Trump needs to completely roll back DEI
And he should do it on Day 1 of his second administration
Make someone’s day: Gift a subscription to your friends and family!
This article is part of two separate multi-part series:
The first series is giving policy reform advice to the Trump administration from the Progress-based perspective. If you have not yet done so, I would suggest:
First reading Priorities for the second Trump administration to understand the constraints that President Trump must operate within, and
Then reading the rest of the series from the “Table of Contents”.
The second series is on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI):
What’s wrong with Diversity, Equity and Inclusion? (podcast; video).
Trump needs to completely roll back DEI (this article).
On January 20th, President Donald Trump and the Republican party are taking over the federal government. For that reason, I am writing a series of articles giving Trump policy advice from a Progress-based perspective.
For those who have not heard of it, the Progress Studies movement’s goals are to:
Promote an awareness and understanding of human material progress as one of humanity’s greatest achievements.
Study its history to identify the origins and causes of progress and how it works in our daily lives.
Apply that knowledge to develop policies and practices that promote future progress.
Build coalitions to implement those policies and practices in the real world.
The Progress Studies movement is non-partisan and non-ideological. We are not associated with any political party or politician. Above all, we support:
Implementing policies that have already proven positive results and
Rolling back policies that undermine the foundations of material progress.
Having said that, the second Trump administration is perhaps a unique opportunity to get substantial Progress-based reforms implemented within two years. It may be another generation before we get a similar opportunity. It really does not matter what individual members of the Progress Studies movement think about Donald Trump as a person. Policy and the results of policy are what matter.
Before reading this article, I would strongly recommend that you read the first article in the series as it sketches out the critical constraints placed on Presidents. All the other articles in the series go into more depth on the issue identified in this article.
The policies are loosely divided up into four categories:
Policies to roll back the trend towards Soft Totalitarianism
Policies to promote long-term widely shared economic growth
Policies to make federal government policies more effective
Policies to ensure that economic growth is widely shared.
I will devote relatively little space in these articles to explain why they will likely promote future material progress because I have already done so in previous articles. My focus will be on explaining the details of exactly what executive orders and Congressional legislation should be implemented in the next 15 months (the typical time span that Presidents have to implement their agenda).
See more articles on policy advice for the second Trump Administration. The page titles without links have not yet been published, but should be published in January and February 2025.
Priorities for the second Trump administration (a must-read to understand the constraints that Trump must operate within).
Trump needs to completely roll back DEI (this article)
… (I am keeping the titles of these 8 or so articles a secret for now)
(coming later this month)
An American foreign and defense policy for the next decade (scheduled for Jan 20)
One simple reform to solve all our problems (what I would do if I were elected President).
more.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
In politics, there is a time to go fast, and there is a time to go slow. On the issue of DEI, the time to go fast is this month.
The practice of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion has been like cancer spreading throughout American institutions for the last ten years. And that is on top of Affirmative Action policies slowly growing through the previous 50 years.
A major cause of the spread of Affirmative Action and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion has been federal government legislation and executive orders. From the 1960s until about the 1990s, Affirmative Action policies designed to increase women and racial minorities were largely restricted to:
the federal government,
state governments,
federal contractors, and
universities.
Their impact on other American institutions was relatively minor. In the mid-1990s, I worked for the “Department of Multi-cultural Affairs” (DMCA) at Apple Computer in Mountain View, CA. I do not know for sure, but my guess is that Apple Computer was a federal contractor, so it had to comply with federal government-mandate affirmative action programs.
It was just another summer job for me. At first, I did not really understand what the department was about, but it became obvious that constantly nagging white male hiring managers to hire more blacks and women was a key part of the job (fortunately, not my job).
At the time, I was fairly supportive of Affirmative Action, but as I saw its inner workings, I realized how useless and potentially dangerous the practice was. I saw some pretty eye-opening “Diversity training” videos that would seem pretty over-the-top even for today (basically a young black man screaming at a bunch of mortified white employees).
After a few months, it was obvious that even the employees in the department knew what they were doing was not doing any good (even if some of the employees still believed in the goal). The white male hiring managers basically said “I am doing my best, but what can I do if there are no qualified black or female candidates?” The DMCA employees knew that they had no response, so they typically just kept records in Excel spreadsheets that documented good faith efforts with no results.
During much of this time, most Americans, and even liberals, opposed preferential treatment in favor of women and racial minorities, but most did not see it as a major problem. Republicans were terrified of trying to roll back these policies for fear of being branded “racist” in the media or political campaigns. Even the Reagan Administration, which was the most conservative administration of the second half of the 20th Century did more to expand the practice than roll it back.
