By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The US State Department has issued new rules for its annual human rights report that redefine human rights, potentially targeting countries with diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. These changes signal a shift in Washington’s approach to global human rights, influenced by the Trump administration’s domestic agenda and are intended to “change the behaviour of governments”. The new instructions also label policies like abortion subsidies, gender-transition surgery for children, and facilitating mass migration as human rights infringements. Critics argue these changes weaponize human rights for ideological purposes and exclude certain groups under US and international law.
Read the original article here
New US rules say countries with diversity policies are infringing human rights – and honestly, where do we even begin? It’s a concept that feels ripped from some dystopian novel, yet here we are. It’s truly difficult to grasp that the notion of a nation, let alone the United States, suggesting that policies promoting inclusivity actually *violate* human rights. It’s a statement that seems designed to confuse and outrage, and frankly, it’s succeeding. The whole idea seems like a tragic joke.
The core of this absurdity appears to be centered around the idea that policies designed to ensure a more equitable society, whether it’s in hiring practices or in broader societal structures, are somehow a form of human rights infringement. To even begin to unpack this, we have to recognize that the very definition of human rights, in this context, seems to be twisted beyond recognition. It feels like we’re watching the world through a funhouse mirror.
This whole thing feels like a very transparent attempt to dismantle programs and initiatives that challenge the status quo, and instead, reinforce existing power structures. They want to create a world where a specific group of people have more rights than others. We’re talking about a move that undermines the very foundations of fairness and equality. This is not a policy, but a tool.
The hypocrisy is just overwhelming, like a tsunami of bad faith. It’s difficult to ignore the glaring contradiction: that the same voices condemning diversity policies are often silent – or even supportive – when it comes to human rights abuses in other countries. You know, the kind of abuses that are undeniably, demonstrably, and unequivocally violations of human rights.
It’s almost like there’s a disconnect between what is being said and what is actually being done. The people promoting this nonsense don’t seem to realize what the world is and what it wants. The world is moving on and will not accept this. We’re talking about a country that champions “freedom” while seemingly trying to dictate what other nations can and cannot do.
And of course, it’s impossible to ignore the historical context. The United States has a long and complex history with diversity. Yet, here we are, facing a policy that seems to advocate for a return to a past where discrimination was not only tolerated but codified. It’s a deeply uncomfortable mirror to hold up to ourselves.
The arguments being presented seem to conveniently overlook the fact that diversity policies are often born out of a desire to rectify existing inequalities and injustices. They are a response to systemic discrimination, not a cause of it. They exist because certain groups have historically been denied equal opportunities, equal representation, and equal rights.
It also raises the question: what kind of world are we heading toward? One where the pursuit of equality is considered a crime? One where basic human dignity is up for negotiation? This isn’t just about a policy, but about a shift in values – a dangerous shift that threatens the very fabric of a just society.
And the bottom line is: it is deeply, deeply embarrassing. And shameful. As the world watches, it’s hard not to feel a sense of profound disappointment. We’re a nation that once aspired to be a beacon of hope, but now seems content to embrace a vision of the future that is backwards.