Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) is an emotional topic here in the U.S. Following the George Floyd riots, it has only grown in popularity. The Supreme Court’s Student for Fair Admissions v. Harvard ruled affirmative action unconstitutional in 2023, fanning the flame that exploded into Trump’s Executive order.
Introduced on January 20th, the order Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing paused special events such as MLK Day, LGBTQ Pride and Holocaust Remembrance Day. These actions that are being fulfilled have led to some important conversations about what DEI truly is, how it’s been implemented, what it seeks to accomplish, and the country’s aspirations concerning diversity. DEI is not adequately fulfilling its purpose in its current state, however, it is a framework that should not be discarded but instead reworked.
Critics
From a conservative perspective, today DEI is a waste of resources. During Former President Biden’s administration, over 1 Billion dollars was spent on DEI initiatives. Money that arguably could have been spent on other matters. Additionally, it is seen as divisive and a form of racial discrimination and serves simultaneously as a vehicle that lowers the standard for the workforce.
Critics believe that it discourages merit-based achievements because hard skills are outweighed by physical characteristics, state of being, and identity expression. When you look at the numbers when it comes to Black, Latino and Native Americans, the consensus seems to be that the results don’t justify the investment. If the purpose of DEI is to solve the equity gap, it’s not doing that in its current state.
Supporters
From a liberal perspective, diversity doesn’t equate to race. DEI covers Veterans, disabled, queer individuals, and women. DEI is an initiative that seeks to ensure all voices have a chance to be heard. It’s not about hiring quotas. It is about cultural sensitivity training and directing employers to look at people that are statistically overlooked. Mandatory policies on the federal level ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity rather than overlooking qualified candidates.
Leaving it up to companies and states where the majority has no desire or motivation to improve these gaps is a throwaway solution that leaves everyone feeling undervalued. The democratic values that America seeks to promote involve ensuring everyone has an equal opportunity of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. While these values that the founding fathers sought to craft in the past were exclusive, they have since have grown to include women, black people, and only recently LGBTQ+ people.
Meeting in the Middle
Both sides can agree that statistically the numbers are not where they should be. Women of European descent primarily benefit from DEI, however, other demographics don’t see the same numbers. Both sides agree on one thing. There is a problem. However, the solution is not to leave it up to people who have never attempted to improve the situation. Historically, legislation has assisted diversity efforts and the current administration has the opportunity to develop something better. While the current system isn’t perfect, dissolving it without an alternate framework is at best, optimistic, and at worst neglectful.
The next steps should involve creating defining benchmarks for DEI that provide clarity and consistency across the federal level. The adaptation should distinctly address access to opportunity rather than outcome. It’s hard to fight for DEI when it’s unclear line by line how it’s implemented and how it is not. Additionally, cultural days and holidays should continue to be embraced and celebrated. Generation Z seems to prioritize equality. As an upcoming generation, many view the executive order as an attack on their culture and rights. For example, removing Black History Month, Holocaust Memory Day, Pride, etc. The fear that DEI only deepens racial and minority divides may be true. However, the current actions are only charging the political climate.
Moving Forward
Rather than tossing DEI out, the goal should be to restructure it into a measurable framework that targets access to opportunity without mandating outcomes. Public transparency during implementation, paired with recognition of cultural observances, fulfills the need for diversity without fueling the flame of division. As Generation Z emerges with a passion for equality, ignoring these concerns will only serve to exacerbate political tensions rather than resolve them. The next steps are where the challenge lies—developing a solution that acknowledges past shortcomings while ensuring a future where DEI fulfills its promise effectively.