This article is part of a multi-part series on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI):
What’s wrong with Diversity, Equity and Inclusion? (podcast; video).
Trump needs to completely roll back DEI (this article).
Affirmative Action morphs into DEI
Since 2010, however, Affirmative Action metastasized into far more dangerous Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies. The Obama and Biden administrations played a key role in this shift. Now overt racial and gender discrimination against white males was deemed necessary to achieve Social Justice. Ironically, this violates the Civil Rights Law of 1964, which Democrats regard as one of their crowning achievements.
By 2020, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion had contaminated virtually every institution in society, and the concepts were quickly replacing Merit as the key means by which institutions hired, fired, and promoted employees. The Biden Administration turbo-charged this trend by mandating the implementation of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion one of the most important jobs of all federal bureaucrats.
The timidity of Republicans on this issue until 2019 ensured that these discriminatory practices increased in scale and severity with each decade. It should be clear to all that overt racial and gender discrimination is the goal of these policies, and they will be mandated by future Democratic presidents.
There is only one choice: make up for the last 60 years of failed leadership in one day. Sounds impossible, right? No, not really, because these policies were largely expanded by Presidential executive orders that can easily be rescinded.
That is exactly what the Trump Administration should do on January 20, 2025.
DEI is rooted in the federal bureaucracy
The first task will be to root out DEI from the federal government. This is where the DEI practices originated and the principal means through which those practices are propagated to the rest of society. Since the 1940s the federal government has implemented a series of presidential executive orders that mandated race-based hiring, firing, and promotion practices within the:
Federal government
State governments who receive federal aid (which is essentially all of them)
Federal contractors, which are a substantial portion of the economy
Universities
Originally, these executive orders went through three distinct phases:
Dismantling Jim Crow segregation, which culminated in the:
Mandating that organizations “cast a wider net” in interviewing blacks.
Affirmative action, which increasingly focused on setting hiring goals rather than just casting a wider net.
Mandating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in as many institutions as possible.
To be clear, this was not all the outcome of presidential executive orders, but executive orders played a key role, and they are the most easily rescinded. Also important was:
Congressional legislation, particularly in major amendments to the original Voting Rights Act in 1970, 1975, 1982, 1992, and 2006. In total, these amendments extended the intent far beyond dismantling Jim Crow segregation. Ironically, every one of these amendments was under a Republican president.
Federal court rulings, particularly:
Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971), where the court struck down Intelligence tests in hiring because they created a “disparate impact” on blacks vs whites.
Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1978)
DeFunis v. Odegaard (1974), where the courts refused to consider the case
Gratz v. Bollinger and Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
Fisher v. University of Texas (2013 and 2016)
(most importantly) an autonomous civil rights bureaucracy acting outside the scope of what the sitting President intended.
You can read more in
’s book, “The Origins of Woke: Civil Rights Law, Corporate America, and the Triumph of Identity Politics” and his Substack article “Woke Institutions is Just Civil Rights Law.”The net result of all these forces has been to transform much-needed regulations to dismantle Jim Crow segregation into its opposite:
Mandating racial and gender discrimination and
Censorship of anyone who opposes these practices.
Ironically, Congressmen who voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 made very explicit that:
They opposed racial quotas
There was absolutely nothing in the legislation that required it.
They were correct, but unfortunately, an aggressive civil rights bureaucracy and a complacent Supreme Court and Presidents turned the Civil Rights Act of 1964 into its opposite.
Goals for the Trump Administration
A key goal for the Trump administration should be to amend all previous race and civil rights-related executive orders to:
Make clear that intentional racial and gender discrimination is a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
DEI policies and practices are clear evidence of intentional institutional racial and gender discrimination, and the full power of the federal government will be used against those practices.
“Disparate impact” is not evidence of intentional racial or gender discrimination. It is the expected outcome of Merit-based hiring, firing, and promotions. As long as an organization can make a plausible claim that their hiring, firing and promotions are based on Merit, then it is not consider discrimination.
Amend Presidential Executive Orders
On Day 1, the President should amend the following executive orders by making it clear that DEI practices in hiring, firing, promotions, and training violate federal law, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and affirm that Merit must be the basis for such actions even if they lead to disparate impact:
Executive Order 8802 from 1941, where the FDR administration outlawed discrimination based on race, color, creed, and national origin in the federal government and defense industries.
Executive Order 9346 from 1943 where the FDR administration extended the above order to include government contractors.
Executive Order 10925 from 1961 where the JFK administration mandated government contractors to “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color or national origin.”
Executive Order 11246 from 1965, where the Johnson administration mandated minority hiring in federal contractors’ recruitment, hiring, training, and other employment practices.
