Rejecting the politicization of EDI issues… while acknowledging their political dimension

Published on Thursday 19 February 2026

Since 2023, AFMD has been examining the effects of the tension, polarization, and radicalization surrounding the issues addressed by Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Directors in both public and private organizations.

Over the past few years, we have witnessed a hardening of positions around questions of discrimination, equality, and diversity and, through them, conflicts over concepts and principles such as secularism, universalism, and the republic. The subjects covered by EDI Directors have a particular characteristic: they sit at the intersection of the social, societal, and professional worlds1 - one of the EDI Directors's missions being to "translate" social changes and public policies into professional norms. They also stand at the crossroads of personal and professional identity - one of the core challenges of inclusion being the recognition of individuals in all their diversity.

In this sense, these subjects are political, in that they carry aspirations that concern both individuals and the collective. As such, they risk being "politicized" - frequently attributed a power they do not themselves possess - and "depoliticized" - severed from the purposes for which they were originally conceived.

So how can we embrace the political dimension of these subjects without falling into the trap of their politicization?

Key Observations

In late 2023, we ran a workshop dedicated to the polarization of discourse around EDI-related themes. We identified two phenomena affecting professionals working in this field: a phenomenon of professional burnout in a context of delegitimization of efforts aimed at preventing discrimination and advancing equality; and a phenomenon of self-censorship in the face of subjects perceived as "sensitive" (religious expression and gender transition, in particular). In 2025, we turned our attention to the radicalization of discourse, mapping out the arguments mobilized against diversity and inclusion programs both in France and in the United States.2

From this perspective, 2025 marked both a tipping point and a moment of momentum, leaving many EDI officers in a state of stress and uncertainty. With an intense political sequence ahead, from the 2026 municipal elections to the 2027 presidential election, we believe it is important to offer reference points to help us stay grounded and stand firmly. By providing definitions, perspectives, examples, resources, and arguments, we aim to create a space conducive to reflection, inspiration, and the strengthening of our professional community.

Clarification


Let us state from the outset that taking into account the political dimension of EDI-related issues is not the same as doing politics at work. It is in no way about politicizing EDI practitioners, or their organizations. It is about acknowledging that these subjects carry principles and values that go to the heart of how we live together in society. Rather than avoiding or dismissing these values in the workplace, which is itself part of that shared life, we believe it is more strategic to embrace their political dimensions, to understand them, to make them one's own, so as to better position oneself professionally and bring meaningful solutions to one's organization.

To do so, we have chosen to proceed in three stages:

  • A first stage dedicated to how work organizations are structured and how they integrate  -or fail to integrate - EDI-related issues. Drawing on the insights of Clotilde Coron, we gain a clearer picture of the changes currently underway and the ways in which professionals can position themselves to preserve the political dimension of these issues and and embed them within the organization's strategic agenda.
  • A second stage dedicated to how these questions are politicized within media and political discourse, often in complete disregard of the technical and legal realities of EDI practice. To understand what politicization processes actually entail and the risks they pose to the future of EDI roles, we speak with Nabil Ouali, philosopher and EDI consultant.
  • A third stage dedicated to the voices of practitioners: How should one respond to attacks? How can one resist the turmoil rising in the United States and across Europe? Should one resist at all, or are other strategies more appropriate? How can organizations make their voices heard on questions of equity, diversity, and inclusion in the face of growing resistance? What arguments can be mobilized to strengthen the essential fight against discrimination and inequality in the workplace?


The Political Role of Human Ressources 

With Clotilde Coron, professor of management sciences at the University of Paris-Saclay, we drew on a book she co-authored with Pascal Braun, published by Dunod in 2021: Le rôle politique de la fonction RH. Du projet stratégique à sa mise en œuvre opérationnelle (The Political Role of Human Ressources: From Strategic Vision to Operational Implementation). Naturally, the word "political" being applied to the HR role caught our attention, which led us to explore with her the political dimension of EDI and the role of EDI functions.
 

 

Sources

1 We borrow here the metaphor used by Laure Béreni to describe professionals responsible for equity, diversity, and inclusion issues as "boundary spanners." Laure BÉRENI, Le management de la vertu. La diversité à New York et à Paris.

2  For AFMD members, see the summary and notes produced following the Innovation workshop dedicated to the radicalization of discourse and anti-EDI arguments, available in the docuthèque/ressource library.