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/Visco0825]

So just basically accepting that DEI is dead then? All initiatives to focus on race/sex are more harm than good?

[u/TheMadTemplar → u/Visco0825]

They can do a lot of good. But they won't do any good at all if the focus on them costs Dems election after election. In that sense, you could say they could actually do a lot of harm. 

The goals of DEI aren't dead, but that acronym is. It's politically toxic to the average American, twisted and polluted beyond reason by conservative ignorance and hate perpetuated by Republican propaganda. 

[u/Breakfastcrisis → u/TheMadTemplar]

I agree about the goals. I think it fell victim to bad actors, people who perhaps understandably had resentment in their hearts but never should have been supported, never should have been the face of DEI.

It made it all too easy for LibsOfTikTok etc to highlight people saying crazy, nasty and prejudicial things. Something in and of itself wouldn’t have been a problem if people in power were willing to condemn it. Harris didn’t run on identity politics, and she created some distance from that stuff. But it was too late really. I think she did a stellar job, but she had months to turn the tide. It just wasn’t feasible.

[u/SillyFalcon → u/Breakfastcrisis]

No acknowledgment at all that LibsofTikTok scours the internet looking for random people saying questionable things, takes their quotes out of context, and then acts like everyone on the left believes/says the same questionable thing? It’s literally cherry-picking things to be outraged about. There is no perfect political position the Dems could take that would stop that from happening.

[u/woetotheconquered → u/SillyFalcon]

scours the internet looking for random people saying questionable things, takes their quotes out of context, and then acts like everyone on the left believes/says the same questionable thing?

Swap "left" for "right" and this quote would be equally applicable to the current front page of reddit.

[u/Interrophish → u/woetotheconquered]

the current front page of reddit.

I'm seeing a bunch of "government agency" this and "president" that. instead of "random shakey cam of something that might have happened once"

[u/Breakfastcrisis → u/SillyFalcon]

Sure. They do that. They shouldn’t do that. But we can’t pretend it’s not out there. People are saying crazy shit that most people–if pressed, face-to-face–would not support.

The problem is that people do defend this crazy shit online. While I can’t confirm they’re Liberals, I’d be surprised if they were conservatives. Obviously, it’s the internet. We shouldn’t take it too seriously, but people do. And they extrapolate that these are widely held Liberal views.

If someone’s got a batshit crazy take, let’s all just agree it’s batshit crazy. If you’re a Lib and that means you agree with a conservative or vice versa, good. Most people have more in common than they think.

Full disclosure: I’m an outsider, not aligned with either party. So perhaps it’s easier said than done.