The World Is Watching
Like people, nations experience identity crises, and the U.S. is facing its worst yet. As its facade of being The Land of the Free, Home of the Brave crumbles, will it embrace a darker path—akin to apartheid-era South Africa or one of the so-called “shithole countries” Trump derided? Or will it finally strive to live up to the image it once projected? If recent trends hold, America may soon cross a line from which there is no return—a point where democracy is a relic, global standing is squandered, and the unraveling is no longer theoretical but inevitable.
This crisis is epitomized by the ongoing battle over "wokeness," DEI, and racial and gender politics. It’s not just about domestic policy; it’s about who America believes deserves power, authority, and equal footing in society. And if the U.S. struggles to see non-white Americans and women as full equals at home, how can it possibly engage with non-Western nations, particularly those in Asia and Africa, and female leaders as equal partners abroad?
America’s self-inflicted regression isn’t just weakening the country from within—it’s shaping how the world perceives it. Once seen as a champion of democracy and human rights, many now view the U.S. as a nation that preaches equality while actively undermining it. If this trend continues, America won’t just lose influence; it will lose respect.
America’s Regressive Turn
For decades, the U.S. championed racial and gender diversity—not always in practice, but certainly in rhetoric. The civil rights movement inspired global justice movements. Affirmative action influenced hiring and education worldwide. The idea that diversity leads to strength was not just a domestic slogan; it was part of America’s soft power.
Now, that narrative is crumbling. States are banning DEI programs, affirmative action has been dismantled, and corporate diversity efforts are being quietly rolled back. The Supreme Court’s rejection of affirmative action and the growing hostility toward DEI initiatives signal a shift away from inclusivity—one that is not just political but structural.
This regression isn’t happening in a vacuum. Across industries, Black and minority leaders are being removed from corporate and government positions. The departures of leaders like Gwynne Wilcox from the National Labor Relations Board and General Charles Q. "CQ" Brown Jr. as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff point to a growing trend: a retreat from diversity at the highest levels of leadership.
Meanwhile, education is being rewritten. Books that discuss systemic racism and gender inequality are being banned or challenged, reinforcing a whitewashed version of history that downplays the struggles of marginalized communities. These moves are not just internal political battles—they are shaping how America presents itself to the world.
Corporate America’s Quiet Pivot Away from DEI
One of the most surprising shifts in the DEI debate is that it’s not just conservative politicians rejecting diversity initiatives—it’s some of Silicon Valley's most influential corporate leaders. Executives like Mark Zuckerberg have openly questioned or scaled back corporate DEI efforts, arguing that diversity initiatives should not come at the expense of merit.
This signals something deeper: Corporate America is recalibrating its stance on diversity, not just due to political pressure but also economic shifts. Many executives argue that DEI hiring practices could hurt efficiency or lead to hiring that isn’t based purely on merit. Tech leaders—who once positioned themselves as progressive—are now aligning with conservative arguments against DEI.
The rollback mirrors similar DEI program cuts and layoffs at major corporations, including McDonald’s, Ford Motor Company, Jack Daniels, Molson Coors, Tractor Supply, John Deere, Amazon, and Walmart. These companies have either scaled back DEI hiring practices, eliminated diversity leadership roles, or distanced themselves from external diversity benchmarks.
Meanwhile, some of the largest corporations—like Microsoft, Apple, and Costco—have rejected calls to dismantle DEI programs. They argue that eliminating diversity initiatives would undermine efforts to foster workplace equity and reduce systemic bias.
But unquestionably, DEI’s rollback is a movement, and this movement isn’t stopping anytime soon.
The shift isn’t limited to Silicon Valley, either.
Elon Musk, now leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has implemented aggressive cost-cutting measures across federal agencies, mirroring tactics he previously used at Twitter (X).
Jeff Bezos has overhauled The Washington Post’s opinion section to align more with libertarian ideals, sparking backlash from longtime subscribers.
Stephen A. Schwarzman, CEO of Blackstone Group, has doubled down on his support for Trump, reinforcing the growing alignment between corporate America and the conservative rejection of DEI.
If even the heads of the world’s most powerful IT companies and financial firms are stepping away from DEI, it raises a pressing question:
Is America’s economic elite abandoning diversity as a core value?
If so, this could accelerate the global decline of DEI—not just as a policy framework but as a guiding business principle.
America is often looked to for leadership. Will other countries allow the U.S. to lead them down this ideological path? One that echoes regimes that cost Europeans millions of lives over the course of two world wars?
This mindset could also reshape America’s competitive landscape, making the country less attractive to international talent while reinforcing exclusionary hiring practices.
A Foreign Policy Built on Selective Equality
America’s racial and gender hierarchy doesn’t stop at its borders. It influences how U.S. leaders, corporations, and diplomats engage with the rest of the world—determining who is seen as a legitimate partner and who is treated with condescension.
Western nations, particularly European allies, are instinctively viewed as serious and equal partners. Meanwhile, Asian and African nations—despite their economic and technological advances—are frequently framed as “developing” or in need of Western guidance.
For example:
French presidents get framed as “partners,” while so-called Sub-Saharan African nations—despite their rapid economic growth—are still called “regimes.”
Germany’s economy is respected, but skepticism surrounds China’s growth, even when it follows similar capitalist models.
The language used in global relations reinforces these biases and signals that U.S. leadership still ranks countries based on outdated racial and economic prejudices rather than merit or strategic value.
Japan’s Growing Security Concerns
Recent geopolitical events have made Japan (where I reside) question just how secure its alliance with the U.S. really is. After the controversy surrounding Trump’s treatment of the Ukrainian president and the wavering of U.S. commitments to allies, many of us here—Japanese and non-Japanese alike—are now wondering:
Could Japan be next?
For decades, Japan has relied on the U.S. security umbrella, trusting that its military alliance would hold firm in times of crisis. But Trump and his political allies have introduced a new level of unpredictability.
If a transactional approach to alliances becomes the norm, Japan may find itself vulnerable to abrupt shifts in American foreign policy—just as Ukraine did.
This uncertainty raises pressing questions:
Will the U.S. continue to honor its commitments under a future Trump administration?
Could Japan find itself abandoned if its strategic value is questioned?
What does this mean for the broader stability of the Asia-Pacific region?
The World No Longer Needs America’s Approval
For much of modern history, the U.S. has dictated the terms of global engagement. But in an increasingly multilateral, multipolar world, with a diversity of races and nationalities in its upper echelons, led by nations outside the West, the U.S. must decide whether it will adapt—or cling to outdated power dynamics.
If America cannot accept true equality within its own borders—across race, gender, and class— then it will struggle to command respect beyond them. And if it continues to push racialized and gendered thinking as the norm, then it will no longer be seen as the standard-bearer of democracy—it will be seen as a cautionary tale.
To be continued...
Comentarios