The world increasingly feels like a Venn diagram, with humanity firmly wedged between 1939 and Orwell's 1984.
Every news item from the United States is more mindboggling than the last. Last week, the Federal Education Department began sacking half its workforce. The new Education Secretary, the former chief executive officer of World Wrestling Entertainment, shared social media posts praising the move, including endorsements from conservative activist groups that have called for the banning of books, curtailing teaching about LGBTQ+ experiences and restricting discussions about race in schools. President Trump has delivered on his campaign promise to close the department, which he claimed had been overtaken by “radicals, zealots and Marxists”.
But silencing dissenting views takes more than just removing public servants. The President has appointed himself chair of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in an effort to end “anti-American propaganda” by artists. And reporters at the New York Times have identified close to 200 words and phrases that have been removed from federal government websites because they related to equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI).
The executive orders preventing the use of particular words (literally labelled as “forbidden words”) represent efforts not just to change the future of America but to erase its past. In one astonishing example, references to trans people have been removed from government signage, including at the Stonewall Memorial, which commemorates activism by trans and LGBQ people. This rewriting of history underscores the intensifying culture wars.
The new administration is certainly staying on message. During the Los Angeles wildfires, the President’s right-hand man, Elon Musk, blamed the disaster not on climate change but on the fire department’s EDI programs.
It’s absurd and would be laughable did it not have such serious implications for not just Americans but the rest of the world.
EDI programs emerged from decades of social progress. Since the 1960s, unions and civil rights movements have fought for racial equality, gender equity, and LGBTQ+ rights. By the 1970s and 1980s, governments and businesses began implementing anti-discrimination measures. Over time, EDI evolved to address barriers faced by people with disabilities, First Nations communities, and multicultural populations. By the 1990s, businesses recognised the tangible benefits of diversity: increased productivity, innovation, and access to global markets.
While progress has been patchier than many of us would have liked, we have made significant progress.
Paid parental leave, flexible work arrangements, and legal protections for marginalised groups have become widespread. Programs supporting First Nations people and women in male-dominated industries have helped break down barriers.
Yet, the backlash against EDI is now in full swing, led by some of the world’s wealthiest white men. Their opposition is ironic, given that EDI has never hindered their success.
Let’s be very clear. The purpose of EDI in the workplace is to support those historically excluded by systems designed for able-bodied, white men with no external responsibilities – people who the organisational scholar Joan Acker calls ‘the ideal worker’.
But it’s not difficult to understand that while the lucky among us by virtue of being middle class or white might be that ideal worker for a while, we are all one step away from not being that person.
Even for those who start out in a privileged position, it is inevitable that at some point during our working lives, we will need support from our workplaces. All it takes is a new baby, an accident, an elderly parent, or a family illness.
And so many people start from much further behind due to unfair biases about the colour of their skin, their faith, their gender identity, or perceived ability.
The attacks on EDI are a distraction, shifting blame from the real causes of inequality, such as globalisation and exploitative labour practices.
Unemployed workers in Pittsburgh, Wollongong, or Whyalla have every right to feel disgruntled, but their Indian neighbour, a trans at their kid’s school, or an Aboriginal nurse at their local hospital are not the cause.
EDI programs exist to ensure everyone gets a fair go. Abandoning these programs helps no one.