It didn't take long for DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) to come back, notching yet another failure of the MAGA "movement" that frankly is quite surprising. Not very long ago even I would have said the drowning of DEI was one of MAGA's very few successes, unlikely to be reversed until after 2028 at the earliest.
The comeback, even more surprisingly, has bipartisan support. You won't hear of it by watching Fox News or listening to Republican (or even Democratic) politicians, but in the real world things are getting, well, real.
And the reason? DEI is good for business, for one thing. Having a workforce made up of identical incel skinheads goosestepping to the same tune is bad for innovation, it turns out. It's also bad for customer service, since customers are stubbornly reflective of a society's general population. Wow—who knew?
I sit in amazement at how very, extremely, ineffably ineffectual MAGA has been on every policy front, and the speed at which the failures rack up. Yes, it spawns fear, anger, grievance, and hatred exceedingly well, but emotions are not policies, and serve only to cripple the US domestically and abroad.
There's no question that the manner in which DEI is enacted should never be dogmatic, and one should always search for better ways to implement it in both the public and private spheres; but to simply ban it altogether was never going to last for very long. History marches on as it always does, with conservative stances always understood to be conservative precisely because they're unsustainable or no longer reflective of how the world works.
This is the waste of MAGA as a social force, it being little more than a collective temper tantrum that gnaws on its own tail like a blind ouroboros, destroying itself even as it believes it is nourishing itself. What an absolute waste.
So here's the story:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/trump-slashed-dei-now-making-040150586.html
Trump slashed DEI. Now it's making a surprising bipartisan comeback
Political pressure during the Trump era forced corporate America to put its diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives on ice.
Now, in a surprising turn, growing rank-and-file buy-in is driving a quiet thaw across party lines, with even Republican employees expressing approval for such workplace programs.
This unexpected bipartisan support for DEI emerged in the latest Bentley University-Gallup Business in Society survey provided exclusively to USA TODAY. Though views remain deeply polarized, workers across the ideological spectrum are growing more positive about the workplace benefits of diversity programs.
Nearly three-quarters (72%) of Americans believe promoting DEI should be a priority for businesses. What's more, public faith in the bottom-line benefits of diversity is climbing as more Americans link diverse workforces to increased profitability and innovation than at any point in the past two years.
The findings defy expectations in today's political climate and even surprised researchers.
President Donald Trump took office pledging to eliminate "woke" Biden-era policies that he argues elevate race and gender above merit. The administration's crackdown has sent shockwaves through the corporate world.
Fearing federal investigations and lost government contracts, major U.S. companies rushed to dismantle their diversity initiatives. In the latest sign of escalating enforcement, the Justice Department announced this week that Accenture will pay $25 million to resolve allegations that its employment practices violated federal anti-discrimination rules.
Yet three-quarters of the Bentley University-Gallup survey respondents said businesses with diverse workforces make more innovative products, up from 64% in 2025. Seventy-one percent of Americans say it is somewhat or completely true that businesses with diverse workforces are more profitable, up from 61% in 2025.
[The article continues—see link above]
DEI is mainly being suppressed by Trumpian fearmongering only in the public sector, and even then largely only at the federal level and in some red states. As it turns out, in the private sector it has stabilized and lately looks to be resurgent.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/adiaharveywingfield/2026/09/16/what-happens-to-companies-that-maintain-dei-turns-out-not-much/
What Happens To Companies That Maintain DEI? Turns Out, Not Much
https://www.hrdive.com/news/companies-dei-roll-back-dei-performance-uc-berkeley/828590/
Companies that roll back DEI don’t perform better financially, study says
“Large corporations appear to have folded under pressure for no financial gain,” a public policy scholar wrote.
MAGA is a seriously scary fascist movement, to be sure, but people and institutions are learning to resist it. Folks are learning that the MAGA Führer—"you-know-who"—is by and large a shit-talking ass-hat who's losing his tiny little mind and doesn't (or can't) follow through on most of his infantile threats.
There's more to fear from the billionaire class than the naked emperor squatting in the Oval Office for about 850 more days—at most.
The fight is on.
- Joined
- 09 Jan 22
- Moves
- 1139
Did you drop in from an alternative universe? DEI is NOT "making a comeback". Universities and private companies are running from it as fast as they can shed themselves of the constraints DEI was pushing on them,. People were being put in positions they didn't deserve and couldn't function in, and now they aren't. .......and that's a good thing.
Voluntary DEI is fine, since the CEO runs the private company and can do what he wants, IMO.
That is, said ceo can hire a person based on the candidate's abilities, or based on the color of his/her skin.
