How Do Liberals Define DEI?
My James Brown POV
“Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion” or “DEI” has become a frequent scapegoat for Republicans. Donald Trump and J.D. Vance blamed the recent D.C. plane crash on DEI without a shred of evidence or shame. MAGA dismissed the Super Bowl halftime show as “DEI.” It’s gotten so bad, it’s like a variation of a Chris Rock routine but instead of “MLK,” “DEI” is their answer to everything: “Who’s buried in Grant’s tomb?” “DEI!” “Why can’t I satisfy a woman?” “DEI!”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio skipped the G20 summit in South Africa because he claims it promotes “solidarity, equality, and sustainability,” which Rubio dismisses as “DEI and climate change.” Back in the 1980s, you’d expect to see the words “solidarity, equality, and sustainability” outside G.I. Joe headquarters. Republicans have gone full Cobra. Elon Musk does sound a lot like Cobra Commander, come to think of it, and we’d probably all benefit if he wore a mask.
Rubio’s acting under secretary for public diplomacy and public affairs is Darren Beattie, who posted on social media last October, “Competent white men must be in charge if you want things to work. Unfortunately, our entire national ideology is predicated on coddling the feelings of women and minorities.”
Responding to Beattie’s comments on CNN last week, Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett said “coddling for the white boys is what’s happening right now.”
“I am tired of the white tears,” she added. “Listen, if you are competent, you are not concerned.” (Watch below.)
Obviously, a lot has changed since Democrats were once politically successful. Back in 1992, Crockett’s comments would’ve inspired a “Sister Souljah” moment from Bill Clinton, and during the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama apologized for describing white rural Pennsylvanians as “bitter.” Obama would have deftly repudiated Beattie’s racist remarks without making his race an issue. That’s not “coddling white boys” so much as acknowledging that successful politics is additive not subtractive.
Black women were just seven percent of the 2024 electorate, and Black men were five percent. White women, who Trump carried by seven points, were 37 percent of the electorate, and white men were 34 percent — more than all other races combined. Not all white men are “mediocre” — some of them are responsible for Severance, after all — but even if we’re generous, the “mediocre white male” electorate probably matches if not exceeds the total Black woman electorate. Also, the percentage of white male voters — and correspondingly “mediocre white men” — increases in key swing states, such as Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.
It’s frustrating, I know, but Elon Musk is the personification of mediocre white male power, and he’s currently winning. We don’t need to help build his Cobra army.
An underreported story from the 2024 election is that the Asian American vote shifted significantly to the right, and the demographic feels excluded from DEI initiatives. Some of this is the result of the Right’s classic divide and conquer tactics, but it’s unfortunately effective. They keep finding wedges within minority groups.
So about DEI …
Unfortunately, a lot of liberals defending DEI have not personally experienced DEI (either through programs or training) and themselves would probably run afoul of most DEI principles. It reminds me of the same liberals who claim they love theatre, because they believe they should say they love theatre, but they never actually attend the theatre and yet express surprise when a local theatre closes. Perception versus reality is the great liberal struggle.
I’ve seen it argued that DEI was primarily about shielding companies from discrimination lawsuits. Companies can point to the often absurd DEI training and insist they did their part, even if nothing major actually changed at the company. There’s some truth to this — although, as the expression goes, no company will ever pay you enough to sue them successfully.
DEI offered corporations good PR and provided the veneer of diversity. A company might still have exclusively white management and very few minority employees in key positions but, hey, at least they’re “committed to a diverse and inclusive workplace.” They pat themselves on the back for hiring Black people and never actually make constructive changes that might retain those employees and attract any more. I’ve worked at places where I’d never refer another Black person despite the company’s asserted liberalism.
Jesse Jackson’s PUSH staged a boycott of Nike in 1991 on the basis that the company didn’t employ any ranking Black executives and didn’t do business with any black-owned banks and advertising agencies. Nike countered that 320 of its 4,243 U.S.-based employees (7.25 percent) were Black. Nike was also based in Portland, Oregon, which had a Black population of just 4 percent.
Nike Chairman Phil Knight admitted that the company was “too male and too white”and promised to hire a minority vice president that year and name a minority to its board of directors by 1992. This was a smart business decision. Black consumers contributed significantly to Nike’s retail sales, and the company had every reason to avoid a high-profile boycott.
Now, MAGA would cry discrimination, but there are a lot of white liberal organizations, especially in media, that would weep even louder if consumers boycotted them until they hired even a single Black staffer.
A big problem facing DEI efforts is the average person’s resistance to charges of “unconscious bias.” Well-intentioned people can easily rally around a “don’t be racist” and “hire the best people” philosophy. They chafe, however, at accusations that their natural instincts for determining merit are somehow tainted.
