American diversity cannot be cancelled by merely eliminating DEI initiatives
Sunday, March 2nd, 2025. By B. Kumaravadivelu
To start with my conclusion:
The frenzied attack on Diversity-Equity-Inclusion programs by the Trump administration is a fig leaf employed to cover nativistic onslaught on the broader issue of American diversity.
Let me explain.
Consider some of the actions taken within a month of Trump regaining the Presidency:
Declaring that “Identity Months Dead at DoD,” Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered the officers and staff of his Department not to “use official resources, to include man-hours, to host celebrations or events related to cultural awareness months.”
Soon after, he directed his staff to create a DEI task force to ensure no DEI programs remain in the Pentagon.
The Department of Education directed the departments of education in all 50 states to remove DEI policies or lose federal funding.
All these are the result of President Trump’s executive order to end affirmative action in federal contracting. He directed that all federal DEI workers be put on paid leave before firing them.
It is not just federal agencies that are taking actions, many private organizations are eliminating or rolling back funding earmarked for DEI programs. These actions impact on their hiring, recruitment and services.
Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting firm and a prominent federal contractor, removed all DEI goals from its management priorities and deleted the acronym from all company communications.
Another consultancy firm, Accenture, has decided to end its DEI goals as well as its development programs for “people of specific demographic groups.”
From the finance sector, Goldman Sachs, for instance, scrapped its policy of taking on a company’s initial public offering (IPO) if it had at least one board member from a diverse background.
Automakers such as General Motors and Ford Motor Company have stopped DEI language from their annual investor reports.
On the brighter side, there are glimpses of resistance.
Maine governor Janet Mills sparred with Trump regarding the ban on transgender athletes curtly telling him: “See you in court.”
Republican lawmakers such as Rich McCormick of Georgia and Scott Fitzgerald of Wisconsin encountered confrontations from their constituents who questioned their complicity.
Apple shareholders rejected a proposal to end the iPhone maker’s DEI program.
The civil rights organization NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) advised African Americans to patronize only companies that have not pulled back from DEI programs.
Ironically, on the day Trump maneuvered to get elected as the Chair of the Board of the John F Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, a move that was considered a “a hostile takeover,” the Center hosted a sold-out Valentine’s Day show of?go-go, a Black popular music.
The flurry of activities already taken by the Trump administration and the ones to be taken follow the plans outlined in the much-criticized?Project 2025?— a framework assembled by conservative think tanks.
In essence,?Project 2025?authors as well as Trump and his allies seek to dismantle the very foundation of American diversity. The attack on DEI is just one step.
What they are trying to do is nothing new.
They merely follow the failed vision propagated by late 18th and early 19th century nativists.
Their vision can be traced to what was called “Americanization Project” whose mission was later labeled nativism which constituted a major agenda of the?American Party, aka?Know Nothing Party, whose goal was to construct and consolidate a monochromatic America that has no place for racial, religious, cultural or linguistic differences.
In order to achieve their goal, they demanded that new immigrants abandon their religion, their culture and their language in a hurry. When the Party failed in their mission, and disbanded itself as a political party, some of the members joined the Republican Party.
Freedom Caucus, considered to be the most conservative and extreme right-wing group in the Congress, keeps nativism alive and has become a part of our contemporary sociopolitical spectrum.
Some of them are fixated on a narrow vision of America that is premised upon race and religion, blood and soil — a vision that considers all immigrants as a danger to the mainstream beliefs and practices.
More recently, Vice President J.D. Vance, claimed in a speech to the conservative group CPAC that uncontrolled immigration was “the greatest threat” to the United States. He was referring to both illegal and legal immigration.
History, research, and lived experiences show that the nativistic version of America has not become a reality.
If it did not become a reality in the eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth centuries when the nation was racially and religiously much less diverse, it is not likely to become a reality in the twenty first century when the nation has become much more pluralistic. And, much more conscious of it.
History, research, and lived experiences also show that a vast segment of American public attach little value to the static, ideologically loaded views propagated by nativist-oriented politicians and pundits.
On the contrary, many Americans are comfortable with the diverse nature of the nation. One of the manifestations of diversity can be seen in the ever-increasing rate of interfaith and interracial marriages.
As a Pew research study found, “white, black and Hispanic adults are about equally likely to say it’s good that the U.S. population is racially and ethnically mixed, and majorities across these groups say this has had a positive impact on U.S. culture.”
Various racial, ethnic, and religious entities strive to preserve and protect their identities but at the same time they operate within the purview of an overall national identity and pursue a common national agenda recognizing that they are all valued stakeholders in the wellbeing of the nation.
They are an asset, not a threat, to America.
Clearly, America can’t be made great again if the value of diversity is not recognized and nurtured.
**********
?