacrifice.
Physical jobs (combat troops, firefighters, police) often see lowered standards when "diversity" hiring prioritises gender quotas over merit. Hollywood myths aside (a 55kg woman overpowering a 90kg attacker is fiction), who do you want rescuing you from a fire or street fight?
Lowered standards aren't strength — they're risk.
The Hypocrisy: DEI Excludes Real Diversity
The biggest contradiction: DEI champions "inclusion" but excludes dissenters. Universities preach diversity of everything except viewpoint:
Conservatives vanish from faculties. Allan cites data showing zero Trump Republicans at Yale; in Australia, amid 38 law schools, only four academics publicly opposed the Voice referendum.
Hiring/promotion favours skin pigmentation, reproductive organs, or favoured identity markers — never political/worldview diversity.
Sceptics of affirmative action, gender ideology, or equity-of-outcome policies are shunned outright.
Result: universities become echo chambers. Working-class white boys face the most discrimination (no special scholarships, support, or unspoken hiring boosts). Indirect quotas (deans judged on matching "favoured" group proportions) create brutal incentives — even under nine years of Coalition governments, which Allan says never truly fought vested interests.
This fuels political backlash (e.g., One Nation's rise). DEI divas are divisive, proselytizing an "insipid faith" that shuns non-believers while claiming to welcome all.
Extending the Argument: Why This Matters in 2026 Australia
Allan's piece resonates amid ongoing debates:
Immigration scale: Mass inflows without strong assimilation create tribalism, not unity. "Diversity without unity is not strength — it's instability" (echoed in related commentary).
Merit erosion: Quotas (explicit or de facto) in unis, public service, and corporates prioritise identity over competence, dragging performance and fairness.
Cultural cohesion: Shared values (free speech, rule of law, gender equality) bind societies far more than superficial variety. Forced mixing without integration risks fragmentation.
Elite failure: Trust in institutions is at rock bottom post-COVID, Voice defeat, and economic pressures. When elites push unproven slogans to silence debate on immigration or merit, it breeds cynicism and populism.
Allan concludes DEI is a "disaster" — ironic merit-believers imposing anti-merit systems, excluding conservatives while preaching inclusion. True strength lies in merit, shared values, and honest debate, not enforced superficial variety.
In an era where "diversity" often means uniformity of thought, Allan's essay is a call to reclaim merit and viewpoint pluralism before the mantra hollows out what's left of Western achievement. If elites won't cash out their claims with evidence, perhaps it's time we stopped believing on faith. Or maybe started opposing the universities and elites.
https://dailysceptic.org/2026/03/18/whats-so-great-about-diversity/