Forcing the CEO to hire the way the government demands you do by statute, is SLAVERY. We di nit need that,
1 edit
@Cliff-Mashburn saidI appreciate your tacit admission of having not read any of the links.
Did you drop in from an alternative universe? DEI is NOT "making a comeback". Universities and private companies are running from it as fast as they can shed themselves of the constraints DEI was pushing on them,. People were being put in positions they didn't deserve and couldn't function in, and now they aren't. .......and that's a good thing.
So, the thing is, businesses and institutions that "caved" to Trump's threats are reaping no profit from their decision, while those that held firm appear to be suffering no adverse consequences. Meanwhile polling shows stronger support for DEI across the political spectrum now than at the beginning of Trump's second term. The trend is toward reversal of anti-DEI actions—and yes, it is being done voluntarily.
Just at a nuts and bolts level, businesses find that having employees from diverse backgrounds is conducive to innovation, and better hones a competitive edge. Really this is pretty ancient knowledge, and it can be extrapolated to the national level. Historically, immigration has without a doubt been the main driver of US innovation, from music to science to technology to literature to cinema.
An incompetent can get hired with or without DEI in place. Just look at the rogues' gallery of degenerate misfits that is the Trump administration. The hiring of someone unsuited to a particular job is not a feature or mandate of DEI, and when it happens it's often because an employer or hiring committee did not do its homework. You don't throw out DEI when a mistake in hiring is made, you revise your vetting process. That's the logical approach. When an organization abandons DEI as a hiring philosophy, it doesn't fix the flaws in the organization's hiring procedure, it merely discounts certain qualities possessed by job applicants that statistically correlate with fresh perspectives and increased innovation; that is, less information is considered in the decision-making process.
MAGA could have been mature and constructive, and brought to the table a discussion on improving DEI practices. Pushing an outright ban at the point of a gun was bound to fail, and it's seen to be failing daily.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 06
- Moves
- 10916
3 edits
@Soothfast saidYes it should seem obvious. Diversity of opinion, diversity of thought and ideas and perspective makes for a more resilient and innovative company. The problem was how to achieve that?
It didn't take long for DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) to come back, notching yet another failure of the MAGA "movement" that frankly is quite surprising. Not very long ago even I would have said the drowning of DEI was one of MAGA's very few successes, unlikely to be reversed until after 2028 at the earliest.
The comeback, even more surprisingly, has bipartisan supp ...[text shortened]... rces are more profitable, up from 61% in 2025.[/b]
[The article continues—see link above][/quote]
The issue I saw with most dei initiatives was that they didn't work very well. It was a waste of money and time. Companies and universities would set aside millions of dollars for it, forced employees to "recognize their bias", hire dei coordinators, targeted new hire searches, and the overall diversity remained roughly the same. It turns out you can't just tell racists not to be racist and change their mind.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidDEI should really just stop at the hiring stage. Enforced "diversity training" and whatnot was overreach and not only ineffective but counterproductive. Hiring "diversity officers" was and is a waste of money.
Yes it should seem obvious. Diversity of opinion, diversity of thought and ideas and perspective makes for a more resilient and innovative company. The problem was how to achieve that?
The issue I saw with most dei initiatives was that they didn't work very well. It was a waste of money and time. Companies and universities would set aside millions of dollars for it, forc ...[text shortened]... d roughly the same. It turns out you can't just tell racists not to be racist and change their mind.
That's the discussion MAGA should have initiated, rather than screaming like a deranged two-year-old. There's no question that "wokeness" went overboard in many areas.
@Soothfast saidThe poorly-kept secret is that in some corporations, and yes, even in some government agencies, DEI never really "went away".
It didn't take long for DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) to come back, notching yet another failure of the MAGA "movement" that frankly is quite surprising. Not very long ago even I would have said the drowning of DEI was one of MAGA's very few successes, unlikely to be reversed until after 2028 at the earliest.
The comeback, even more surprisingly, has bipartisan supp ...[text shortened]... rces are more profitable, up from 61% in 2025.[/b]
[The article continues—see link above][/quote]
@Soothfast said"Woke" was hijacked by the far-right. It never meant what they said it meant. They (the powers that be) took a word from outside their culture and misappropriated it and changed its meaning. The original concepts of "woke" are still discussed in black families with children. Of course it means nothing to white families, as white kids don't have to be worried about being "used" and "abused" by "the Man". Indeed, society itself has become the "helicopter parent" of white kids. Black kids don't get that kind of societal protection. Therefore, black parents warn their kids to always look out for danger, whether it's from "the weirdo down the street" to police to trouble-making white boys who think they have "something to prove". To "try to avoid trouble", to "keep your head on a swivel", to "stay woke".
