RT Freedom Enthusiast 🇺🇸 (@ThoughtCrimes80)I’m white.I know a lot of people like me.I know loads of progressives.Not a single one seeks out inner city Chicago.Not one of them moved to Southest Detroit.Not a single one seeks out an afternoon in Compton.They don’t want to live around diversity because they know it means being in violent, lawless, low-income areas.Progressives have no skin in the game. They love diversity in virtue only. ...

As outrage increases over President Trump' social media posts dedepicting the Obamas as apes, it's important to note that his racist rhetoric is just a reflection of the racist policies he's been pushing since day one of his presidency. Shortly after taking office the second time, Trump issued executive orders ending diversity, equity and inclusion programs at federal agencies and in the private sector. And on Friday, a federal appeals court sided with the Trump administration and lifted a block on the pres ...

Core Insights - The share of Fortune 500 companies publicly outlining their diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) commitments has decreased by nearly two-thirds from the previous year, indicating a significant decline in corporate engagement with DEI policies [1][2]. Group 1: Participation in DEI Initiatives - Only 131 Fortune 500 companies participated in the Corporate Equality Index (CEI) this year, a drop from 377 in 2025, with many non-participating companies being federal contractors [2]. - The decline in participation suggests that corporate leaders are recognizing the risks associated with DEI controversies, which can negatively impact share prices [5]. Group 2: Political and Regulatory Context - The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) president noted that unprecedented pressure from the federal government has led some companies to withdraw from DEI initiatives, citing executive orders and threats of investigations [9]. - An executive order signed by former President Donald Trump aimed to end illegal DEI discrimination and encouraged private sector companies to eliminate illicit DEI policies [8]. Group 3: Public Sentiment and Corporate Response - Activists argue that the decline in DEI participation reflects a disconnect between corporate policies and the views of average Americans, suggesting that such policies may not be popular [5][6]. - Companies that maintain transparency and clear communication regarding their DEI policies tend to earn trust and retain talent, with shareholders largely rejecting anti-DEI measures [13].

Core Viewpoint - A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit from Missouri alleging that Starbucks used diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives as a cover for discrimination based on race, gender, and sexual orientation, stating that the case did not prove any discrimination against Missouri residents [1][6]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claimed that Starbucks unlawfully linked executive compensation to achieving racial and gender hiring quotas [2]. - It accused Starbucks of favoring certain groups for additional training and job advancement, and of implementing a quota system for board diversity [3]. - The lawsuit sought to compel Starbucks to cease alleged discriminatory practices, rehire affected employees, and pay unspecified damages [6]. Group 2: Context and Background - The lawsuit was filed in the wake of Starbucks' policy changes following the murder of George Floyd in 2020, which prompted many companies to reassess their employment practices [5]. - Starbucks employs over 200,000 people in the U.S. and 360,000 globally [5]. - Previous legal challenges to Starbucks' diversity policies have also been dismissed, indicating a trend of courts refraining from intervening in such public policy matters [6].

RT Matthew Schmitz (@matthewschmitz)Ohio State embraced diversity efforts in the name of “representing” the state it serves.These efforts have led to a situation in which 20 percent of tenure-track faculty are white men.Meanwhile, white men make up around 40 percent of Ohio’s population. https://t.co/KeaNEW0lFB ...

RT Christian Heiens 🏛 (@ChristianHeiens)I want you to imagine if there was a headline that said things like:“Diversity drive to make India’s Ganges River Valley less Indian”“Diversity drive to make Egypt’s Nile Delta less Arab”“Diversity drive to make Zimbabwe’s Victoria Falls less Black”“Diversity drive to make Istanbul less Turkish”“Diversity drive to make the Yangtze less Chinese”“Diversity drive to make Israel’s Tel Aviv less Jewish”“Diversity drive to make Gaza less Palestinian”There is only one group ...

Core Viewpoint - US regulators are investigating Nike for alleged discrimination against White employees, focusing on systemic bias in employment practices and DEI initiatives [1][2]. Investigation Details - The EEOC is examining claims of "a pattern or practice of disparate treatment" against White employees in various employment decisions, including hiring, promotion, and layoffs, with records requested dating back to 2018 [2]. - The inquiry includes criteria for layoffs and how Nike tracks race and ethnicity data, particularly its influence on executive compensation [3]. Nike's Response - Nike expressed surprise at the escalation of the investigation, stating it has cooperated in good faith with the EEOC and is committed to lawful employment practices [4][5]. - The company plans to continue cooperating with the EEOC and respond to the subpoena after failing to provide all requested materials [5]. Legal Context - A subpoena is a formal legal directive requiring the delivery of documents or testimony, which the EEOC has enforced due to Nike's non-compliance [6]. - The EEOC chair emphasized the agency's commitment to investigating potential violations of federal discrimination laws, particularly in relation to DEI programs [7].

RT Christian Heiens 🏛 (@ChristianHeiens)I want you to imagine if there was a headline that said things like:“Diversity drive to make India’s Ganges River Valley less Indian”“Diversity drive to make Egypt’s Nile Delta less Arab”“Diversity drive to make Zimbabwe’s Victoria Falls less Black”“Diversity drive to make Istanbul less Turkish”“Diversity drive to make the Yangtze less Chinese”“Diversity drive to make Israel’s Tel Aviv less Jewish”“Diversity drive to make Gaza less Palestinian”There is only one group ...

Core Viewpoint - The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is investigating Nike for alleged discrimination against white employees through its diversity policies, marking a significant escalation in scrutiny of corporate diversity initiatives [1][2]. Investigation Details - The EEOC is seeking information on Nike's criteria for employee layoffs, how it tracks race and ethnicity data, and details about programs that may provide race-restricted mentoring and career development opportunities [2]. - Nike has stated that it has cooperated with the EEOC by providing thousands of pages of information and considers the subpoena an unusual escalation [2]. Context of the Investigation - Nike is the most prominent company currently under a formal anti-diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) investigation by the EEOC, following a similar subpoena issued to Northwestern Mutual [3]. - EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas has emphasized that the agency will take necessary actions, including subpoenas, when there are indications that DEI programs may violate federal discrimination laws [4]. Background of the Complaint - The investigation against Nike was initiated by a commissioner's charge filed by Lucas, rather than stemming from a worker complaint, and was influenced by a letter from America First Legal, a conservative legal group [6]. - This investigation follows Lucas's public call for white men to report experiences of race or sex discrimination, indicating a shift in the agency's focus [5].

Core Viewpoint - The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has filed a federal lawsuit against Nike, seeking information related to allegations of systemic discrimination against white employees within the company's diversity, equity, and inclusion programs [1][2]. Group 1: Allegations and Investigation - The EEOC has received complaints alleging systemic race discrimination against white workers through Nike's diversity initiatives [2]. - The investigation focuses on claims that Nike has engaged in a "pattern or practice of disparate treatment" against white employees in various employment decisions, including hiring, promotion, and layoffs [4]. - Allegations include discriminatory practices in layoffs, internship selections, and access to mentoring and leadership development programs [5]. Group 2: Legal Actions and Requests - The EEOC has requested a federal court subpoena to compel Nike to provide information dating back to 2018, including criteria for layoffs and the company's tracking of employee race and ethnicity data [5][6]. - The agency initially sought voluntary cooperation from Nike but resorted to legal action after lacking cooperation [6]. - The EEOC is specifically interested in 16 Nike programs that are alleged to have provided race-restricted opportunities for mentoring and career development [6].