Finding new paths for DEI to thrive in the US

https://www.resourceumc.org/-/media/umc-media/2017/12/13/01/07/watch-night-black-worshipers-ethnic-groups-offer-ideas-vital-church-2.png?iar=0&mh=768&mw=432&w=432&hash=24F6C401FA3DAB92F6CA8AFB73A55CBD

In Union County, South Carolina, the cotton mills that once supplied many jobs have vanished. Now, the county is labeled as a “food desert,” indicating residents are often distant from grocery stores. Acknowledging this challenge, local non-profit leader Elise Ashby initiated a project in 2016, working with farmers to deliver affordable boxes of fresh fruits and vegetables across the area, where around 30% of the population is Black, and about 25% face poverty.

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 ago, initiatives like this were extensively supported by leading businesses throughout the U.S., as the nation came to terms with systemic racism following the 2020 killing of George Floyd, a Black man who lost his life under the knee of a police officer in Minneapolis.

However, many of these corporations are now retreating from such commitments. In November, Walmart announced the discontinuation of some diversity initiatives, including plans to shut down its Center for Racial Equity, which had been instrumental in funding Ms. Ashby’s grant.

Companies such as Meta, Google, Goldman Sachs, and McDonald’s have all made similar moves, reflecting a broader corporate pullback from diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.

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 assuming office in January, Donald Trump has vigorously attempted to dismantle DEI programs, promoting a revival of “merit-based opportunity” within the United States. He has directed the federal government to abolish DEI initiatives and commence inquiries into private companies and educational establishments suspected of participating in “illegal DEI practices.”

During the initial months of his second term, the Department of Veterans Affairs shut down its DEI offices, the Environmental Protection Agency put nearly 200 civil rights staff on paid leave, and Trump removed the nation’s leading military general—a Black man—following prior recommendations from his defense secretary for his removal due to his connection with “woke” DEI policies.

At first glance, it might appear that the U.S. has given up on improving outcomes for historically marginalized racial and identity groups. Yet, some experts propose that these programs may continue, though perhaps rebranded to match the evolving political environment of a country that has recently chosen a leader focused on contesting “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 described with terms like “affirmative action” and “equal opportunity,” these initiatives were designed to address the enduring effects of slavery and the systemic discrimination perpetuated under Jim Crow laws.

As social justice movements expanded to include women’s rights, LGBTQ+ advocacy, and racial and ethnic diversity, the language describing these efforts widened to incorporate “diversity,” “equity,” and “inclusion.”

In corporations and government bodies, DEI initiatives primarily concentrated on recruitment strategies that positioned diversity as a financial benefit. Proponents contend that these programs tackle inequalities across different communities, although the primary 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.

Recently, detractors have amplified their assertions that DEI initiatives—originally crafted to fight discrimination—are themselves prejudiced, especially against white Americans. Training programs that emphasize “white privilege” and systemic racial prejudice 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.”

Online platforms like End Wokeness and conservative personalities such as Robby Starbuck have leveraged this feeling, directing attention to companies for their DEI efforts. Starbuck has taken credit for changes in policy at firms like Ford, John Deere, and Harley-Davidson after revealing their DEI programs to his audience on social media.

A major and visible achievement for this movement occurred in spring 2023, when Bud Light encountered significant backlash for teaming up with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. The resulting calls to boycott the brand and its parent company, Anheuser-Busch, led to a 28% drop in Bud Light sales, according to a Harvard Business Review analysis.

Another major turning point arrived in June 2023, when the Supreme Court ruled that race could no longer be a factor in university admissions, effectively dismantling decades of affirmative action policies.

This verdict questioned the legality of corporate DEI policies. In the wake of the ruling, Meta notified its employees that “the legal and policy landscape surrounding DEI has shifted,” shortly before revealing the discontinuation of its own DEI programs.

Corporate Retreat: An Issue of Authenticity

The swift retreat of DEI programs among prominent corporations raises questions about the genuineness of their dedication to workforce diversity.

Martin Whittaker, CEO of JUST Capital—a non-profit that surveys Americans on workplace matters—holds the view that many businesses initially adopted DEI initiatives to “appear favorable” following the Black Lives Matter movement, rather than from an authentic dedication to transformation.

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 is polarized. A survey by JUST Capital indicates that backing for DEI has decreased, yet support for associated matters—like equitable pay—remains robust. Likewise, a 2023 Pew Research Center survey revealed that a majority (56%) of working adults still perceive workplace DEI initiatives as advantageous.

By Winry Rockbell

You May Also Like

  • Crypto investment risks in a sluggish economy

  • Calls for reduction in regulatory bureaucracy by Reeves

  • Retail sales miss projections, adding to US economic concerns

  • Tariff effects on American tech businesses