As you are aware, Ben, the length constraints of a piece such as this preclude addressing many subtleties. I did, however, make the point that "you can’t artificially create healthy diversity by mixing differing elements up in a bucket and declaring job done." And I also did not say anythig as crude or obviously false as that every system automatically becomes "healthier"/better by having more diverse elements foisted on it. Rather what I am trying to draw attention to is the fact that healthy, resilient complex systems like organisms, ecosystems, societies and companies all depend on internal diverse complexity to thrive and be adaptable. In the case of the predator/prey example you give, if a predator lacks any ability to activate prey behaviour, this inflexibility is a critical vulnerability if an even bigger predator from a nearby area wanders into the territory. It's not that the predator's effectiveness is "watered down" by being averaged towards being more prey-like. It's about rich behavioural resources. Trump is completely lacking in behavioural flexibility and a rich resource of diverse cognitive strategies, and that's why he is so weak and vulnerable. He's like a poker player who always goes all-in to intimidate others players. Works for about two rounds. As for arguments about correcting bias, I think a healthy society does include arguments about bias and attempts to correct it. I would not try to stamp out conservative news outlets. Communism (of the 20th century USSR variety) is leftist absolutism and completely non-diverse. By all means let us debate how to do DEI better. Let's correct its excesses and acknowledge where it has failed. But everything the Trump regime is doing is about stamping out difference, diversity and dissent. That will not end well, just as it didn't with communism and Nazism.