I think either someone is qualified for a position or they're not.
My thoughts on DEI are it came from a good place, and is great when implemented and managed properly. It can also be terrible when those things don't happen and/or bad actors are involved. DEI positioned as inherently wrong/the boogeyman/evil is a mistake and lazy. It's a scapegoat.
My last employer had a robust DEI program, and I was never pressured or forced to hire someone with specific traits. What I did receive was a variety of (mostly) qualified applicants to review and move forward if I desired. If not, I got more applicants. It was done well.
I think people believe DEI is only about hiring certain people to meet quotas, whether or not they're qualified. Now, some bad DEI implementations may do that, but certainly not all or even most. DEI is more than hiring practices, though. It's employee resource groups, and community outreach, and fostering a sense of belonging. It is true that happy employees are typically more engaged and productive employees. DEI can support this when done properly.
I'm all for going after bad DEI programs, but framing the whole thing as some horrible monster is wrong, imo.