When the conversation changes, do your values change with it?
Since I started On The Level in 2021, there has been a noticeable shift in the conversation around equality, diversity and inclusion. Right now, the argument that seems to be gaining more traction is that we have gone too far; that attempts to address inequality have tipped the balance the other way and that Britain has become a country where white people are now disadvantaged.
You can see this playing out across our national conversation. Individual cases and tragedies are increasingly being used to support a much bigger argument: that our institutions are no longer serving the majority and that white communities are being systematically disadvantaged. We hear this in debates about two-tier policing, workplace discrimination and claims that equality initiatives unfairly benefit some groups at the expense of others.
I read an article this morning by Dr Shereen Daniels that helped put words to something I’ve been reflecting on: how quickly narratives can take hold, and the importance of questioning what evidence sits behind them. One point she made really stayed with me - we apply different standards of evidence depending on the type of discrimination being discussed.
When people talk about systemic racism affecting Black communities, they are expected to evidence it, and rightly so. We don’t usually accept one example, one experience or one bad decision as proof that an entire system is operating unfairly. Instead, we look for patterns - things like recruitment, progression and pay. We look at health inequalities, educational outcomes and experiences within the criminal justice system. We examine whether different systems and institutions are repeatedly producing unequal outcomes.
That is because systemic discrimination means something very specific - that there is evidence of patterns within systems that repeatedly create barriers for particular groups. It does not mean that every person from one group succeeds or that every person from another group struggles. It does not mean individuals won’t experience hardship, unfairness or disadvantage.
So if we are going to suggest that Britain now has a problem with systemic anti-white discrimination, surely it is reasonable to ask for the same standard of evidence.
This doesn’t mean that white people can’t experience unfairness, or that individual decisions are never wrong - they can and they do. But there is an important difference between recognising individual experiences of unfairness and concluding that they represent a systemic problem across our institutions.
And this distinction really matters, because if a narrative is repeated often enough, it starts to influence what feels true. Over time, it can shift what is sometimes called the Overton window: the boundaries of what society sees as acceptable or reasonable, allowing ideas that once sat at the edges of the conversation to move into the mainstream.
I think we are already seeing the impact of that shift in organisations, with many becoming quieter about equality, diversity and inclusion than they were even a year ago. During Pride Month, for example, colleagues have commented that there are noticeably fewer flags, fewer events and fewer public displays of support for equality from businesses. These visible commitments often tell us something about what organisations feel confident standing behind. Leaders are hesitating, and people are questioning whether they should still be doing work that, not long ago, they believed was both important and necessary.
For me, this brings us back to a bigger question for organisations and leaders: When the conversation changes, do your values change with it?
If your organisation believed that removing barriers helped people perform at their best, what has changed?
If you believed diverse teams made better decisions, what has changed?
If you believed creating workplaces where people from all backgrounds could thrive was good leadership, what has changed?
Has the evidence changed, or has the conversation changed? Because if the evidence hasn’t changed, but the conversation has, that tells us something important about when our values are truly tested.
With love
Claire
You can sign up to receive our blog here