DEI Boogeyman (Part V): Black Women at a Crossroads
Dearest Reader,
NOTE: In last week’s newsletter, I mentioned the “pre-emptive strike” from Israel towards Iran. As you know, unless you live under a rock but even then I doubt it, The U.S. bombed several Iranian nuclear sites. Is it war? Is it not? Is the “ceasefire” abruptly and unilaterally announced by President Trump on June 23rd (on social media!) real or a stunt? Is there any logic behind this? Who’s to say, at the moment, though there is far too much talk of “regime change” in Iran for my liking or that of international humanitarian law. But the official government framing is basically: ‘Trump strong, Iran totally defeated, non-existent nukes bad, and Israel my friend.’ Nevertheless, before getting into this week’s newsletter, I wanted to share a corrected paragraph from last week’s commentary on the Israeli strikes:
Israel also attacked Iran in a “pre-emptive strike” last week on the basis of Iran’s unsanctioned civilian nuclear energy programs that have yet to be weaponized according to most Western intelligence agencies…meanwhile Israel has hundreds of unsanctioned nuclear weapons as a non-signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). According to a 2024 report from Common Dreams, “Israel does not admit it possesses nuclear weapons, has not signed the NPT, and does not allow inspections of its nuclear arsenal.” Anti-war president Trump seems to be totally on board with this latest unsanctioned bombing campaign. Also this so-called preemptive violence is illegal, but whatever, I guess. I’m sure it will be fine.
No more wars.
As you may recall I have published four previous installments in the sub-series called “DEI Boogeyman” beginning May 2024. I started this series because I noted a pattern in how DEI was being weaponized to effectively push out women and other minorities in positions of power. I first flagged this pattern with the shameful ouster of Harvard’s first black president Claudine Gay in a newsletter I published in January 2024 called “The Trial of Claudine Gay.” I was shocked by how legitimate fears over student safety were exploited to shift power so brazenly in academia. Gay was the canary in the proverbial coalmine—her public persecution was a preamble to the noxious fumes of authoritarianism that we are choking on today.
Former President Gay, upon her resignation in January 2024, penned an op-ed for the New York Times with a brilliant, sober analysis of her own circumstances:
As I depart, I must offer a few words of warning. The campaign against me was about more than one university and one leader. This was merely a single skirmish in a broader war to unravel public faith in pillars of American society. Campaigns of this kind often start with attacks on education and expertise, because these are the tools that best equip communities to see through propaganda. But such campaigns don’t end there. Trusted institutions of all types — from public health agencies to news organizations — will continue to fall victim to coordinated attempts to undermine their legitimacy and ruin their leaders’ credibility. For the opportunists driving cynicism about our institutions, no single victory or toppled leader exhausts their zeal.
I hope her words speak for themselves—please read her remarks in full at the Times link above.
The fact of the matter is I have been writing about this slide into authoritarianism at least since Spring 2016. In fact, one could argue, at the moment, the U.S. is no longer a democratic state but transitioning into “competitive authoritarianism” where the ceremony of democracy remains (like elections and so-called free press), but the consolidation of power by the autocrat and his cronies steadily increases as they maintain control over and destabilize the federal government. I suspect the ideal outcome for MAGA is a fascist government, but that could take a beat to come to full bloom. As it happens, both authoritarianism and fascism require centralized rule that seeks to control all aspects of an individual’s life including suppressing dissent and coercion. Sound familiar? But fascism can be defined as:
[The] imposition of dictatorial power, government control of industry and commerce, and the forcible suppression of opposition, often at the hands of the military or a secret police force.
Just today the U.S. supreme court voted 6-3 on partisan lines that this administration can deport criminal immigrants to South Sudan or Libya (where they have open slave markets since the fall of former leader Muammar Gaddafi) even if those places are deemed too dangerous for tourism. That tracks with increasingly undemocratic norms in a slipping democracy, no?
I mention all this because the anti-DEI vehicle (preceded by the anti-Critical Race Theory or anti-CRT narrative) has been highly effective in toppling experts, academics and even the incremental decimation of the Department of Education (DOE) facing a 15% budget cut among other horrid choices. Many of the state/federal courts are trying to uphold the law and it feels like our only institutional bulwark against the rising authoritarian tide. That’s not going to be enough though, so people power will also be essential until more political power (hopefully) emerges. Thankfully, an executive order to close the DOE was blocked by a federal judge in Massachusetts, so the DOE is still with us.
By starting with black women and other women first (like transwomen or undocumented women), the right wing elements that make up Trump’s MAGA cohort, like conservative activist Christopher Rufo or Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts, are actualizing their dystopian vision with uneven pushback from Democrats and, until recently, the broader American public. This is why I’m a bit on the fence about the No Kings collective who seem quite cozy with the Democratic Party. That’s not inherently bad, but the Democratic establishment is moving towards the center—how will a centrist (non-“identity politics”) option fair in comparison to an unhinged autocrat? I think a centrist take, though I respect moderation, may not be the most potent strategy to stop a dictator.
