The DEI Dilemma

Apparently, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) continues to be a problem, as highlighted by many news articles and political pundits. We keep hearing how companies in the United States are abandoning their DEI policies.

Recently, I read that Toyota, the Japanese multinational automotive manufacturer, is joining this trend.1 John Deere (an American agricultural machinery company), Harley-Davidson (an American motorcycle manufacturer), Lowe’s (an American home improvement retailer), and Ford (an American multinational automobile manufacturer) are among the companies that have abandoned DEI policies in recent months. This trend is even spilling over into other areas, such as college campuses.2

Most of the controversy is generated by people who don’t truly understand what diversity, equity, and inclusion mean. They are simply using talking points from toxic politicians and social media personalities who are stirring up the population for their own political and personal gain. Part of the problem is also self-inflicted because, at least in the U.S., we tend to take things to the extreme. Some politicians and elected officials have pushed policies meant to advance the cause, but in reality, they were using DEI to score political points. Both sides of the political spectrum are wrong when it comes to DEI, and their political games are making things worse.

This trend isn’t confined to the United States; it’s affecting many other countries as well.

I really like how the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation defines Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion:3

  • Diversity: A broad array of differences in identity, perspective, skill, and style.
  • Equity: Practices and policies that are just, transparent, and consistent.
  • Inclusion: An environment that actively welcomes, connects, and values all while harming none.

I also discussed the topic of diversity back in February in my post titled Embracing Diversity in Today’s World, where I shared personal experiences and observations from my time in the military.

Today, I want to move beyond the concept of DEI as merely a tool to advance the cause of racial minorities, and instead explore DEI as a key element in creating a stable government that meets the needs of its population.

While I appreciate the Gates Foundation’s definition, here’s another perspective to broaden the concept. According to Merriam-Webster, diversity, equity, and inclusion mean:

“The state of having a diverse group of participants as well as policies and norms that are equitable and inclusive.”4

Now, with that said, I want to discuss the problems we face when we don’t apply the DEI concept correctly to governance.

We all know that people’s dissatisfaction with the government is rising in the United States because it’s not meeting their needs. Concerns about the lack of jobs, immigration issues, housing shortages, high health care costs, the opioid epidemic, and a long list of grievances are not being heard or acted upon. When the government doesn’t listen to the people and address their concerns, the natural response is protest, which leads to political polarization. At this point, all ideas are dismissed, and no one wants to work toward the common good. This is currently happening between Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. When good common sense doesn’t prevail, craziness takes over. We see it every day at the federal, state, and city levels. Elected officials aren’t interested in diverse opinions or views; practices and policies are non-transparent and one-sided; and large segments of the population are marginalized to the point of harassment, and in some cases, violence, for having different views.

The same pattern is happening in Europe. News articles discuss Germany’s concerns over the rise of the far-right, which is winning elections at the state level and may soon start influencing national politics. France and other parts of Europe are facing similar challenges. The main causes are governments’ failure to address underlying grievances like economic insecurity and immigration.

Today, I read that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is also facing challenges because people are frustrated that their problems aren’t being addressed. The Economist mentioned immigration, housing shortages, education, and health care as the main concerns.

It seems that the primary problem affecting many governments is their sole focus on the causes of the people who brought them to power, while marginalizing their opponents.

In this country, Republicans and Democrats are focused only on their political bases and aren’t paying attention to those outside their spheres. No one is applying DEI concepts to governance, and they are missing out on the diverse population’s input on how to solve common problems. They also aren’t discussing the best policies to address people’s concerns in a way that is inclusive and equitable for everyone.

If we care only about our personal needs and desires—often shaped by a limited worldview, sometimes negatively influenced by others—then, as a society, we fail to understand that DEI is crucial if we want to achieve greatness.

