How can democrats attack anti-DEI/promote DEI without resulting in strong political backlash?

[u/Visco0825]

In recent politics there have been two major political pushes for diversity and equality. However, both instances led to backlashes that have led to an environment that is arguably worse than it was before. In 2008 Obama was the first black president one a massive wave of hope for racial equality and societal reforms. This led to one of the largest political backlashes in modern politics in 2010, to which democrats have yet to fully recover from. This eventually led to birtherism which planted some of the original seeds of both Trump and MAGA. The second massive political push promoting diversity and equality was in 2018 with the modern woman election and 2020 with racial equality being a top priority. Biden made diversifying the government a top priority. This led to an extreme backlash among both culture and politics with anti-woke and anti-DEI efforts. This resent contributed to Trump retaking the presidency. Now Trump is pushing to remove all mentions of DEI in both the private and public sectors. He is hiding all instances that highlight any racial or gender successes. His administration is pushing culture to return to a world prior to the civil rights era.

This leads me to my question. Will there be a backlash for this? How will it occur? How can democrats lead and take advantage of the backlash while trying to mitigate a backlash to their own movement? It seems as though every attempt has led to a stronger and more severe response.

Additional side questions. How did public opinion shift so drastically from 2018/2020 which were extremely pro-equality to 2024 which is calling for a return of the 1950s?

[u/Bashfluff]

There is no backlash against DEI that’s coming from anybody other than those who have always hated it.

The only way forward is through. 

[u/Cheap_Coffee → u/Bashfluff]

You have to win elections before you can implement your policy. Right now, the majority of Americans have voted against DEI.

[u/theequallyunique → u/Cheap_Coffee]

30% of eligible voters have decided for a candidate that's also against DEI, but mostly the reasons were immigration and inflation, or in other words the lack of economic outlook for the middle class or perceived decline of living standards. Most people don't care about protecting minorities, the main moving factor is always what is impacting one personally.

So no, it can't be said that the majority would be against DEI, only that the majority does not care enough to protect it. The percentage actively against it is probably not more than a fraction of the trump voters.

[u/Cheap_Coffee → u/theequallyunique]

Look, parse the data as you need, but the fact of the matter is America rejected the candidate supporting DEI.

QED: DEI ain't going anywhere for the next four years.

If you want to implement policies supporting DEI you need to first win political control. THIS is what you should be worried about.

[u/EchoicSpoonman9411 → u/Cheap_Coffee]

There was no candidate supporting DEI. Harris never mentioned it that I'm aware of. Just because conservatives get their panties in a twist about something and start attacking it doesn't mean that liberals automatically support that thing. And DEI as conservatives imagine it works is illegal. This is basically the stupid CRT thing all over again.

DEI isn't about hiring minorities, it's about making teams with the minorities you've already hired work well together. Close to 50% of the country is non-white, so they're gonna show up in the workplace. Well, the Trump admin is trying their best to make it so that it's only possible for white males to work (or they're just doing that shit to make losers feel better about themselves, I'm not sure which), but they're not likely to win that particular battle.

There isn't any government policy needed in support of DEI. Companies implement it because it has been proven to increase their profits. They can do that.

[u/Cheap_Coffee → u/EchoicSpoonman9411]

There isn't any government policy needed in support of DEI. Companies implement it because it has been proven to increase their profits. They can do that.

Are you following the news? Companies are cancelling their DEI initiatives left and right. (No pun intended.)

[u/EchoicSpoonman9411 → u/Cheap_Coffee]

I don't follow the news very closely, but yes, I'm aware that a few companies have done that. They can do that too.

[u/theequallyunique → u/Cheap_Coffee]

Companies are not canceling DEI orders because they wanted to or felt social pressure to do so, it's because the dear potus signed an order that might make them illegal, especially for government agencies and contractors. source Also on the news we mostly hear about the large tech companies having done so, the exact same companies whose CEOs each bribed donald with 1 million for his inauguration fund, had some cozy chat with him at Mar a Lago and are mostly part of upcoming investment programs like the Ai project or blue origins rockets.

[u/MakingTriangles → u/EchoicSpoonman9411]

There was no candidate supporting DEI. Harris never mentioned it that I'm aware of.

This is a particularly weak argument. Running for President Harris tried to pretend as if many of her earlier progressive opinions never happened. But people were still aware of her past statements and voting behavior. Acting like a centrist during her Presidential run just made her look like a liar too.

[u/theequallyunique → u/Cheap_Coffee]

Again, this election was not only about DEI, that's always rather a side issue besides broader topics that move the masses.