Admittedly I did not watch the debate (perhaps tomorrow), but I think the crux of this disagreement seems to be the essence of what diversity statements are, an

Admittedly I did not watch the debate (perhaps tomorrow), but I think the crux of this disagreement seems to be the essence of what diversity statements are, and whether we believe the institution's stated goal. Proponents are arguing they are mundane statements aligned with the goals of the institution. But opponents are skeptical--they see it as a motte and bailey. They are, in reality, a test of politico-ideological adherence. The institutions only use the 'we just want to ensure we have fairness and equality' as a fallback, according to detractors. What they are actually asking is not what is being asked. Following up on their war analogy, it is as if the university asked 'How have you contributed to your society and neighbourhood?' but in reality, only accepting contributions related to the war effort. Writing about generic charitable efforts does not count--and definitely don't mention any anti-war contributions. Allegedly of course--I have no particular knowledge in this area.