Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Dismantling DEI Reinforces America's Original Sin

"Diversity," "Equity" and "Inclusion" on wood blocks

"Diversity," "Equity" and "Inclusion" on wood blocks

Nora Carol Photography/Getty Images

When President Trump signed Executive Order 14151, titled "Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing," on January 20, 2025, he didn't just eliminate diversity initiatives from federal agencies—he set in motion a sweeping transformation of the federal workforce.

The order, which terminated all Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion-related activities across federal departments and rescinded existing affirmative action guidelines, sent shockwaves through government institutions and contractors alike. Universities began scrubbing their websites and canceling diversity events, while federal agencies scrambled to dismantle programs built over decades. The order's immediate impact was so concerning that by February 21, 2025, a federal judge issued a nationwide preliminary injunction, temporarily halting its implementation. But beyond the immediate practical implications, the executive order did something far more insidious: it codified a dangerous myth that America has somehow transcended its need to actively pursue equality.


The speed with which corporate America fell in line tells its own story. Major companies, including Walmart, Lowe's, and Meta, have announced rollbacks of their diversity commitments, while others have quietly removed representation goals and inclusive language from their websites. This retreat isn't happening in a vacuum—it's occurring when research demonstrates the tangible benefits of diverse workplaces.

Arguments against DEI programs are fundamentally grounded in the idea that in a meritocratic society, the most qualified person ought to surely get the job, irrespective of various social constructions. Such seductive logic ignores how "merit" is shaped by centuries of systemic advantages and disadvantages. Far too often, we foolishly pretend that everyone starts from the same starting line, thus perpetuating inequality under the guise of objectivity. Consider the implications of our nation’s retreat from equity initiatives. Studies have shown that DEI programs improve organizational performance and innovation when properly implemented. By dismantling these programs, we're not just affecting individual opportunities but compromising our national potential.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Trump's administrative actions represent a gross misapprehension of the social contract. The contract, enshrined in our founding documents but perpetually unfulfilled, promises equal opportunity, not just in theory but in practice. DEI initiatives aren't about giving anyone an unfair advantage—they're about acknowledging and addressing the unfair advantages that have shaped American society since its inception.

Mounting political and legal attacks have turned DEI from a corporate rallying cry to a politically toxic acronym, ushering the erasure of progress made. This backsliding isn't just about politics, it is an embodiment of politics.

Critics of DEI often point to individual success stories as proof that the system works fine as is. But these exceptions prove the rule—they stand out precisely because they're exceptional. Moreover, they usually stand out because they are acceptable or appreciable in some way. A meritocratic society wouldn't produce such stark disparities in outcomes across racial, gender, ethnocultural, and socioeconomic lines. The dismantling of DEI programs undermines the very foundation of a democratic society. When we abandon the active pursuit of equity, we tacitly accept that some Americans will face artificial barriers to success, simply because of who they are. This isn't just morally wrong; it's economically self-defeating.

Ironically, authentic meritocracy requires precisely what the anti-DEI movement opposes. A requisite of meritocracy is an active intervention to level playing fields tilted by centuries of discrimination. Abolishing DEI interventions does not result in some natural state of fairness. On the contrary, we’re reinforcing existing power structures under a disingenuous assumption of neutrality.

Like many, I am left to question, what kind of society are we choosing to be? One that acknowledges its imperfections and actively works to address them? Or one that pretends centuries of systemic inequity can be overcome simply by declaring that merit is all that matters?

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson is a spiritual entrepreneur, author, and scholar-practitioner whose leadership and strategies around social and racial justice issues are nationally recognized and applied.

Read More

The Power of the Classroom: Why Diversity in Higher Education Matters

A professor assisting students.

Pexels, Andy Barbour

The Power of the Classroom: Why Diversity in Higher Education Matters

After the first class of the semester, a student waited patiently as I answered questions. When he finally stepped forward, he introduced himself, shook my hand, and shared that his high school teacher had advised him to do so. He was the first in his family to attend college, and his family had traveled across the state from their rural town to drop him off. My class was his first college class, and I was his first college professor. His sincerity moved me—I felt the weight of the moment and the privilege of being part of his journey.

A university education is more than lectures and exams; it’s a gateway to opportunity, transformation, and belonging. Diversity in the classroom isn’t just important—it’s essential. As a faculty member who studies leadership in post-secondary education, I see both the challenges and opportunities within higher education. The lack of diversity at top institutions impacts not just who enters our classrooms, but how students experience their education. Representation matters, and universities must reflect the diverse realities of the students they serve.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion
five human hands on brown surface
Photo by Clay Banks on Unsplash

Project 2025: Diversity, Equity, Inclusion

Last spring and summer,The Fulcrum published a 30-part series onProject 2025. Now that Donald Trump’s second term has commenced, The Fulcrum has started Part 2 of the series.

No one should be surprised by Donald Trump's attempt to dismantle Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs, given his many promises during his campaign for President to do just that.

Keep ReadingShow less
Liberation Through the Womanist Perspective

Two people reaching out for another.

Getty Images, Hiraman

Liberation Through the Womanist Perspective

Women's History Month finds us at a critical crossroads. Nearly three-quarters of the world's population faces increasing backlash against women's rights, while technological disruption and economic uncertainty threaten to deepen existing inequalities. Yet, within this challenging landscape lies an opportunity to radically reimagine our approach to gender equality through a womanist theological lens.

Womanist, a methodological approach centering on the experiences and perspectives of Black women, offers profound insights for diverse girls and women everywhere. It teaches us that liberation cannot be compartmentalized—the struggle for gender equality must be understood within the broader matrix of racial justice, economic empowerment, and spiritual transformation.

Keep ReadingShow less
On the Basis of Merit: The Only Fair Way Forward

An abstract illustration of people of different genders, nationalities, and races.

Getty Images, Yevhen Borysov

On the Basis of Merit: The Only Fair Way Forward

Merit must be the driving force in business leadership in this country today—in hiring, retention, promotion, and assignment of duties. In order for the American economy and culture to be successful, rewards must be on the basis of merit.

The presumption that diversity, equity, and inclusion are at odds with merit is not only incorrect, it is revolting. Any bifurcation of the U.S. workforce into “DEI-hires” and “merit-hires” is divisive and must be challenged, especially when the DEI label is used to refer to anyone except white men. Merit is distributed across all groups and not the purview of any one group.

Keep ReadingShow less