RUTHFULLY YOURS

Say this about the DEI radicals who have run higher education into the ground: They’re shameless.

A case in point is Santa Ono, the president of the University of Michigan and a current finalist for president of the University of Florida. Ono has spent his entire career building DEI bureaucracies, pushing climate radicalism, and injecting left-wing politics into the universities he’s led. As the Florida Board of Governors prepares to vote on his appointment on June 3, Ono has tried to fool them into believing he’s the second coming of Ron DeSantis. With a $15 million, five-year contract on offer—which would make him the highest-paid public university president in the country—Ono is rebranding himself as a reformer. He brings to mind the Groucho Marx quip: “Those are my principles, and if you don’t like ‘em… well, I’ve got others.” But the University of Florida needs a principled leader—someone who will continue its trajectory of reform with conviction.

On Tuesday, the mask slipped many times as Ono appeared before the University of Florida’s Board of Trustees. The most significant moment came when the board’s vice chair publicly admitted that Ono began conversations about UF’s presidency in February. That matters because Ono closed Michigan’s DEI department in March—one month later. This move against DEI has been touted as proof of his reform credentials, but the timing suggests that Ono ended DEI at Michigan as part of his live audition for the UF presidency, not out of principled courage. He was also a holdout on so-called “diversity statements,” banning them a full six months after Harvard. Ono took that action only after being criticized for DEI radicalism by—of all sources—the New York Times, and only after President Trump was elected.

Make no mistake: Ono is a DEI radical, having embraced that divisive and discriminatory ideology for years. Before arriving at Michigan, Ono served as president of the University of British Columbia. In 2021, he appointed a President’s Task Force on Anti-Racism and Inclusive Excellence, later bragging he was “really proud” of the task force’s strategic plan, which had become “a standard that is emulated around the world.” What exactly was Mr. Ono so proud of? The task force’s report is littered with racism. It concludes, “Whiteness is an obstacle to achieving inclusive excellence.” But take heart: “UBC is also lucky to have a good number of White students, faculty, staff, and administrators who readily recognize how problematic Whiteness is.” The task force promised that “expanding Whiteness in strategic hires will not be tolerated.”

To bring about this outcome, the plan called for “a special program of preferential or limited hiring for Black faculty and staff.” That’s racial discrimination. The plan also required all “students taking courses taught by Black faculty” to submit to mandatory “online training” to learn “bias-free approaches” for interacting with their professors.

Chillingly, Ono’s DEI plan demanded a “zero-tolerance policy” for faculty and staff who showed “unwillingness to expand knowledge and action related to anti-racism work.” Translation: Agree with woke ideologies, or else. His DEI strategy even called on all of the university’s deans to sign a “pledge” declaring, “Eurocentrism … has dominated UBC, to the detriment of IBPOC [BIPOC] within and beyond the university.”

When he moved from UBC to Michigan, he immediately set to work expanding Michigan’s already sprawling DEI bureaucracy, dubbing this plan “DEI 2.0.” In his inaugural address at Michigan, Ono declared racism “America’s original sin.” He called for a round of applause for his predecessors, not because they improved the university’s rankings or facilities, but because they defended unconstitutional racial admissions quotas all the way to the Supreme Court. The New York Times recently reported that under his leadership, Michigan “doubled down” on DEI—even as many universities were already retreating from it.

On Tuesday, at the University of Florida, Mr. Ono tried to explain away this troubling record, telling the trustees, “I’m an immunologist. I’m not an activist, I’m not somebody who works in social justice… And to be honest, like anyone, when you’re in a field that’s not your own, it takes time to understand what is really going on, you know?” This absurd explanation reveals much about both Mr. Ono and his assessment of the intellect of Florida’s leaders. Tens of millions of Americans, and thousands of academics, knew from the start that the policies of neo-racism and indoctrination championed by activist administrators like Mr. Ono were both foolish and unjust. They did not need to work in the “field” of “social justice” to reach such commonsense conclusions. But on Tuesday, Mr. Ono effectively told the Florida board that it took him nine years of trial and error to realize universities should treat everyone equally. They swallowed this explanation whole. Ono’s lack of principles is outrageous—and disqualifying.

One Florida trustee asked Ono whether he still holds his view (announced just two years ago) that racism is America’s “original sin” and that systemic racism “is embedded in every corner of any institution.” Mr. Ono’s evasive response was telling. He did not reject these views. Instead, he said, “I don’t think the university president should be saying that, and it’s not very helpful.” Note the rhetorical sleight of hand. He did not disavow his belief that “white supremacy” is lurking around every corner. He merely said he won’t say what he really thinks. This is an unserious response from an unserious person.

Ono’s track record shows a profound lack of judgment, wisdom, and understanding of the purpose of higher education. Its proper purpose is not political indoctrination or ideological adventurism. It’s developing in students a love of truth, breadth of knowledge, apprehension of civic duty, wariness of deceit, and the strength of character to abide by these values. We need these qualities in the next generation of society’s leaders—a task at which Ono has failed miserably over the past decade.

As president of UF, Ono would oversee the hiring of senior leadership who will set the direction of the university for decades to come. There’s no doubt he’d hire deans and vice presidents who will lead the university right back into the rut of left-wing academic conventionality, gussied up under new names. While some may hope the Board of Trustees and state legislature will keep him in line, that’s a pipe dream. The university president sets the tone for the entire institution, makes crucial appointments, and establishes the university’s direction with dozens of decisions every day. A man like Ono simply will not drive and sustain academic reform, which requires conviction, courage, and wisdom.

The Ono affair has already badly damaged UF’s reputation. Already, the son of the President of the United States, the state’s senior senator (Rick Scott), its probable future governor (Byron Donalds), and multiple members of Florida’s congressional delegation are publicly and loudly opposing this bizarre choice, and with good reason. The Florida Board of Governors should recognize reality and reject Ono outright on June 3. State leaders, including legislators and Gov. Ron DeSantis, who appoints board members, should make sure of it. They need to recognize that activist administrators like Santa Ono are shameless, and it would be shameful to hand him power over such a promising institution.