References:

  1. https://www.fastcompany.com/91203724/toyota-is-the-latest-company-to-scale-back-dei-policies ↩︎
  2. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/colleges-risk-talent-loss-with-pushback-on-diversity-initiatives ↩︎
  3. https://docs.gatesfoundation.org/documents/bill_and_melinda_gates_foundation_2021_dei_progress_report.pdf ↩︎
  4. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/diversity,%20equity%20and%20inclusion ↩︎

50 thoughts on “The DEI Dilemma”

  1. This is another well written analytical piece. The issue of DEI has been weaponised by a very well funded political lobby, and the pressure has been applied on corporations which rely heavily on investments and or workforce. Politicians unfortunately, follow the money, and it’s the electorate that pay the price in the long run
    Great stuff, Edward.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. “Politicians unfortunately, follow the money.” Well said, my friend. I wish they would leave the stupidity aside and actually do the work that needs to be done to move this country forward. We have a diverse and intelligent society, and we should be able to accomplish great things without resorting to political games.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. I understand but we sure need quality leaders. You’re welcome and thank you for continuing to share valuable information. Not a shortage of serious subjects to consider and research as voting draws near.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  5. Thank you for your focus on this important topic, Edward. DEI affects everyone. We are a diverse nation in the United States. Diversity creates strength and resilience in times of crisis. Equal opportunities for education are central to a healthy democracy and economy. What if each child could pursue the career that best matches their talents and abilities?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  6. I appreciate your eloquent and insightful essay, Edward. If everyone has what they need to meet their basic needs and reach their full potential, society as a whole benefits. That’s how both my parents lived their lives.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you, Liz. I’m with you, and I believe we have the resources, and the majority of people agree that ensuring everyone can meet their basic needs is both important and achievable. However, I’m afraid most of our leaders lack the will to make that happen because they are more interested in pleasing interest groups than in addressing the problems affecting our country. I’m still hopeful, though

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  7. As an Independent-No-Party-Affiliated Voter, I appreciate your writing, research, and analysis of DEI. I believe society thrives under healthy competition and healthy compassion, and the proper use of DEI allows for both.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you, Rose, and as an independent voter myself, I completely agree with you. I like that you mentioned healthy competition and compassion as important elements of a thriving society. I wish more people understood that.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  8. As long as governments and political leaders spend more time and energy fighting each other than caring for the greatest good of people, the application of DEI seems quite distant. Almost an utopia, I would say, given the current scenario. When the interests of people and their well-being are not the main concern of leaders, DEI will remain just a concept. A concept of great potential for a better world. But its practical use must be considered a priority. I believe we will reach there! People’s discontentment with how things are going is already the first step. Thank you, Edward, for bringing this important issue to light. *Infinite blessings and light to you, my friend*

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  10. Thank you for this thought-provoking post! I appreciate how you go beyond DEI as a buzzword and focus on its broader implications for governance. It’s true that when governments ignore diverse viewpoints, it leads to polarization and unrest. We need leaders who understand that inclusivity isn’t just about representation but about crafting policies that truly serve everyone. Your call for applying DEI to governance is spot on!👌🎉

