Unpacking the Attack on DEI

The current administration is using adjectives such as …“radical” and “wasteful” to describe Diversity, Equity, and inclusion programs.

In the first days of the new administration, President Trump has issued dozens of executive orders including several that eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs and policies across the federal government. These orders are encouraging the private sector to end such policies.

President Trump rescinded Executive Order 11246 (Equal Employment Opportunity order) which was originally enacted in 1965 by President Lyndon B. Johnson. This executive order prohibited federal contractors from engaging in employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, and mandated affirmative action programs to promote equal employment opportunities. This act was crucial at the height of the Civil Rights movement. With the sign of a pen, this administration has set us back more than 60 years.

What is DEI?

This type of policy is most simply to direct efforts towards correcting systemic racism. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives have been essential in fostering environments where individuals of all backgrounds, identities, and experiences can thrive. DEI policies creates equitable opportunities, promote representation, and ensure inclusivity across social, professional, and institutional landscapes. These initiatives respond to historical and systemic disparities addressing the barriers that marginalized groups face in education, employment, and beyond. Put simply, these policies seek to level the playing field by recognizing that not everyone starts from the same position.

So, why does this administration as well as other companies have an issue with these principles?

DEI has been completely politicized.

Well yes, the personal is political. But why is anti-DEI is correlated with conservative values?

Conservative ideologies often are skeptical to identity politics. Conservative groups argue that policies or frameworks that explicitly address identity groups can lead to unfair advantages or a perceived form of “reverse discrimination”. A core conservative value is the belief in meritocracy, where individuals succeed based on their abilities, qualifications, and effort. DEI policies are often viewed as incompatible with this principle. Conservatives argue that by focusing on diversity, companies may be prioritizing group identity over merit. They believe this leads to less qualified candidates being chosen simply because of their gender, race, or other factors. This is where you hear the terms/phrases “meeting the quota”, “under-qualified”, and "DEI hire" come into play. Conservatives often frame DEI initiatives as part of a larger cultural shift that seeks to enforce a particular ideological stance, especially on issues like race, gender, and sexuality. They argue that DEI programs may stifle free speech by creating environments where dissenting views or opinions (particularly those that criticize aspects of DEI) are not welcome.

*Meritocracy: a system, organization, or society in which people are chosen and moved into positions of success, power, and influence on the basis of their demonstrated abilities and merit

However, this perspective relies on the myth of a meritocracy. It assumes that effort and ability are the keys to success in the United States due to free-market capitalism. Meritocracy is deeply intertwined with the American Dream. According to meritocracy, anyone who works hard enough will succeed, and those who do not succeed must not have worked hard enough. This is fueled through the lens of contempt and shame. If success is solely attributed to hard work and ability, then their argument suggests that those who fail must be seen as lazy, undeserving, or incompetent. Individuals who do not achieve this idealized version of success internalize shame and forces the blame towards the individual. The myth of meritocracy makes people feel as if they alone are responsible for their hardships.

The default to the "qualification" argument as a critique of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives reveals deeply rooted biases and structural racism. This argument often assumes, either explicitly or implicitly, that individuals benefiting from DEI efforts are less qualified or have only succeeded because of their gender or race and not their merit. Such assumptions perpetuate harmful stereotypes about marginalized groups and overlook the historical and systemic barriers that have limited access to opportunities for many communities. DEI is not about unqualified people getting a leg up based on their gender and race. It’s about creating equitable opportunities and ensuring that everyone, regardless of their identity, has a fair chance to succeed. This means addressing and dismantling structural inequities that have long favored certain groups while excluding others. I guess when privilege is all you’ve ever known, equality can feel like discrimination?

*Identity Politics: focuses on advocating for the rights and interests of specific identity groups, such as race, gender, or sexuality, often to address systemic inequalities

The "qualification" argument conservatives make ignores the fact that traditional notions of merit and qualification are often shaped by systems that historically excluded marginalized groups. Systemic inequities in education, housing, and healthcare have limited the ability of marginalized individuals to meet conventional measures of qualification, such as attending elite schools or gaining certain work experiences. Standardized tests, interviews, and other assessments often reflect cultural biases that disadvantage certain groups which creating a false equivalence between privilege and qualification. Also, many industries rely on informal networks or gatekeeping processes, which have historically excluded women, people of color, and other underrepresented groups.