In January 2025 when Trump took office, he immediately signed an anti-DEI executive order targeting federal workers, so a national tone was set. Maintaining DEI could be a liability. In April, a report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics noted that 106,000 black women lost jobs in April. Black women’s unemployment climbed from 5.1% to 6.1%, which as noted by The Grio was the “most significant month-to-month [unemployment] increase among all demographics.” Even black men gained jobs in April while other demographics remained, more or less, unchanged. Why? One expert in the article suggested, “The unusual nature of this increase in Black women’s unemployment is a testament to and a direct result of the anti-DEI and anti-Black focus of the new administration’s policies,” William Michael Cunningham, an economist and owner of Creative Investment Research, said about the data. “This is demonstrably damaging to the Black community, something we have not seen before.”
The Target boycott over DEI rollbacks led by Reverend Al Sharpton has been successful in drying up black community purchases at the retailer. But some question if Sharpton’s April photo op and meeting with the Target CEO, Brian Cornwell was a sign that ongoing negotiations may blunt the force of the boycott. I suppose like Trump, CEOs are willing to make “deals” for civil rights. However, all these democratic initiatives like this Target boycott are good training for wider economic protest because I don’t think this singular boycott will suffice to change the anti-DEI tide. Some companies and institutions are maintaining a commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion, while others are jumping ship. But, regardless, DEI is now marked by negativity.
As the new normal sets in, it does not favor those who can be targeted as an alleged “DEI-hire,” a slur popularized in the past year or so. In January this year, a mid-air collision between an army helicopter and commercial plane at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport shocked the nation. Sadly in the wake of this horrible event, the Trump administration accused the deceased female co-pilot from the helicopter of being a “DEI-hire” and that diversity initiatives at the Federal Aviation Administration are to blame. It’s absurd on its face given how rigorous military flight training is, as many have argued. Nevertheless, on that tragic night, two army helicopter pilots and a crew chief died alongside 64 civilian passengers on American Airlines Flight 5342.
Although it may take over a year for the final National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) report on the cause of the crash, so far it looks like misheard communication with the air traffic controller, problematic travel routes and corrupt aviation data may have led to the collision. No one is claiming DEI is to blame except for the White House. Just two weeks ago, The Atlantic reported that the Trump administration is currently spending $2 million to figure out if DEI causes plane crashes. *Sigh*
Since the U.S. election, I have been unpacking how some black women in my life feel. Most want to resist, but we are also tired and even jaded. Processing the betrayal among the 92% of black women who voted for Kamala Harris has been slow and plodding. By ignoring or minimizing the attacks on DEI or the festering “anti-woke” stance dogging us in recent years plus old school racism, companies and institutions absentmindedly created the permission structure to weaponize DEI. What happened to Professor Claudine Gay is a textbook example of taking the bait.
Look at Harvard University today, in the crosshairs of this administration blocking federal funding and other attacks. However, a recent announcement on Truth Social hinted at a new “deal” to come with Harvard. On June 20th Trump said, “[Harvard] have acted extremely appropriately during these negotiations, and appear to be committed to doing what is right.” All this “deal making” language is insidious; turning basic rights of non-discrimination or access to education into crass capitalist negotiations over commodities not rights. I suppose we’ve been well on our way here long before Donald Trump. In many ways, as seen in this term, Trump may well be the ultimate neo-conservative, committed to profit through war. And this time, it seems, there will be war at home and abroad. CHA-CHING!
This week New York City completes primary elections for the mayoral race and the young New York State Assemblyman Zorhan Mamdani is polling ahead in early voting. Clearly whatever we’ve been doing on the so-called liberal left hasn’t been particularly effective in meeting the moment, perhaps with the exception of Bernie Sanders’ “Fighting Oligarchy” tour—but that too has its limits. And No Kings has yet to mobilze beyond the initial June 14th protest, I suspect something will emerge. But maybe thirty-three year old Mamdani, a Democratic Socialist on the Democratic ticket with a lot of grassroots support, can inspire more people through class analysis, like Sanders has, for the fight ahead. Perhaps. Perhaps. Perhaps.
I’ll leave Professor Gay with the last word from her NYT op-ed in January 2024:
It is not lost on me that I make an ideal canvas for projecting every anxiety about the generational and demographic changes unfolding on American campuses: a Black woman selected to lead a storied institution. Someone who views diversity as a source of institutional strength and dynamism. Someone who has advocated a modern curriculum that spans from the frontier of quantum science to the long-neglected history of Asian Americans. Someone who believes that a daughter of Haitian immigrants has something to offer to the nation’s oldest university.
I still believe that.
[Having] now seen how quickly the truth can become a casualty amid controversy, I’d urge a broader caution: At tense moments, every one of us must be more skeptical than ever of the loudest and most extreme voices in our culture, however well organized or well connected they might be. Too often they are pursuing self-serving agendas that should be met with more questions and less credulity.
With Love During End Times,
Agunda