“I’m really looking forward to the next four years.”

That was the response I received from a local business owner after expressing my concerns about the current administration and its attack on DEI and how it will affect marginalized communities.

She then casually said, “Let’s do lunch soon!”

I walked away from the conversation, realizing that she didn’t know she is a part of a marginalized group and seemed unaware or indifferent to the harm being done.

A marginalized group comprises individuals who have been disadvantaged or excluded from certain social, economic, political, and cultural opportunities. Some examples of marginalized groups include those based on age, ability, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, and race, to name a few.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives have long been a cornerstone in the fight for a more just and equitable society. These programs have sought to address systemic barriers, create opportunities for underrepresented groups, and ensure that workplaces, schools, and institutions reflect the diverse communities they serve. DEI has come under attack, with opponents arguing that such efforts are divisive, unnecessary, or even discriminatory in themselves. The consequences of this backlash are far-reaching and disproportionately affect marginalized communities, deepening existing disparities and threatening progress that has taken decades to achieve.

For decades, DEI initiatives have played a vital role in leveling the playing field, ensuring that race, gender, ability, and socioeconomic status do not serve as barriers to opportunity. Corporations, educational institutions, and public agencies have made strides in creating more inclusive environments, recognizing that diverse perspectives strengthen decision-making and innovation. Studies consistently show that businesses with diverse leadership teams perform better financially, and workplaces prioritizing inclusion see higher employee satisfaction and retention rates.

Beyond the corporate world, DEI efforts have also reshaped public policy, ensuring marginalized communities have better access to healthcare, legal representation, and government resources. These initiatives help combat biases that have long contributed to disparities in hiring, promotions, and education, bringing us closer to a more equitable society.

Despite these proven benefits, DEI has become a political lightning rod. Opponents argue that these initiatives amount to “reverse discrimination” or “political correctness gone too far.” However, these claims ignore the reality that systemic inequalities remain deeply ingrained in our society. The rollback of DEI programs is not about fairness but about maintaining historical power structures that favor a select few while marginalizing others.

Examples of this rollback are the recent governmental push to erase minorities from official records and historical discussions. Reports indicate that references to slavery, systemic racism, and even the Holocaust are being removed from websites and educational materials. This is more than an erasure of history–it is an outright denial of the struggles that marginalized communities have endured and continue to endure.

Dismantling DEI initiatives does not just affect statistics and policies; it directly impacts real people. Without DEI safeguards, workplace discrimination cases will rise, representation in leadership will dwindle, and hiring biases will resurface. Educational institutions will see fewer scholarships and mentorship programs aimed at underserved populations, deepening wealth and achievement gaps.

The irony is that those who celebrate the rollback of DEI often fail to recognize that these initiatives benefit everyone, not just marginalized communities. Strong DEI policies foster innovation, improve workplace morale, and create environments where people from all backgrounds can succeed. When companies and institutions prioritize diverse perspectives, they are better equipped to solve complex problems, navigate global markets, and avoid the pitfalls of homogenous decision-making.

Despite these benefits, opponents of DEI paint it as unnecessary or even discriminatory. Some argue that it leads to “reverse racism” or unfair advantages, ignoring the long history of systemic barriers that have prevented women, people of color, LGBTQ+ individuals, and other marginalized groups from accessing the same opportunities as their white, cisgender, male counterparts. The truth is, DEI does not take anything away from those who have historically held power–it simply seeks to ensure that others have a fair shot.

For those celebrating this attack, let me echo the wisdom of my Grammie: “Be careful what you ask for.” The erosion of DEI doesn’t just harm Black and brown communities, women, LGBTQ+ individuals, or people with disabilities–it weakens the very fabric of society. The same forces attacking DEI today may very well turn their focus to other protections and rights that many take for granted.

Chi Hinson is a Jamestown resident.