5/19/23

DEI Escape

DEI Escape

Graffiti rendered by DALL-E art generator.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion—DEI—was something that I filed away mentally as another superficial intellectual fashion statement that was nearly meaningless. To the extent there was any meaning to it, that was driven out once it became another blunt battle axe to be wielded on the political battlefield of our day. It probably meant as near its opposite if it had any meaning at all. It probably meant uniformity, greater wealth and power for the wealthy and powerful, and admittance mainly to an exclusive subset of the population.

I don’t think I’m alone in believing that politics is mostly a cynical enterprise, with dramatic cover stories used for the adversarial teams to hide their main objective, which is merely to jockey for political power. Thus, DEI is an instrument of rhetorical combat, not something to be taken all too seriously. As such, it is used predominantly to hurt people’s feelings, not to soothe them.

Our friend Optimum reports that the whole DEI idea has recently been reformulated to make it more inclusive by permitting everyone to confess their own flaws. The new element in this case is that of belonging: we want to be able to feel good about ourselves, and it helps if we can all recognize we struggle with similar shortcomings.

The nonpartisan nonprofit Business for America recently interviewed more than two dozen executives at 18 companies and found this to be a common theme. “The way they’ve rolled out DEI has exacerbated divides even while addressing valuable issues,” said Sarah Bonk, BFA’s founder and CEO. “It has created some hostility, resentment.”

It’s why companies such as Woodward are now hiring consultants who specialize in “belonging” and “bridge building.” They are coming to the aid of executives who fear that national divisions are penetrating the workplace, threatening to drive a wedge between colleagues and making everyone feel anxious and defensive.

Once DEI became part of the culture war, companies had some difficulty balancing the demands of shareholder advocates and the needs of employees who didn’t necessarily want to wear their politics on their sleeves at the workplace.

Totalitarian regimes work by keeping their people preoccupied in demonstrating their allegiance to the rulers’ ideology. What the ideology means in the abstract or concretely isn’t important. Citizens are expected to say the right things, whether or not they behave appropriately or actually believe in what they say. Our political tribes increasingly resemble totalitarian regimes, requiring their members to demonstrate ideological adherence at any given moment. Our current politics is about excluding those who fail to conform with that, to eliminate them from gaining access to political power.

That sort of fight is not what interests people who don’t want to participate in politics, people who just want to live their lives and pursue their non-political careers. It would be better for companies and the economy in general if the political fights were set aside. That should allow people to feel like they belong.