This is unfortunate as I have not always held this view. Initially, stepping into the role of Ethnic Diversity Officer was an exciting challenge to tackle issues faced by the ethnically diverse or global majority community.
Much of the problem lies in the understanding of the issue.
The cornerstone of EDI is that a person’s identity is group-fostered. Simply put, one’s primary identity is best characterised by their gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or minority status, and specifically through the prism of disadvantage.
While there are other dimensions, these remain the key pillars of the EDI narrative. In this scheme the individual becomes a mere thumbnail of the group they represent. The complexity of the individual is ignored because according to EDI, group-identity is everything.
This was exemplified in conversations I had with senior university staff on decolonisation. I do not think anything tangible has been done by the University on “decolonising the curriculum”, apart from using it as a buzzword.
I also argued that it is a term steeped heavily in its origins on historical treatment towards the Black community, which heavily alienates other ethnicities. This harks back towards the lack of understanding on who exactly EDI represents.
Inequality can affect student populations across a range of demographics. While most institutions collect monitoring data on the protected characteristics of their students, there are often gaps in this information for certain groups.
More frustratingly, data protection on such information prevents access to the student populations that we wish to effect change on, likening many of our interventions to casting a net in a massive school of fish hoping to just catch a single breed.
That is why, in my opinion, EDI initiatives are losing their popularity. Students, ethnically diverse or global majority, are no longer able to resonate with neither the blanket descriptions nor actions.
EDI initiatives that offer a fixed model of discrimination, based on a model of “white” power and dominance, are unable to engage with shifting globalisation.
This is where the university community, which is international in nature, is able to bring about a change. The West is not the epicentre of all the world’s racisms and anti-racisms, and we need to learn from and listen to many voices.
That is why during my term as a Liberation Officer, I have been focused on highlighting the different communities on campus. I oversaw three international cultural booths held in the NUSU building and actively promoted the BAME Community Fund.
I also commend Alex (Activities Officer) for the incredible initiative that is the Festival of Culture, which celebrates Hanukkah, Spring Festival, Ramadan, Holi and Cinco de Mayo. I am honoured to have helped organise some of them, and believe it is the right step in fostering intercultural understanding on campus.
EDI needs to come from a place of understanding and integration, as well as in touch with the community it wishes to impact.
Jonathan Lee is the Ethnic Diversity Officer at Newcastle University's Student Union. The views and opinions expressed are solely the author's own.