Executive Order 11375 from 1965, where the Johnson administration extended Executive Order 11246 to women.
Executive Order 11478 from 1969, where the Nixon administration extended affirmative action in federal agencies.
Executive Order 11590 from 1971, where the Nixon administration extended affirmative action to the US Postal Service.
Executive Order 13087 from 1998, where the Clinton administration added sexual orientation to the list of classes covered.
Repeal Executive Orders
Starting during the Obama administration, presidents went beyond compelling affirmation action. They moved into explicitly mandating DEI policy and practices. All of these executive orders should be repealed.
On Day 1, the President should repeal the following executive orders:
Executive Order 13583 from 2011, where the Obama Administration mandated diversity training.
Executive Order 13665 from 2014, where the Obama Administration amended Executive Order 11246 to require equal pay for women among federal contractors and subcontractors.
Executive Order 13672 from 2014, where the Obama Administration amended Executive Order 11246, to prohibit federal contractors and subcontractors from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
Executive Orders 13985 and 14035 from 2021, where the Biden Administration mandated DEI programs.
Implement Executive Orders
Amending and repealing existing executive orders is not enough. The Trump administration should take advantage of this opportunity to completely dismantle DEI policies and practices in:
The federal government
Federal contractors
Organizations that receive federal money
Accreditation agencies which typically force other institutions to adopt DEI policies. The federal and state governments typically out-source regulation to supposedly independent non-profit organizations as they are experts in their field. Over the last few decades, these accreditation agencies have played a key role in mandating DEI and ESG.
On Day 1, the President should implement the following executive orders:
Every job title and department with the words “Diversity,” “Equity,” or “Inclusion” in their title at any time during 2021-24 should be abolished immediately. The personnel in those positions must be fired immediately. The personnel may not be reassigned to another position within the federal bureaucracy.
All federal training or organizational practices that attempt to categorize employees or citizens by race, gender, ethnicity, religion, age, or label employees based upon those criteria must be abolished immediately.
Any promotions, bonuses, or financial rewards to managers within the federal government for preferentially hiring, firing, or promoting individuals from certain demographic groups must be abolished immediately.
All federal contractors that do not implement the same rules listed above within their organization by the end of 2025 will lose their contracts with the federal government.
All accreditation organizations that require any of the above for an organization to be certified will lose their federal accreditation status by the end of 2025.
All organizations, including state governments, corporations, non-profits, or universities, that receive federal government funding directly or indirectly will lose their federal funding by the end of 2025 if they continue the practices listed above.
Note: this last one may require Congressional legislation rather than an executive order. The other actions can likely be accomplished via a Presidential order because they are basically rescinding previous executive orders that were never overturned by the Supreme Court.
Department of Justice lawsuits
In addition, the President should direct the federal Department of Justice to sue large corporations and other organizations under the following guidelines:
Any corporate policies that intentionally hire, fire, or promote based on race, gender, ethnicity, religion, age, etc. violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The supposed quest for Diversity, Equality, Inclusion, or Social Justice does not override the illegal nature of this act.
Any training or organizational practices that attempt to categorize or label employees based upon those criteria are also illegal. These policies encourage discrimination in the workplace, which violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Any promotions, bonuses, or financial rewards to managers for preferentially hiring, firing, or promoting individuals from certain demographic groups violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Because the concepts of Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion were deliberately designed to promote discrimination, they are prima facie evidence that the organization deliberately intends to violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and has done so in the past. The policies will no longer be regarded as prima facie evidence of avoiding discrimination.
Any organization that eliminates these practices by the end of 2025 will not be sued by the DOJ under these guidelines. In other words, all corporations have one year to completely roll back these practices or they will face a lawsuit from the federal DOJ.
In other words, give corporations and other organizations one year to completely roll back DEI practices in hiring, firing, promotions and training or face a law suit by the federal Department of Justice.
Will all this eliminate DEI?
These executive orders will not completely eliminate DEI practices in the United States, but they will seriously weaken them at a time when the moral legitimacy of these practices is seriously compromised. Any delay in the counter-offensive will only enable DEI advocates to lay low within the bureaucracy to resurface during more promising times.
These executive orders will eliminate DEI from:
The federal government
Federal contractors
Organizations that receive federal money
Accreditation agencies which typically force other institutions to adopt DEI policies.
These executive orders will also:
Encourage 25 Red states with massive Republican majorities in the state legislatures to eliminate DEI from (in many cases, the process has already started):
State bureaucracies
Public universities
K-12 public school
State-level accreditation agencies which typically force other institutions to adopt DEI policies.
