US State Department Designates “DEI” As A Violation Of Human Rights

There is no way for a government to enforce Diversity, Equity and Inclusion policies without also discriminating against certain groups of people.  DEI, by its very nature, is anti-merit, anti-success and pro-privilege.  Of course, the groups that are most commonly discriminated against under DEI quotas are mostly white, male and straight.  The assumption being that white dudes are widely considered “fair game” by the rest of society. 

This dynamic creates a never-ending cycle of people clamoring for oppression status rather than personal integrity and accomplishment.  To win in life, you must figure out a way to catch the government’s favor and attain that coveted prize; to rise to the top of the diversity totem pole.

This ideology has infected societies throughout most first world countries and even some developing nations.  Woke activism seems rampant in the US, but that’s because DEI faces American opposition.  The color revolution is louder because their power is failing.  For the rest of the west, however, DEI in government is an absolute.  This is a problem because it requires Americans to reconsider which countries they view as “allies.” 

The Trump Administration is adjusting to this ideological conflict quickly, and part of this change requires that the US starts openly calling out far-left governments for their destructive behaviors.

Countries enforcing DEI policies will now be at risk of the Trump Administration deeming them as human rights abusers, which upends the status quo when it comes to diplomatic relations.  The State Department is issuing new rules to all US embassies and consulates involved in compiling its annual report on global human rights violations.  

Other policies by foreign governments which US embassies will be told to categorize as human rights infringements include:     

Subsidising abortions, “as well as the total estimated number of annual abortions”     

Gender-transition surgery for children, defined by the state department as “operations involving chemical or surgical mutilation… to modify their sex.”     

Facilitating mass or illegal migration “across a country’s territory into other countries.”     

Arrests or “official investigations or warnings for speech” – a reference to the Trump administration’s opposition to internet safety laws adopted by some European countries to deter online “hate speech” (any speech which is critical of woke ideology no matter rational).  

A senior State Department official says, rather blatantly, that the new rules are “a tool to change the behavior of governments”.  That is to say, the sooner foreign governments abandon woke cultism, the easier it will be for them to engage with the US in terms of relations and trade.  

State Department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott said the new instructions are intended to stop “new destructive ideologies [that] have given safe harbor to human rights violations”. 

“The Trump administration will not allow these human rights violations, such as the mutilation of children, laws that infringe on free speech, and racially discriminatory employment practices, to go unchecked.” 

Leftist officials are calling the new policy an “attack on marginalized groups” and a “new low for Trump.”  But once again, there is a substantial disconnect between what leftists see as a human right versus what normal people see as a human right.

The rights that the Trump Administration is referring to include the right to free speech, the right to secure borders, the right to cultural integrity without fear of engineered cultural replacement, the protection of children from manufactured consent, the right to equal opportunities (not equal outcomes), the right to life, etc.  Many of these ideals are taken for granted in the US as the norm, but the Biden Administration revealed how fragile such standards can be.

Leftists see human rights as contingent on identity.  In other words, some people have more rights than others depending on their genetic history and gender orientation.  Bureaucrats and progressive gatekeepers have conveniently made themselves the decision makers for which groups deserve the most rights.

They see speech rights as conditional; it all depends on the ethnicity and sexual identity of the person who is talking. 

They treat national borders and national identity as a social construct that needs to be torn down (if the country rooted in western civilization).  They see the west as a global commons, an economic zone to be pillaged, not protected.

The view morality as relative, childhood as circumstantial and parental rights as an obstacle.  The grooming of children is a political imperative for leftist survival.  Questions of right and wrong never enter their minds.    

Millions of Americans united in solidarity against DEI and other mechanisms of progressive authoritarianism, turning back from the edge of utter disaster.  It makes little sense, then, to reward woke foreign governments with alliances and economic benefits after spending years struggling to defeat those same cancerous notions in the US.