We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

So-called “anti-racist” activists such as Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi have become media stars and made millions through their social justice advocacy and its embrace by the society-wide diversity, equity, and inclusion movement. But, rather than promoting tolerance or acceptance, it turns out that their ideas may actually be making society more divided and toxic.

At least, that’s the finding of a bombshell new study from the Network Contagion Research Institute. It examined the actual effect that DEI-style teachings from the likes of DiAngelo, who wrote the bestseller White Fragility, have on people and found that these narratives “heighten racial suspicion, prejudicial attitudes, authoritarian policing, and support for punitive behaviors in the absence of evidence for a transgression deserving punishment.”

TRUMP CABINET PICKS: WHO’S BEEN TAPPED TO SERVE IN THE PRESIDENT-ELECT’S ADMINISTRATION

Basically, these teachings make people more likely to see bias and victimhood where it doesn’t exist — and make them more hostile toward their peers whom they incorrectly deem “guilty.” (These findings are echoed by other research and affirm the warnings that many critics of the DEI movement have offered.) The study also found that exposure to DEI materials increased people’s support for authoritarian ideas. 

This should be a big deal because, as the study’s authors note, more than 50% of American workers are subjected to DEI training and we’ve collectively invested roughly $8 billion into DEI initiatives. What’s more, college professors are now routinely required to affirm their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion as a condition of their employment. So, it sure seems important to know whether this stuff actually works, or if it actually makes everything worse. 

But it’s apparently not important enough for the New York Times or Bloomberg to cover. As Colin Wright details for Reality’s Last Stand, even though they typically report on the Network Contagion Research Institute’s findings, the outlets conspicuously declined to cover its bombshell report on DEI:

“The New York Times, which has cited NCRI’s work in nearly 20 previous articles, suddenly demanded that this particular research undergo peer review—a requirement that had never been imposed on the institute’s earlier findings, even on similarly sensitive topics like extremism or online hate. At Bloomberg, the story was quashed outright by an editor known for public support of DEI initiatives. The editorial decisions were ostensibly justified as routine discretion, yet they align conspicuously with the ideological leanings of those involved.”

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER 

So much for objectivity and basic curiosity. Apparently, those traditional journalistic values go out the window when there’s a progressive narrative, and a lucrative cottage industry, to protect.

But, slowly but surely, the public is waking up to the reality that the identity-obsessed Left has gone too far. Media blackouts of inconvenient realities might slow this cultural shift, yet it is inevitable — and the careers of “anti-racist” grifters are living on borrowed time. 

Brad Polumbo is an independent journalist and host of the Brad vs Everyone podcast.