The Diversity in DEI is used to create racial/ethnic/sex quotas, which in MIT's case involve discrimination against white and East Asian males who, in general, are better at science and engineering than the privileged Diversity candidates who replace them. The Neomarxist aim is to weaken society by disempowering white males. The Equity in DEI is code word for communism, because it stands for forcing equal outcomes. This is contrary to what we should strive for, equality under the law, and reasonable efforts to improve opportunities for talented poor candidates. The inclusion seems to be code word for putting certain privileged groups in positions of power. Those who advocate DEI don't believe in diversity of opinion, and have a built in repressive culture. Unfortunately, many of their opponents, the so called "rightists" share similar repressive traits. This is why we see hysterical opposition to students protests, attempts to silence unpopular ideologies, and other actions which violate the First Amendment.

Scientific progress has slowed down a lot, the emergent culture requires conformity with accepted dogma (try debating climate change in a university setting and your career will probably be ruined). I don't have the statistics, but I bet they're falling behind in patent applications, the theses are increasingly mediocre, research by those professors who got their jobs via DEI privilege is worthless, and similar factors. Large organizations like MIT are like a bulk carrier, they take miles to turn, so I imagine changing things will take 20-30 years. And this assumes we can take Congress and the White House, elect decent politicians, and undo the damage done over the last 30 years. It's going to be a tough fight.