DEI isn’t about handing out jobs based on race, it’s about removing barriers that have kept qualified people from even getting a fair shot. Systemic oppression isn’t some catchphrase, despite how some people may use it (including the people you mentioned, but it’s a real, documented pattern across housing, education, and employment. For instance, studies have shown that identical résumés get significantly different responses depending on whether the name at the top sounds white or black. Bob get hired and Marquis does not. That’s not meritocracy, that’s bias. We all have them, but we have recognize them. It’s about evening the playing field for opportunities, not for outcomes.
Voter ID laws sound simple, but they disproportionately impact lower-income and minority voters, many of whom don’t have easy access to IDs due to cost, time, or distance from issuing offices. Those same people aren’t renting cars, buying houses, or any of the other activities you mentioned either. But since voter fraud is statistically negligible (see the research by the historical liberal Heritage Foundation), these laws solve a problem that doesn’t exist while making it harder for certain Americans to vote. That’s not about integrity and these laws never have been.
And if we’re talking qualifications, let’s not forget Trump’s record: he handed out top jobs to Fox News personalities like Pete Hegseth and Larry Kudlow, and appointed Kash Patel, who had no meaningful intel experience, to help oversee national security. He chose billionaires like Betsy DeVos, whose only connection to public education was trying to dismantle it, or Jared Kushner, whose biggest asset was marrying the boss’s daughter. Or Dr. Oz, the daytime TV snake oil guy he backed for Senate. If you think that’s “putting the most qualified people in place,” we must be using very different definitions of qualified. But sure, let’s clutch our pearls over someone getting hired after graduating Harvard or Yale with top marks because they also happen to be Black or female.
