Towards a Liberatory Future: Thinking with and Beyond Oppression and Intersectionality Frameworks

• In Event: Beyond Binary Thinking: Jews, Antisemitism, and Navigating Difference

Abstract

Purpose
This presentation aims to critically examine and interrogate the conceptual foundations and practical applications of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) work. By analyzing the varied terminology and frameworks used in this field - from DEI to JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity, Inclusion) to IDEA (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Accountability) - I seek to unpack the assumptions, limitations, and possibilities inherent in how we conceptualize and operationalize diversity work. Specifically, I will problematize the centrality of intersectionality theory and oppression-based frameworks in DEI, arguing that we need more expansive and nuanced approaches.

Theoretical Framework
My analysis draws on Jennifer Nash's (2008) critique of intersectionality in "Re-thinking Intersectionality,” Sara Ahmed's (2020) examination of institutional diversity work in On Being Included, and Karin Stögner’s (2020) examination of power relations in “Intersectionality and Antisemitism: A New Approach.” Nash highlights key limitations of intersectionality, including its methodological murkiness, overreliance on Black women as prototypical subjects, and inability to account for simultaneous privilege and oppression. Ahmed explores how institutional statements about a committment to diversity becomes (in a modification of Judith Butler’s construction of a speech act having real material consequences by shaping social realities, identities, and power structures through their performative nature and repetition over time) a non-performative institutional commitment –“the reiterative and citational practice by which discourse does not produce the effects that it names” (emphasis original, p. 117). While, at times, leaning unproductively into essentializing some identities in order to argue that Jews are beyond categorization, Stögner's "intersectionality of ideologies" could open new avenues for genuine inclusion and institutional change. Synthesizing their insights, I argue that DEI's grounding in intersectionality and oppression constrains its ability to foster genuine inclusion and accountability.

Mode of Inquiry
This theoretical investigation will involve close reading and critical analysis of Nash and Ahmed's texts alongside an examination of DEI terminology, frameworks, and practices across various institutional contexts. I will analyze specific cases, such as debates around including antisemitism and Jewish identity in DEI work, to illustrate the conceptual and practical limitations of current approaches. Through this analysis, I aim to identify alternative frameworks that could expand DEI's scope and impact.

Scholarly Significance
This research contributes to ongoing scholarly debates about the foundations and future directions of DEI work. By critically examining intersectionality's centrality in diversity frameworks, I open up new avenues for conceptualizing difference, power, and inclusion in institutional settings. This intervention is particularly significant given intensifying scrutiny of DEI initiatives and urgent calls to address forms of marginalization and violence not easily captured by conventional intersectional approaches.
Ultimately, I argue that moving beyond oppression-based models toward an ethics of care and accountability could make DEI work more capacious, nuanced, and effective. This shift would allow DEI to better contend with complex identities and power dynamics while fostering genuine institutional transformation. By troubling the conceptual foundations of diversity work, this research aims to expand our collective imagination of what inclusion and equity can mean and how we might achieve them.

Author

• Majida Kargbo, Northwestern University