The Downfall of DEI: Exposing the Harmful Agenda
In the wake of George Floyd’s death in 2020, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives became a dominant force in corporate America. Companies pledged billions to advance these so-called social justice programs, hosted divisive figures like Robin DiAngelo and Ibram X. Kendi, and rolled out sweeping policies designed to enforce ideological conformity under the guise of combating systemic racism. However, as time has passed, DEI has increasingly been exposed for its ineffectiveness, divisiveness, and harmful impacts on both workplaces and society.
The National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC) has been at the forefront of investigating and exposing the harmful consequences of DEI, as well as its close cousin, Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) initiatives. NLPC has shed light on the ideological agenda underlying these programs, revealing how they often prioritize activism over merit and create division instead of unity.
The Rise and Decline of DEI
Initially, corporations embraced DEI with zeal, embedding it into hiring practices, promotions, and workplace cultures. Fortune 100 companies reported increases in women and ethnic minorities in leadership roles, but at what cost? According to critics, these policies frequently sidelined meritocracy in favor of identity politics, creating resentment and backlash among employees.
The economic challenges of 2023, combined with the Supreme Court’s ruling against affirmative action in higher education, led to significant corporate cutbacks. Companies like Meta, Home Depot, and Lyft reduced DEI budgets and staff by over 50%. Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter) cut its DEI team from 30 employees to just two. Even Wall Street began to retreat from DEI’s grip, with Goldman Sachs opening its “Possibilities Summit” for Black college students to include White participants and Bank of America broadening its initiatives to cover all employees.
Critics like Dr. Peter Boghossian argue that DEI fosters ideological conformity rather than true diversity. Boghossian’s assessment of DEI’s components is damning: diversity means “people who look different but think alike,” equity enforces “current discrimination to address past discrimination,” and inclusion restricts free speech.
NLPC’s Investigations Expose DEI
DEI programs have faced growing scrutiny for their failures. At the University of Michigan, despite a $250 million investment in DEI, surveys revealed a worsening campus climate and declining sense of belonging among students and faculty. Meanwhile, companies like Microsoft quietly rebranded their efforts, dropping equity from their framework and emphasizing a narrower focus on diversity and inclusion.
The NLPC has played a critical role in uncovering the harm caused by DEI and ESG initiatives. One high-profile example is the NLPC’s work exposing the partnership between Oreo and PFLAG, which promoted transgender ideology to children under the guise of inclusivity. This revelation sparked widespread public outrage and highlighted the dangers of corporations adopting activist agendas that undermine parental rights and societal norms.
Former DEI director Dr. Tabia Lee’s testimony further reveals how DEI frameworks marginalize dissenting voices and foster antisemitism. Lee faced backlash for promoting awareness of campus antisemitism, with colleagues dismissing her concerns by labeling Jewish people as “white oppressors.” A federal lawsuit against Harvard further illustrates how DEI selectively enforces anti-discrimination policies, ignoring antisemitism while aggressively protecting other groups.
The Future of DEI: A Necessary Reassessment
As NLPC continues to investigate and expose the failures of DEI, it is clear that many corporations are rethinking their approach. John Deere recently announced a shift to focus on professional development and recruitment while discontinuing support for external social or cultural events. The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) dropped equity from its framework, citing the polarizing effects of DEI programs.
Chloe Valdary, founder of the pro-human “Theory of Enchantment” training, argues that DEI must fundamentally shift to foster genuine belonging and inclusion without ideological coercion. Meanwhile, Dr. Lee contends that DEI in its current form is irredeemable, as it prioritizes activism over organizational and societal well-being.
Conclusion
DEI’s decline signals a broader societal reckoning with identity politics and ideological overreach. Thanks to our efforts and the work others are doing in this area, the harmful impacts of DEI and ESG initiatives are being exposed, forcing corporations to reconsider their priorities. The movement’s future depends on whether it can adapt to focus on merit and true inclusion, rather than divisive and coercive practices. As NLPC’s investigations have shown, the time has come to reject ideological conformity and embrace policies that unite rather than divide.