State-level judicial system
Give political cover for other major corporations and non-profits to eliminate DEI practices by allowing them to say “We hate to do this, but Trump forced us to…”
In this way, the cowardly executives who allowed DEI policies and practices to be implemented between 2014 and 2024 to avoid antagonizing Woke activists will have the courage to do what they likely wanted to do in the first place.
But what about the rest of American society?
The executive orders that I describe above will not eliminate DEI practices from:
Blue state governments and some Purple states.
A minority corporation and non-profits.
Should the federal government not require those institutions to roll back DEI as well? No, I do not think so, for two reasons.
First, one of the trends that got us into this problem was the federal government compelling private organizations to implement affirmative action and DEI. Rolling back Jim Crow segregation was essential in the 1960s. At the time, blacks could simply not participate in civil society due to state government policies and prevailing racism within white southerners. The federal government had to act to ensure that blacks could participate in society with equal legal and voting rights.
The federal government should not expand its power to fight another problem because the Left can later use that power to implement a far more tyrannical DEI on steroids. Even if they do not do so, we need to roll back the reach of the federal government in civil society. I believe that the best means to do so is to reembrace the concept of Federalism and transfer the vast majority of domestic programs to the state governments.
One simple reform to solve all our problems
Make someone’s day: Gift a subscription to your friends and family!
The second reason is that DEI is highly dysfunctional world view. Like American foreign policy in the Cold War, DEI should be contained just like Communism, and then let its own internal contradictions destroy itself. A DEI that slowly kills itself in spectacular ways will serve the anti-DEI cause far better than a complete abolition. Otherwise, the myth of good DEI destroyed by the evil Trump administration will live on for generations.
Fortunately, DEI is a highly dysfunctional world view that see Merit-based decision-making as a system of Oppression. As long as the majority of the economy and government is completely free of DEI practices, then those organizations will be at a huge competitive disadvantage compared to their competition.
Organizations ruled by DEI principles will:
Have a very hard time recruiting and holding the best talent
Be rocked by constant scandals caused by idiotic and self-serving behavior of DEI activists who masquerade as managers and executives.
Provide a vivid and on-going demonstration of how profoundly dysfunctional DEI is.
I believe that it is actually better that some hard-core DEI institutions remain active (as long as they are in competition with non-DEI dominated institutions). In the end, the only way that people learn what works and what does not is when those ideologies are implemented and we can all see the results.
A complete elimination of DEI is probably not only unconstitutional but also serves the Woke Left. Woke ideology cannot survive in a transparent competitive environment. The Woke need a constant flow of revenues from the government to maintain themselves. Once the flow of money stops, then many of those who were pretending to be Woke will go off and find other methods.
What will be left behind will be hard core Woke who are primarily driven by Cluster B personality disorders. Given their inability to perceive material reality in a rational way, they are guaranteed to continually and spectacularly discredit themselves in the eyes of the rest of the public.
Let the Woke sabotage themselves.
See also my other articles and podcasts on Ideology:
Radical ideologies feast on mental disorders (this article)
Why Ideologies Threaten Progress (Part 1 of 3-part podcast series)
Why ideologies fail (podcast)
Descent into a man-made Hell: Understanding modern Totalitarianism
You might also be interested in reading my “From Poverty to Progress” book series:
This topic is near and dear, given my multiracial family. A few months ago I took my son to the library. One of the children's books on display looked interesting, so I picked it up. It was ostensibly a book on racism.
Yet within the first few pages, the book made it clear, in no uncertain terms, that race was a creation of white people and that all racism was the fault of the white race alone. This is troubling, to teach children that one race is the root of all problems, the root of all historical racism.
This book wasn't aiming to help children understand the errors of racism. It wasn't aimed at healing the sins of the past, but instead at reopening a wound, and pitting all races against one. It sought to reinforce the divisions of skin pigment, not move past them.
As a child, I was taught that race does not define you. Very simply, you should be judged by your character and your merit, not by something as shallow as skin pigment.
Yet somewhere along the line, this became a justification for banning "gifted programs," force-hiring, based largely on skin color, and which later expanded to include many new minority groups.
The result is not diversity, it's conformity. People are employed because while they look different in the end, they think similarly. DEI initiatives, like many government programs, became the very thing they were trying to eliminate.
The contradictions in this ideology are irreconcilable, especially for a family like mine which is forced to straddle both worlds where these contractions are laid bare.
We need to get your ideas to someone in the Trump inner circle.
I agree that for most bureaucracies and businesses that a war on DEI will have everyone running for cover. The left can and will try to roll it back, but large companies will get tired of the war and pursue a more reasonable middle ground of no discrimination (rather than discrimination in favor of leftists groups).