From Affirmative Action to the War on DEI: How the Liberal Fallacy Sabotages Social Justice
Blaming the water for the fire: A structural diagnosis of the DEI culture war through Affective Socialization Theory
A Note for New Readers: This article uses the Affective Socialization Theory (AST) framework, a neuro-materialist science I am developing to explain how our environment physically shapes our behavior. You will see variables like Material Strain (MAT) and Hegemonic Mood Climate (HMC) used throughout. If you are new to the theory, you can find the full glossary and research at [Here].
Introduction
How do we create a truly just society? This is one of the most persistent questions we ask today, with many different proposed answers. While we generally agree on the ideal that anyone should have the opportunity to succeed based on their talent and hard work, we deeply disagree on how to achieve that level playing field in reality. Central to this debate is a fundamental conflict over race and fairness: does justice require us to be “colorblind” and treat everyone exactly the same, or does it require us to be “race-conscious” to actively correct for historical wrongs?
This conflict is most visible in the historical debates over Affirmative Action, a controversy that has seamlessly mutated into today’s fierce cultural battles over DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives in the workplace. Whether debating college admissions or corporate hiring, the core question remains: should all decisions be made on “neutral” measures, or must we account for structural disadvantages? To understand this complex issue, we must move beyond simple polemics and instead assess the underlying arguments. By analyzing the perspectives of Kimberlé Crenshaw and Thomas Sowell, and applying the lens of Affective Socialization Theory (AST), we can uncover the structural forces that drive this deep societal division and move toward a more comprehensive understanding of justice.
The Arguments
Crenshaw argues that “colorblindness” (ignoring race) fails because there are built-up historical, systemic inequities that create unequal opportunities. She also extends this by pointing out the compounding nature of oppression with her theory of intersectionality. Basically, being marginalized in more than one category (race, sex, gender, class, disability, etc.) exposes you to even greater oppression that is not traditionally recognized in legal views of discrimination.
Sowell argues that Affirmative Action (AA) fails because it only benefits a few elites among the marginalized, causing resentment and inefficiency. We can see clearly Sowell’s view when he says things like, “However, the cost of inefficiency is overshadowed by the cost of intergroup polarization, violence, and loss of lives,” and, “the more fortunate American blacks receive a disproportionate share of benefits.”
Affective Socialization Theory Analysis
Through my development of Affective Socialization Theory (AST), I have found a powerful framework for analyzing this specific conflict. AST would identify that Sowell is observing real social friction, but that he misidentifies the cause. In a society with manufactured artificial scarcity, which wires us for competition through the profit motive and other methods of coercion, allocating limited resources without concretely solving the underlying structural issue will inevitably cause competition and even hostility, as people fight over crumbs to survive.
However, Sowell commits what I call the “liberal fallacy” by abstracting the individual(s) from their environment. By ignoring the structural correlation and even causality, he is being willfully ignorant of the effect that our environment has on us. This contradiction is evident in how he credits his own environmental upbringing for his personal success. In a highly competitive society where some win and some lose (as he acknowledges), wouldn’t the same environmental effect that helped and shaped the winner also shape the loser?
Ultimately, I find the argument from Crenshaw more compelling because it seems more grounded in reality. We can see her honest thought process when she says, “... but the better metaphor is damaged lanes. Some runners start with lanes cluttered with debris” and “Organized under the mantra of colorblindness, advocates seek to stabilize the dramatically inequitable status quo by framing it as the natural product of individual initiative.”
My theory, AST, is fundamentally about addressing the environmental and social architecture that influences not only our place in society but also our neural wiring. The compounding nature of intersectional oppression triggers a biological survival state. With this understanding, AST recommends removing these specific structural barriers to foster Collective Agency Expectancy (CAE); the learned belief that “we” can shape our world and interact with society cooperatively to achieve our goals.
Reflection and Conclusion
My own background influences how I interpret these arguments. When I was 18, I did not believe in white privilege because I grew up poor and did not feel “privileged.” As I grew up and experienced periods of homelessness and harder times, I saw how powerful the environmental effect truly was. Having empathy and listening to others has made me see that white privilege is not a moral accusation, but a systemic reality.
It is important to acknowledge that both Sowell and Crenshaw ultimately want to uplift others and establish a fair society. They are simply operating under fundamentally different diagnoses of the problem. What the viewpoint of Sowell fails to realize is that this concept of “elite blacks” getting more than others is precisely why scholars like Crenshaw and others have not given up, but have instead sought new ways of examining and explaining oppression, and how we must respond to it.
We are seeing the devastating consequences of the liberal fallacy play out in real time today. By successfully framing Affirmative Action as the source of social friction, rather than the artificial scarcity of the capitalist macro-environment, critics provided the intellectual cover to dismantle it. However, because the underlying structural inequities were never resolved, that societal friction did not disappear. It simply metastasized. The arguments originally tailored to attack college admissions quotas have now escalated into a much broader, more destructive war against Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives across all sectors of society.
Sowell is essentially saying we must stop spraying a burning house with water because it causes water damage. Crenshaw is correctly pointing out that the building is still on fire, and that the active blaze must be dealt with first. When a society is socialized to view structural interventions as the enemy, rather than the coercive environments causing the harm, any attempt to foster Collective Agency Expectancy becomes a target for elimination. Until we address the macro-environment of capitalist scarcity, our duty is to build organized microclimates of solidarity and mutual aid that provide the biological stability our current system refuses to offer.
Beyond the Culture War
We cannot solve structural problems with individualistic thinking. Affective Socialization Theory (AST) provides the dialectical and biological framework to understand exactly how our environment shapes our society and our minds.
If you want to understand the deeper mechanisms of manufactured scarcity, the Hegemonic Mood Climate, and how we can build Collective Agency, I invite you to read the foundational theory.
Dive into the full AST framework on my website here: Affective Socialization Theory
References
Crenshaw, K. W. (2006). Framing affirmative action. Michigan Law Review First Impressions, 105(1), 123–133.
Sowell, T. (2004, November 1). Affirmative action around the world. Hoover Institution. https://www.hoover.org/research/affirmative-action-around-world
Tamargo, A. (2026). Affective Socialization Theory: A unified model of behavior (Part 1: Neural wiring & the recursive system). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18514658