DEI should really just stop at the hiring stage. Enforced "diversity training" and whatnot was overreach and not only ineffective but counterproductive. Hiring "diversity officers" was and is a waste of money.
That's the discussion MAGA should have initiated, rather than screaming like a deranged two-year-old. There's no question that "wokeness" went overboard in many areas.
In some communities, now more than ever.
In a corporate environment, blacks still do not get promoted nearly as often as white employees. And filing EEO complaints will generally get them nowhere. Most end up tossed out before they ever make it out of company to the federal EEO offices. Except in the rare companies with forward-looking executives who understand the value of ALL their employees, and make it a point to stop harassment before it begins. And, as I said, the few government agencies who still find a use for DEI practices. DEI is not quite dead, but has been sent to hospital in most corporate environments because of the policies of this administration. Racism is STILL systemic and endemic in this country, despite what this self-serving administration tells you. And DEI is still needed in the corporate space because companies simply cannot thrive in a culture where their best employees are ignored or punished for the color of their skin.
In some companies, now more than ever.
@Earl-of-Trumps saidTell me, WTF do white people know of slavery?
Voluntary DEI is fine, since the CEO runs the private company and can do what he wants, IMO.
That is, said ceo can hire a person based on the candidate's abilities, or based on the color of his/her skin.
Forcing the CEO to hire the way the government demands you do by statute, is SLAVERY. We di nit need that,
Funny how your definition and the definition of blacks in this country have nothing in common.
@Cliff-Mashburn saidYou keep your blinders on.
Did you drop in from an alternative universe? DEI is NOT "making a comeback". Universities and private companies are running from it as fast as they can shed themselves of the constraints DEI was pushing on them,. People were being put in positions they didn't deserve and couldn't function in, and now they aren't. .......and that's a good thing.
But please, put a cap on your racism.
@Suzianne saidIgnorant racist POS!
Tell me, WTF do white people know of slavery?
Funny how your definition and the definition of blacks in this country have nothing in common.
“White slavery refers to the enslavement of European ethnic groups, particularly during the 16th to 18th centuries, with estimates suggesting that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa. This form of slavery was often overlooked in historical narratives that primarily focus on the African slave trade.
The Ohio State University
Wikipedia
Overview of White Slavery
White slavery refers to the enslavement of European ethnic groups, particularly during the 16th to 18th centuries. This form of slavery is often overshadowed by the more widely discussed African slave trade.
Historical Context
Time Period: Primarily from the 16th to 18th centuries.
Regions Affected: Most notably in North Africa, particularly along the Barbary Coast.
Estimated Numbers: Between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced into slavery during this time.
Forms of White Slavery
Types of Enslavement
Barbary Slave Trade: European Christians, especially sailors and coastal villagers, were captured by Barbary corsairs and sold into slavery.
Indentured Servitude: Many white individuals in Britain and its colonies were also subjected to indentured servitude, which, while not slavery in the traditional sense, involved significant restrictions on freedom.
Demographics
Victims: The majority of those enslaved were from Mediterranean countries, including Spain and Italy, but also included individuals from England and Ireland.
Gender Dynamics: Women and children were often targeted for domestic servitude and sexual exploitation.
Comparison with Other Forms of Slavery
AspectWhite SlaveryAfrican Slave Trade
Time Period16th to 18th centuries16th century to 19th century
Estimated Numbers1 million to 1.25 million10 to 12 million
Primary RegionsNorth Africa, MediterraneanAmericas, Caribbean
Types of LaborDomestic, agricultural, sexualPrimarily agricultural
Conclusion
The history of white slavery is complex and often overlooked. It highlights that slavery was not solely a racial issue but also involved various ethnic and religious groups throughout history. Understanding this aspect of slavery provides a more comprehensive view of its impact on European societies.”
@Mott-The-Hoople saidHere's the largest grain of truth in your rant.
Comparison with Other Forms of Slavery
AspectWhite SlaveryAfrican Slave Trade
Estimated Numbers1 million to 1.25 million10 to 12 million
1 million to 1.25 million involved in what you speak of.
This is 10% of the African slave trade, and I doubt your numbers are even close to correct. And these numbers are worldwide.
The slavery of African blacks affected FAR more people and for far longer. Racism resulting from this treatment of these people extends to even to today. They have been saddled with the stigma of slavery even up to the present day. Because it is obvious who they are. They are obvious and convenient targets, even today. White people have never been as directly tied to this history as much as blacks descended from Africans. People like you are so desperate to be connected with this history, that this administration even stands up for those who participated in Apartheid in South Africa.
Never has ONE issue affected nearly an entire race of people. And sorry, but those people aren't white. And they are STILL paying for this by being kept down by the very race who enslaved them then. But you are determined to ignore that.