Conservatives have claimed highly qualified individuals who also happen to be women, BIPOC and/or LGBTQ+ are all DEI hires. Tim Burchett, a representative of my home state (U.S. representative for Tennessee's 2nd congressional district) called former Vice President Kamala Harris a “DEI Hire”. Sorry, what? Harris has a degree in political science and economics from Howard University, and a law degree from University of California, Hastings College of the Law. She is the former district attorney of San Francisco, former Attorney General of California, a former U.S. senator, and former vice president of the United States of America. What about this screams underqualified? She had to work ten times harder to achieve these accomplishments, navigating systemic racism, sexism, and societal obstacles. Her success is a testament to resilience, intelligence, and hard work—not tokenism.

*Tokenism: the practice of making only a perfunctory or symbolic effort to do a particular thing, especially by recruiting a small number of people from underrepresented groups in order to give the appearance of sexual or racial equality within a workforce

What is this talk about DEI is just meeting “quotas”?

DEI is not about fulfilling quotas. It’s about ensuring the workforce genuinely reflects the diversity of the society it serves. The critique that DEI is just about meeting "quotas" stems from misunderstandings or oversimplifications of what Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives aim to achieve. This perception assumes that DEI is solely focused on checking boxes or hiring a certain number of individuals from underrepresented groups to meet numerical goals.

My counterargument this misconception lies within in capitalistic logic. Companies benefit when their workforce reflects the diversity of the customers they serve. A diverse team brings varied perspectives, experiences, and ideas that make a company’s products or services more appealing to a broader audience. Studies consistently show that diverse teams are better at problem-solving and creating solutions that address the needs of a wider range of people. Diversity enhances a company’s ability to understand and authentically connect with its audience. Businesses can tailor their strategies, messaging, and offerings to resonate with different demographics. It’s just smart business.

How are private companies responding post executive order?

In private companies, DEI initiatives focus on creating a fair and inclusive workplace by improving recruitment practices, eliminating biases in hiring, and providing training on unconscious bias. These efforts also include ensuring equity in career advancement through mentorship, offering inclusive policies like flexible work arrangements, and setting measurable goals for diverse representation and leadership. Regular progress tracking and accountability are key components of a successful DEI strategy. Why some have decided to stop this practice is beyond me…

So far these are the companies that have scaled back discontinued their Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives:

·      Target

·      Walmart

·      Ford Motor Company

·      Toyota Motor Corp.

·      Boeing Co

·      McDonald's

·      Nissan

·      Meta

·      Amazon

·      John Deere

·      Tractor Supply

·      Harley-Davidson

·      Polaris

·      Lowe's

·      Molson Coors

·      Starbucks

·      Brown-Forman

Prior to the executive order, companies such as Tractor Supply, Deere, Harley Davidson, Ford, and Lowe’s scaled back their DEI policies. Companies with a conservative customer base are announcing an end to their DEI offices and initiatives. A leading face of this pushback is Tennessee native, Robby Starbuck (Another shoutout to Tennessee - lol). He used his vast platform and reach to rally against DEI programs in major companies. Starbuck began publicly pressuring brands such as John Deere, Tractor Supply, Ford, Harley-Davidson, and Jack Daniels to end their diversity-focused initiatives. Starbuck has claimed direct credit for many big brands retracting their DEI policies. He has also been a large vocal supporter of bills that banned gender-affirming medical care for minors, drag shows, and the anti-DEI bill in the Tennessee General Assembly.

Now larger corporations such as META, Google, and Costco are speaking out.

META’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg chose to scale back and remove a portion of their DEI initiative. He claims he wants to focus on “merit” versus “meeting quotas”.

On the bright side, some companies are doubling down on their policies. Costco has consistently upheld its commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies, even as other major companies have scaled back their initiatives. In January 2025, shareholders overwhelmingly rejected a proposal from the National Center for Public Policy Research to assess risks associated with the company's DEI practices. About 98% of shareholders voted against the measure. Despite external pressures and a national trend of companies reevaluating their DEI strategies, Costco remains strong in its commitment to diversity and inclusion.

So, stay up to date about the policies and values of the companies you support with your purchases. I certainly will be. I haven’t decided if I will start boycotting these companies, or if I find that it is too difficult to do so, but I will keep you up to date with that decision.

With gratitude,

Olivia