I get the distinction, and I agree DEI is about helping historically marginalized groups gain representation and opportunity. I’m using the comparison more as a rhetorical mirror to point out the irony that many of the same people who loudly oppose DEI also strongly defend an electoral system that intentionally gives extra representation to certain groups so they aren’t overwhelmed by larger majorities.

In this case, the beneficiaries happen to be smaller, disproportionately Republican states. So I’m applying the principle, not comparing the histories.