How DEI might survive under a different guise in the US

https://archive-share.america.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Black-muslims-america-history-AP838864611134.jpg

In Union County, South Carolina, the cotton mills that once sustained the economy and offered jobs have vanished over time. Today, this area is designated as a “food desert,” indicating that numerous inhabitants reside a considerable distance from the nearest supermarket. Observing this problem, community non-profit leader Elise Ashby initiated a project in 2016. She partnered with local farmers to deliver affordable boxes of fresh fruit and vegetables across the county, which has a demographic where nearly 30% of the population is Black and approximately 25% are living below the poverty line.

Ms. Ashby originally financed the project using her own savings and minor grants. In 2023, her work saw a substantial advancement when the Walmart Foundation—the charitable arm of a leading national corporation—awarded her organization a grant exceeding $100,000 (£80,000). This financial support was included in a larger $1.5 million program designed to assist “community-based non-profits spearheaded by people of color.”

“It moved me to tears,” she confessed. “It was one of those instances where you understand that someone genuinely recognizes and appreciates your efforts.”

Only two years prior, initiatives like this received widespread support from leading corporations throughout the United States, as the nation grappled with systemic racism after the 2020 murder of George Floyd, a Black individual who lost his life beneath the knee of a police officer in Minneapolis.

However, numerous corporations are now withdrawing from these commitments. In November, Walmart shared plans to end certain diversity efforts, with the closure of its Center for Racial Equity, which had played a key role in financing Ms. Ashby’s grant, among them.

Firms like Meta, Google, Goldman Sachs, and McDonald’s have undertaken comparable actions, highlighting a more extensive corporate retraction from diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs.

This shift marks a notable cultural change, driven in part by fears of legal challenges, regulatory scrutiny, and social media backlash—pressures exacerbated by the new U.S. president.

Since taking office in January, Donald Trump has aggressively worked to dismantle DEI programs, advocating for a return to “merit-based opportunity” in America. He has ordered the federal government to eliminate DEI initiatives and launch investigations into private companies and academic institutions suspected of engaging in “illegal DEI practices.”

Within the early months of his second term, the Department of Veterans Affairs closed its DEI offices, the Environmental Protection Agency placed nearly 200 civil rights employees on paid leave, and Trump dismissed the country’s top military general—a Black man—after his defense secretary previously suggested he should be removed due to his association with “woke” DEI policies.

At first glance, it may seem that the U.S. has abandoned efforts to improve outcomes for historically marginalized racial and identity groups. However, some experts suggest these initiatives may persist, albeit under different names that align more closely with the shifting political climate of a nation that has just elected a leader committed to combating “woke” policies.

The Roots of the Backlash

Initiatives similar to DEI first gained traction in the U.S. during the 1960s, in reaction to the civil rights movement, which aimed to extend and safeguard the rights of Black Americans.

Originally termed as “affirmative action” and “equal opportunity,” these initiatives were designed to address the enduring effects of slavery and the institutionalized discrimination imposed by Jim Crow laws.

As social justice movements grew to include women’s rights, LGBTQ+ advocacy, and racial and ethnic diversity, the language associated with these endeavors expanded to cover “diversity,” “equity,” and “inclusion.”

In the realm of corporations and government bodies, DEI initiatives primarily concentrated on recruitment practices, portraying diversity as a financial benefit. Proponents claim that these programs tackle inequities across different communities, even though the focus has traditionally been on racial equity.

The push for DEI gained momentum in 2020 during the Black Lives Matter protests and escalating calls for social change. Walmart, for example, committed $100 million over five years to create its Center for Racial Equity. Wells Fargo hired its inaugural chief diversity officer, while firms like Google and Nike already had similar leadership positions established. After these developments, S&P 100 companies generated more than 300,000 new jobs, with 94% filled by people of color, as reported by Bloomberg.

However, as swiftly as these initiatives grew, a conservative backlash arose.

Stefan Padfield, the executive director of the conservative think tank National Center for Public Policy Research, contends that DEI programs inherently separate individuals based on racial and gender differences.

In recent times, critics have amplified claims that DEI efforts—initially intended to fight discrimination—are themselves discriminatory, especially against white Americans. Training workshops that emphasize “white privilege” and systemic racial bias have faced significant criticism.

The roots of this opposition stem from conservative resistance to critical race theory (CRT), an academic framework that suggests racism is deeply embedded in American society. Over time, campaigns against CRT in schools evolved into broader efforts to penalize “woke corporations.”

Social media accounts like End Wokeness and conservative personalities like Robby Starbuck have leveraged this sentiment, focusing on corporations for their DEI efforts. Starbuck has asserted accountability for policy changes at firms like Ford, John Deere, and Harley-Davidson after highlighting their DEI programs to his digital audiences.

One prominent success for this movement occurred in spring 2023, when Bud Light encountered significant backlash for collaborating with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. Boycott calls targeting the brand and its parent firm, Anheuser-Busch, led to a 28% drop in Bud Light sales, according to an analysis by Harvard Business Review.

Another significant milestone came in June 2023, when the Supreme Court decreed that race could no longer be a consideration in university admissions, effectively dismantling decades of affirmative action policies.

This decision raised questions about the legal foundation of corporate DEI policies. After the ruling, Meta advised employees that “the legal and policy landscape surrounding DEI has shifted,” shortly before revealing the termination of its own DEI programs.

Corporate Withdrawal: A Matter of Authenticity

The rapid rollback of DEI initiatives among major corporations raises questions about the sincerity of their commitments to workforce diversity.

Martin Whittaker, CEO of JUST Capital—a non-profit that surveys Americans on workplace issues—believes that many companies initially embraced DEI efforts to “look good” in the wake of the Black Lives Matter movement, rather than out of genuine commitment to change.

Nevertheless, not all corporations are succumbing to political and legal pressures. A report by the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation indicated that although DEI programs seem to be diminishing, “nearly all” Fortune 500 firms still incorporate DEI pledges within their official declarations. Furthermore, Apple shareholders recently voted to preserve the company’s diversity initiatives.

Public sentiment on DEI remains split. A survey by JUST Capital indicates that backing for DEI has diminished, yet support for related topics—such as equitable pay—remains robust. Likewise, a 2023 Pew Research Center survey discovered that a majority (56%) of working adults continue to perceive workplace DEI efforts as advantageous.

Related Posts