This article originally appeared in the National Post. Below is an excerpt from the article.
By Peter MacKinnon, March 12, 2026
A few weeks ago, York University’s vice-president of research and innovation heralded a workshop for its researchers that explored “how decolonization, equity, diversity and inclusion (DEDI) can be meaningfully integrated into research applications.” Though focused on science research, it was said to be relevant to social science, the humanities and health research, too.
This is a political agenda that should have no place in research applications. Decolonization is not a term of settled meaning and wide acceptance. For some of radical persuasion, it means that the foundations of Canada are illegitimate and must be removed even if it means the end of the country itself. Certainly it is a term that implies major change, though of what kind and quality are usually left unspecified.
Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) has been widely discussed and has been the subject of surveys by think-tanks and other organizations. It is clear that there are mild, moderate and strong versions of DEI; the unobjectionable mild version recognizes the importance of diversity and encourages outreach in its pursuit. The moderate and strong versions include one or more of race-based hiring, quotas for identity groups, and requirements that job applicants pledge support for them
