DEI continues to adapt despite opposition in the US

https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/styles/opengraph/public/media_2022/08/202208us_chauvin_trial_protest.jpg?h=d4e46ef0&itok=HAY3c8xo

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.

At first, Ms. Ashby supported the project using her own savings and modest grants. Nonetheless, in 2023, her work gained considerable momentum when the Walmart Foundation—the charitable arm of a major national corporation—awarded her organization more than $100,000 (£80,000). This financial backing was included in a larger $1.5 million program designed to assist “community-focused non-profits led by individuals of color.”

“I was moved to tears,” she confessed. “It was one of those instances when you understand that someone genuinely recognizes and appreciates what you do.”

A mere two years ago, initiatives like this received extensive support from large companies throughout the U.S., as the nation confronted systemic racism following the 2020 murder of George Floyd, a Black man who lost his life beneath the knee of a Minneapolis police officer.

Yet, several of these companies are now withdrawing from those pledges. In November, Walmart revealed it would end certain diversity programs, including the closure of its Center for Racial Equity, which had played a key role in providing 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 change signifies a significant cultural transition, spurred partially by concerns over legal challenges, regulatory oversight, and social media backlash—pressures intensified by the new U.S. president.

Since assuming office in January, Donald Trump has vigorously sought to dismantle DEI initiatives, promoting a return to “merit-based opportunity” in the United States. He has directed the federal government to abolish DEI programs and initiate investigations into private companies and academic institutions suspected of participating in “unlawful 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 ousted the nation’s top military general—a Black individual—after the defense secretary had earlier recommended his removal because of his connection to “woke” DEI strategies.

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 Origins of the Backlash

DEI-style programs first gained momentum in the U.S. during the 1960s in response to the civil rights movement, which sought to expand and protect the rights of Black Americans.

Originally described through terms like “affirmative action” and “equal opportunity,” these programs sought to address the enduring impacts of slavery and the institutional discrimination enforced under 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 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 surged in 2020 amid the Black Lives Matter protests and increasing demands for social change. Walmart, for instance, pledged $100 million over five years to establish its Center for Racial Equity. Wells Fargo appointed its first chief diversity officer, while companies like Google and Nike already had similar leadership roles in place. Following these changes, S&P 100 companies created over 300,000 new jobs, with 94% of them going to people of color, according to Bloomberg.

However, just as quickly as these initiatives expanded, a conservative backlash emerged.

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

More recently, critics have intensified their arguments that DEI efforts—originally designed to combat discrimination—are themselves discriminatory, particularly toward white Americans. Training sessions that highlight “white privilege” and systemic racial bias have drawn heavy 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 such as End Wokeness and conservative personalities like Robby Starbuck have leveraged this sentiment, focusing on companies for their DEI efforts. Starbuck has taken credit for influencing policy changes at firms like Ford, John Deere, and Harley-Davidson after revealing their DEI programs to his online audience.

One of the most visible victories for this movement came in spring 2023, when Bud Light faced widespread backlash for partnering with transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. Calls to boycott the brand and its parent company, Anheuser-Busch, resulted in a 28% decline in Bud Light sales, according to a Harvard Business Review analysis.

Another significant milestone occurred in June 2023, when the Supreme Court decided that race could no longer be considered in university admissions, effectively ending decades of affirmative action policies.

This ruling raised questions about the legal basis of corporate DEI policies. In the wake of the decision, Meta notified employees that “the legal and policy landscape surrounding DEI has shifted,” shortly before announcing the end of its own DEI initiatives.

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 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 opinion on DEI remains divided. A survey by JUST Capital suggests that support for DEI has waned, but support for related issues—such as fair pay—remains strong. Similarly, a 2023 Pew Research Center survey found that a majority (56%) of employed adults still believe that workplace DEI efforts are beneficial.

By Ethan Brown Lambert

You May Also Like

  • Manchester’s small businesses struggle with increasing costs

  • Employment steady as government cuts take hold

  • New beginnings for DEI amidst changing tides in America

  • Successful economic year for the US