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  11. Good food for thought, Edward, and I agree with much, especially politicians who pander to their patrons and bases and are deaf to (if not outright dismissive of) even the most obvious concerns of other consituents. One thought to push the dialectic forward. I actually think the definitions your give (Gates and Meriam-Webster) are irrelevant. Everyone pretty much agrees that the concepts D, E, and I, as defined there, reflect values worth embracing. The problem is the gap between the general concepts (which are not controversial as stated in the innocuous definitions, as only a tiny minority objects) and a particular set of institutional practices (which are very controversial, with maybe half the populace against). I think you agree that how we put DEI into practice is what makes or breaks it in the eyes of the public, but I might go beyond you in saying that the problem is not “people who don’t truly understand what diversity, equity, and inclusion mean” – I think everyone understands the concepts well enough, but the entire debate is about the gap between concept and practice. This clarifies the focus – i.e., don’t focus on giving people a better definition, focus entirely on the institutional practices as the site of struggle. Thanks for starting a thoughtful discussion here.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you very much for reading and commenting. I agree with almost everything you’ve said, especially that the concept reflects values worth embracing. However, the idea that the concept is well understood is debatable. I’ve sat in meetings and working groups discussing this topic, and you’d be amazed at how many well-educated people find this concept foreign. There are several reasons for that, and it would take a long time to discuss each of them. At the end of the day, as you said, it’s about values that shouldn’t be controversial at all. We’ve put a label on something that shouldn’t have one.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    1. Thank you so much, Mary. My personal opinion is that these companies implemented some of these policies to please political leaders and gain influence, but they didn’t truly care about DEI. DEI is a good thing and should simply be part of human nature—no fanfare or big announcements needed. They just need to act. Deeds, not words.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    1. You know, the funny thing is that one party pushed the company to implement DEI, while the other party pushed them to eliminate it. It’s all a political game, and everyone wants the next shiny object. Companies need to stick to their core competencies and implement DEI concepts, which are beneficial, without going overboard with major policy changes just to please politicians.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  14. A very well expressed analysis as always and that I agree with almost entirely. Allow me to make some considerations. I have a pessimism about power, whatever it is, which I define as realism, which leads me to believe that not even by concretely reaching these precious and humanly just concepts will the issue really change. I do not believe in political incapacity, I only believe in political dishonesty, as an individual and as an entity, corrupt at the root and without any possibility of plausible remediation. More likely is a change, as you rightly say, ephemeral, based on the self-interest of the politician and the financiers. False ideals are more harmful than non-ideal ones. Poverty, insecurity, fear, the division of the people, are forms of control that are too powerful and functional that will never let go, unless the possibility of total digitalization is reached with the consequent automatic and constant control of people.
    These are my personal considerations, probably not correct, but on which I have a certain conviction. I speak for Italy, but from your considerations on American politics and companies, I can intuit that the situation is very similar, if not the same. Thanks for the great article, dear Edward, and sorry for my long rant on this. Have a good evening 🙂

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    1. Simon, I really appreciate your comment, and by the way, I don’t have any problems with long comments or rants. All are welcome, and the more, the better. You brought up some excellent points, and sometimes I lean toward the pessimistic side of things, but I try to stay hopeful to keep my sanity. I think you are absolutely right about the use of poverty, insecurity, fear, and the division of the people as forms of control. These are solvable problems, but many politicians do not want to solve them because they help them politically, and that is all that matters to them. This is a sad commentary on the current state of society and the reason why we are losing faith in the government.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Thank you for your welcome, and for your understanding. You are right, we must always maintain hope and a point of lucidity so as not to get lost. This is what is needed, and you do a great job to make this happen, so that the people, the people, leave aside political barroom brawls and find humanity and unity of purpose for their own good as a plurality before as a singularity. You are also right in saying that those types of problems would be solvable, easily solvable I add. I believe never as in these last years is a national and global split evident in two groups hungry for command. But decidedly lacking in appetite when it comes to concretely solving real problems. Sooner or later in this story, a very broad union of people with ideas, heart and no interests will probably be needed, to be able to keep the good and move forward in peace and trust. In Italy anything remains standing only for citizen volunteers, and I believe the same is true everywhere. Unity!

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

  15. Thank you for addressing a challenging topic and the apparent causes. I want a system that in inclusive and embraces DEI but don’t know how we get there. And I think there are different causes for the division and unrest. I believe big money and corporations have corrupted our political and economic systems to meet their needs and agendas over those of the general population. In addition, they largely control the politicians, media, and stories. Until we change or fix the money in politics, I don’t see how we make progress on much of anything for the masses.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. You’re welcome, and your point about big money is spot on. That is what is really behind all of this. The amount of money that we are spending to elect our officials is insane, and of course, once a politician gets those big donations, they have no option but to please those donors, which is wrong. Congress is paralyzed, and you can see the number of corrupt politicians who are getting caught. Sadly, none of the main parties want to address the money problem, so all we can do is continue to get educated and cast our votes, hoping that change will come.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

  16. Good and informative as always Edward. I try to steer clear of political stuff one way or the other on social platforms, but I will say this: “When good common sense doesn’t prevail, craziness takes over.” Is very true and is above all. There’s a lot of different agendas out there that address only some of the issues but not the underlying cause, as you well stated.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you, Laura. There is a lot of crazy stuff in social media and the news, so I don’t blame you for steering away from politics. I’m an independent voter, so I don’t pay much attention to what politicians are publicly saying. Instead, I read their platforms, ideas, and plans, and then I make a decision. We’ll see what happens in a few weeks.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

Leave a reply to byngnigel Cancel reply