THE WASHINGTON POST: Diversity is not the threat Donald Trump says it is. That’s just ‘common sense’

When Alicia Keys stepped onstage at the Grammys to accept the Dr. Dre Global Impact Award, she delivered a speech that cut to the heart of the upheaval that President Donald Trump has injected into the federal government and the country’s cultural life. Standing there under the lights done up in a bejeweled Dolce & Gabbana alta moda corset and headpiece, she addressed the conservative assault on diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

“This is not the time to shut down the diversity of voices. We’ve seen on this stage talented, hardworking people from different backgrounds with different points of view, and it changes the game,” Keys said Sunday night in Los Angeles. “DEI is not a threat; it’s a gift. And the more voices, the more powerful the sound.”

Women won big on Grammy night. Chappell Roan, with her drag aesthetics, was honoured as best new artist and Doechii became only the third woman to win for best rap album. Beyoncé finally won a best-album award for “Cowboy Carter,” her blockbuster foray into country music that was ignored by the Country Music Association. These winners were diversity writ large, and the sweep of it was powerful. Which is, of course, a problem.

How do you muffle the sound of glass ceilings shattering and the ground breaking? How do you turn down the volume of a country album celebrating the music’s Black roots and a queer Midwestern princess singing about living authentically? How do you drown out the sound of a nation applauding it all?

Trump was sent to Washington to silence the voices of change, to narrow the pipelines of progress, to make sure the unwritten rules remain unbroken. He’s launched an assault not only at the country’s core - its brain trust, its defense mechanisms, its human infrastructure - but also at its soul. He’s ordered the razing of institutions and the removal of civil servants whose only transgression was to function as dutiful intermediaries between citizens and their government.

Pause for a moment to consider these fine folks - not just the men and women of agencies whose jobs are lionised by Hollywood thrillers, but the nine-to-five workers. They’re the ones who translate bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo into some semblance of plain language so that citizens can be on their way to filling out the right forms, getting their due process, and accessing the benefits, the information or the relief that they deserve.

These workers are the rank and file, the foot soldiers, the bureaucrats … the zoologists, the engineers, the park rangers. And while some of them have doubtlessly been the source of citizens’ frustrations, they are also godsends when some knotty problem is finally untangled.

But the federal workforce demographics sit firmly in Trump’s sour spot. While federal workers skew slightly more male than the overall civilian workforce, they’re also a bit older. There are more Black workers. And federal employees are more educated as a whole and as a result are paid relatively well. But a nurse supporting the nation’s veterans or a manager working to make sure a child with a disability has equal access to public education is not getting paid like a tech titan. They aren’t billionaires.

So they are disposable. Trump’s favourite billionaire, Elon Musk, tech entrepreneur and enemy of diversity, has been unleashed to terrorise the federal workforce, hack away at federal agencies and upend anything else in Washington that meets with his displeasure. His mandate is based solely on the strength of his bank account rather than expertise.

In other words, the rich White guy knows best because he is a rich White guy. Those who rail against unelected elites who hold sway over the culture seem to have little problem with this unelected one-percenter lording over the government. Some Americans just can’t stomach intellectual elitism, but economic elitism is an entirely different story.

Not that long ago, diversity, equity and inclusion was a tool for creating a more equitable and welcoming environment in public and private institutions. DEI was meant to afford equal opportunity for the marginalised or overlooked and to make sure talent was allowed to flourish.

In Trump’s Washington, DEI is the new shorthand for the myriad slurs that have been used to label women and members of various minority groups as unqualified. For some people, calling someone a DEI hire is simply the 21st-century version of labelling them an affirmative action hire, which was the 20th-century version of dismissing them with the n-word, which has always been a way to say: You don’t belong here.

For the president, in the immediate aftermath of the collision of a passenger plane and a military helicopter in Washington, DEI was the problem, not technology or miscommunication or mistake or something that no one can even fathom as of yet. It’s simply a matter of “common sense,” said the DEI-hating president.

Politicians and activists have been working hard to purge the country of DEI. They will tell you that this cleansing of the nation is to create a colour-blind society, a true meritocracy in which the best and brightest rise no matter their race or gender. But they also make it plain that in their assessment, an America that aims to celebrate diversity in all aspects of employment is inherently lowering its standards.

The assault on DEI is exhaustive. In 2023, the Supreme Court effectively ended affirmative action in higher education. But now an activist lawsuit has been filed arguing that the University of California system, which had been banned by state law from considering race in evaluating student applications since 1996, is once again using racial preferences in admissions. The suit was filed in light of an uptick in acceptance rates for Black and Hispanic students. The litigant’s argument seems to be that California must surely be skirting the law if diversity is on the rise.

Its admission offices must be cheating or lying instead of having simply altered the system so it’s less discriminatory. Something illegal must be going on instead of Black and Hispanic students simply having more tools to navigate the college admissions process.

One wonders how many Black students at a selective institution are evidence of a meritocracy at work and how many represent the smoking gun of DEI? How many are a victory and how many are a crime?

The argument over DEI is a confounding one. The president has made eradicating it central to his administration. And so on Jan. 31, the Defense Department issued a pronouncement that celebrations of identity are dead. No spotlighting Black History Month or Women’s History Month, among others.

“We are proud of our warriors and their history, but we will focus on the character of their service instead of their immutable characteristics. This guidance is effectively immediately.”

That same day, the White House issued a proclamation highlighting Black History Month, with special shout-outs to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and golfer Tiger Woods. “Throughout our history, black Americans have been among our country’s most consequential leaders, shaping the cultural and political destiny of our Nation in profound ways. … I call upon public officials, educators, librarians, and all the people of the United States to observe this month with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.”

And so it would seem that in the Trump administration, certain Black folks are okay. But celebrating Black people in general is banned. Effective immediately.

As Keys said, DEI is not a threat; but those who oppose it may well be. It’s just common sense.

© 2025 , The Washington Post