Recently, I had a chat with a friend from Los Angeles. She’s quite liberal and voted for Kamala Harris last fall. But as our conversation unfolded, I found we agreed on something that aligns with a segment of the MAGA crowd: She was clearly upset with what she believes the “diversity, equity, and inclusion” initiatives are doing to the entertainment industry.
She pointed out that instead of focusing on creating high-quality art, publishers and studios are pressuring creators to highlight content that features protected classes, such as minorities or disabled characters. And when creators try to include these perspectives without firsthand experience, they’re often accused of “cultural appropriation.”
This puts everyone but Hollywood’s biggest stars and reliable box-office draws in a no-win situation.
Adding to this, racial preferences aren’t just affecting fictional characters but the artists and actors as well. Back in 2020, for instance, CBS made it a point to ensure that their writers’ rooms were composed of at least 40% individuals who were Black, Indigenous, or people of color.
While these policies are well-meaning, they often leave people feeling like mere statistics in a diversity checklist. And truth be told, it’s not as if these diversity pushes have made our movies more entertaining. More often than not, mandates for diversity and “woke” agendas tend to erode the passion, originality, and quality in creative arts.
But it’s not just the entertainment world feeling the impact. These diversity initiatives have extended well beyond Hollywood, permeating corporate America, academia, and several other spheres of American life.
This bounces us into the realm of politics.
Among the flurry of executive orders and initiatives President Trump has unleashed since his return to the White House, several have been controversial, and some likely cross constitutional lines. Yet, his decision to dismantle diversity programs in the federal government stands out. It might signal the beginning of the end for such initiatives in the private sector too.
Many people do support the ideals of diversity, inclusion, and equality. Yet, the concept of “equity,” with its focus on equal outcomes rather than equal opportunities, stirs more debate. For countless Americans enduring intense cultural expectations or participating in constant “training” sessions that feel more like ideological drills, Trump’s resistance to these imposing norms is a bit of a relief.
On college campuses, these diversity programs often cast the Founding Fathers in a negative light or criticize European art as oppressive. As Nicholas Confessore of the New York Times reported last year, the University of Michigan’s largest department even distributes materials that identify traits like the “worship of the written word” as elements of a “white supremacy culture.”
Some might be more forgiving of these initiatives if they actually delivered results. Yet, they often miss their intended mark. Take the Michigan case, for example. After these programs were implemented, a survey showed students were interacting less with individuals from different races or religions, which is precisely the kind of engagement these DEI programs should be promoting.
The pushback isn’t just coming from disgruntled students or older workers resistant to changing times. As my friend in Los Angeles can testify, many more Americans feel alienated by its reach, even those who wouldn’t usually agree with Trump’s followers.
Why? Because its focus on race contradicts a core American value: the vision championed by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. of a colorblind society.
So, it’s not shocking that identity politics and political correctness have sparked a significant backlash. Increasingly, young people and racial minorities — groups that generally lean liberal — are surprisingly casting their votes for Republicans.
Instead of truly fostering inclusion, diversity programs have, somewhat unintentionally, radicalized or “red-pilled” many previous liberal Americans, leaving them feeling resentful and disappointed.
For those of us who are intently following politics and are deeply invested in maintaining liberal democracy, turning to Trump as a savior might seem outlandish, considering his impeachments, numerous felony charges, and his role in the Capitol incident.
However, for the average American, these high-level political debates can seem irrelevant. To borrow a thought from George Orwell, the metaphorical boot is not MAGA but the DEI administrators and HR managers people face regularly.
Despite the justified criticism Trump receives for his authoritative tendencies, it’s interesting that one of his more impactful actions has been easing the strict hold of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” on American life. Should he succeed, he may ironically dissolve one of the clearest reasons for his own political allure. In this mission, I find myself hoping for his success.
Matt K. Lewis is the author behind “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”
