Last week I wrote about giving the new presidential administration a chance to do what the voters asked it to do. Secure the borders. Lower the cost of eggs and insurance and housing. Level the playing field for athletes. Help bring peace to war zones and keep our troops safe.
I suspect that was irrational hope or abject naivete compelling the writing.
Because within days employees at federal agencies received an email from the White House’s Office of Personnel Management warning them they could face adverse employment actions if they did not report colleagues who work in DEI positions that might have gone unnoticed by supervisors.
The email stated that “we are aware of efforts by some in government to disguise these [DEI] programs by using coded or imprecise language.” Employees were told to notify OPM if they were “aware of a change in any contract description or personnel position description since November 5, 2024 to obscure the connection between the contract and DEIA or similar ideologies.”
The email added ominously that “there will be no adverse consequences for timely reporting this information, however failure to report this information may result in adverse consequences.”
While the email did not specify “consequences” it can be presumed that jobs would be jeopardized and perhaps obstruction or interference criminal charges would be filed against non-cooperating personnel.
As of this writing, there had been no news about what, if any, actions the unions that represent these threatened employees would be taking to push back against the threats.
Whether you support DEI or not is beside the point. I think DEI programs went too far and inevitably there was going to be whiplash. They were window dressing. But that is not the issue.
The repugnance associated with a government calling on individuals to report on other individuals who had not violated any law, rule, or regulation is repulsive of course. And it seems that the command has occurred without any opposition from Congressional leaders or the media to any great degree. Labor leaders have not come to the front to announce their concerns about such a policy.
At this point, it seems, that employees of federal agencies have been left to cast about on their own and decide whether to report their friends and colleagues or alternatively face a loss of position, income, and reputation.
Maybe the label “fascism” does not apply to this type of governmental action. But the action is certainly oppressive, and designed to promote fear and hatred within the workforce. Fascism is such an ugly word and placing labels typically does not move the discussion forward. But when a government requires neighbors and colleagues to report on each other in pursuit of an oppressive policy that strikes fear in the subjects, it sure seems like the fascism I learned about in high school.
And given that naivete is where I started today, doesn’t it seem naïve to believe that the government’s reporting obligations will simply end at the DEI doorstep? Isn’t it more likely that soon we will be required to report on those who might be present in the country illegally? Some states are already requiring neighbors to report on other neighbors who have sought abortions or other reproductive medical care.
Is this what we really voted for? To rip apart the fabric that binds our society together? To make us suspicious of the motives of our friends, families, and neighbors? And what will be the bulwark against this disintegration of societal ties? Unions maybe. Churches maybe. Local governments maybe.
The train is leaving the station and gaining momentum. What are we prepared to do about it?
The Law Office of Eric R. Brown 
Leave a comment