An issue I’ve found with a lot of DEI cultural sensitivity training is the presumption that the sole Black person a white liberal met once in grad school represents an entire culture. An administrator at a Portland school once suggested that it was racist somehow to assume that Black people have reliable email access and that Black people prefer discussions in person. (This administrator had obviously not met me, as I always wonder “why wasn’t this an email/text?” when someone starts talking.)
I’ve also seen white people forced to apologize like a North Korean hostage because they dared describe a Black colleague as “eloquent.” Can we move past claiming this is in any way offensive? It’s hardly the default presumption for any competent Black person these days. Not a single racist called Kamala Harris “eloquent.” They usually suggested quite the opposite. Feel free to call me “eloquent” until I give the safe word.
The ‘DEI hire’ dilemma
Republicans have turned “DEI hire” into its own loaded slur, but I personally resent how liberals have enabled the insult. During the 2020 Democratic primary, Joe Biden made a point of announcing that he’d pick a woman as his running mate. Previous presidential nominees, including Obama, didn’t declare in advance that they’d choose a bland white guy. People would’ve noticed if Biden’s running mate was a woman. This was a political move because Biden was running against a diverse slate of candidates, but it made the choice more about him than the person he eventually chose — sort of like most corporate DEI efforts. It got worse during the summer of 2020 when Democratic groups put pressure on Biden to pick a Black woman. Amy Klobuchar made a big scene about withdrawing from consideration for that reason, as if there weren’t objective, non-race-based reasons for choosing Kamala Harris or Val Demings. (Watch below to see Demings shred Trump during his first annual impeachment trial.)
Before Trump picked J.D. Vance as his 2024 running mate, he didn’t announce that he was restricting the search to young weaselly guys with rubbish beards. (Kash Patel will make history as the first non-white FBI director, but that’s hardly worth celebrating.)
When Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer retired in 2022, Biden declared, “The person I will nominate will be someone with extraordinary qualifications, character, experience and integrity. And that person will be the first Black woman ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court.”
This undermined Ketanji Brown Jackson’s eventual nomination. She’s extremely qualified and would’ve been the best choice among a full roster of candidates from every race and gender.
When people advocate for excluding trans women from women’s sports, they claim that this is an issue of “fairness” because trans women have a biological and physical advantage over other women. I don’t personally agree, just as I don’t think white people have some inherent advantage over minorities that requires special consideration for us during recruitment and hiring.
Even well-meaning white liberals have suggested that I must have it made because I’m a smart, capable Black professional so organizations must fall all over themselves to hire me. This isn’t just insulting. It’s flat-out untrue. Yes, I’ve been a “diversity” hire, but I was also the most qualified person there. They should’ve hired me long before trying to tick a box.
These are people who defend Jasmine Crockett’s “mediocre white guy” remark while elevating mediocre white guys over people of color at their own organizations. They don’t realize it or just refuse to accept it. Consider how Democrats recently snubbed Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for ranking member on the Oversight Committee (where she obviously would have excelled) over a white man who’s still technically alive.
Now, a truly “antiracist” organization would probably deprioritize seniority, because white people, especially men, are more likely to benefit from it. Nancy Pelosi has an established pattern of supporting older men over younger women, particularly women of color. She lobbied from her hospital bed for Gerry Connolly over AOC. She endorsed Adam Schiff for Senate over Katie Porter. She’d say that she’s simply backing the person she believes is better overall for the job, but that is very selective DEI.
I think Rep. Crockett’s blunt statement about “mediocre white boys” is perhaps a compelling argument against DEI: “If you are competent, you are not concerned.” That’s a position a lot of minorities hold about our own prospects. We don’t want or need special programs to ensure a limited success. As James Brown said, “I don't want nobody to give me nothing. Open up the door. I’ll get it myself.” We want to thrive on our own terms. Don’t hold open the door and then slam it in our faces when no one’s looking.
Some really good points here. I also found the way Justice Jackson's nomination and especially Kamala Harris' nomination were handled to be grating and insulting, not just to them, but to women and Black people generally. On the other hand, I've worked in situations where if you aren't insisting on a so-called "diversity hire," no one who isn't a white man will ever be hired. (and not because of merit - because of unconscious bigotry)
It feels like you're giving a foothold for right wing pundits to keep saying "DEI" over and over. And there are probably instances where DEI is taking the place of meritocracy.
But players please. You know FULL WELL that these people are operating from a place of hate and exclusion against people and ideas they don't understand, where they work backwards to "DEI" to explain this cultural grievance. These are people who DEPLORE women and minorities, and "DEI" gives them a way to say that and save on syllables.
Fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com