The Corporate HR Department

While we are clearly on opposite sides of the political fence, and I believe his frequent use of F-bombs and other profanities are offensive, gratuitous, and unnecessary, I often find Democratic strategist James Carville’s political observations prescient and amusing. Does anyone recall his famous “It’s the economy stupid” comment while heading up former President Bill Clinton’s successful 1992 political campaign for President? The condition of the United States economy became an important issue in the 1992 Presidential election which benefited the Clinton campaign. Fast forward to 2025 and the condition of the economy is once again in the current political news cycle but under the new heading of “Affordability.”

But as tempting as it might be to join the debate between President Donald Trump and Congressional Democrats on the Affordability issue, today I want to focus on another recent podcast musing from “Professor” Carville. While excoriating the Trump Administration and its handling of economic and foreign policy and noting the disenchantment of young voters with Trump, he took time out to criticize his own party’s approach to young voters. Carville lamented that, in recent focus groups that he has personally conducted, young voters expressed disappointment and disillusionment with the Trump Administration but were equally turned off with the national Democratic party which they termed the “Corporate HR Department” because of the national Democratic party’s focus on DEI issues! Carville was unrestrained in criticizing what he believes is a major mistake national Democrats made with its huge focus on DEI and the concomitant missed opportunity in bringing young voters into the Democratic fold.

Carville can rest easy as I have no intention of joining the debate on Affordability or his party’s missed opportunity with young voters, but I will have a few things to say on his Corporate HR Department observation. Many years ago, I heard a preacher say that individuals are wired for worship, and if they do not worship God, they will surely find something else to worship as an idol. I believe that in the case of Corporate America and Higher Education the idol for worship has been DEI for the last several years. As I have written in previous blogs, the DEI Industrial Complex thrives with an alliance of elites in Higher Education and Corporate HR Departments which fuels the focus and emphasis on DEI by Corporate America and Higher Education.

To be sure, there has been a recent change by many companies and colleges on DEI messaging if not the actual substance of DEI. The Trump Administration has been given credit or blame (depending on how one views DEI) for the change in focus on DEI in Corporate America and Higher Education. While I believe this is largely the case, I believe it would be a mistake to believe that DEI was ever popular and readily embraced by the rank-and-file employees of Corporate America and Higher Education even before negative action was taken by the Trump Administration on DEI. To the contrary, I believe DEI was delivered to the Corporate America and Higher Education rank and file with the subtle and sometimes not so subtle message to get with the DEI program or be gone. I believe most of the rank and file believed that they had little choice but to swallow hard and obey as good soldiers as in many cases compensation and promotions were linked to DEI scores. The questions I have now for the leadership of Corporate America and Higher Education is what impact has DEI had on your employees and their engagement for work? Have you allowed your employees to offer respectful dissenting views on DEI without fear of reprisal? Has DEI benefited your respective constituents, shareholders, customers, and donors? For Corporate America specifically, what impact has DEI had on your market share, revenues, and profitability? Have you sought to objectively measure these DEI outcomes for the categories referenced above? If your measurements have yielded negative results, do you feel any moral, ethical, or fiduciary obligation to consider changes in DEI separate and apart from a fear of negative action which may be undertaken by the Trump Administration?  I would love to hear your thoughts.

God bless you and thank you for the privilege of your time in reading my blog.