Split Thread Diversity Equity and Inclusion and merit in employment etc

Trausti said:
You mentioned critical race theory; a catechism that arrogates to itself the creditional of theory when it's just an unfalsifable political ideology. What predictions does it make? Are they replicable? Well, no. But some folks cite it as some sort of unimpeachable authority. If it is the justification for DEI, then all the better to toss DEI into the trash.
Click to expand...
You're referring to SCRT. You're not describing CRT at all. Nobody has since the rightist pundits started demonising it back in 2020.

If this is all sounding familiar, that's because it's been an essential part of the rightist culture war playbook going back decades. Political correctness. "Woke". CRT and DEI. It's all the same thing - a cynical political strategy to manipulate public outrage so that populist demagogues can ride the wave.
 
The United States Military Academy has just eliminated all Cadet clubs and activities for minority cadets. Some the Society of Black Engineers have existed for over 50 years.

bafkreifclnrmmmy7nyt7u3vhnx7dyu3iqllcnqoxccxak4mlrje6lphp3e.jpg
 
theprestige said:
You're yelling at the wrong patch of sky. Your beef is with the grifters hiding behind the idealistic language. Go browbeat them, if language is your highest concern.
Click to expand...
My highest concern is actions, but language drives those. And the actions of the new administration are reprehensible. But that's for other threads.
 
theprestige said:
One would think you'd be in favor of the current administration's efforts to curtail what passes for DEI policy in this country.
Click to expand...
If the intent and the expected outcome of those efforts were not utterly deplorable, I would be.

But they are employing SDEI in the service of cronyism, oligarchy and white-cis-het-male supremacy. So no, I am not.
 
arthwollipot said:
Figures.

First they came for the trans people, and I spoke out because I've read the rest of the ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ poem.
Click to expand...
The following is my actual email signature. Perhaps it will jog your memory.

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.“ —Martin Niemöller
 
jt512 said:
The following is my actual email signature. Perhaps it will jog your memory.

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.“ —Martin Niemöller
Click to expand...
Thank you, I am familiar with it, like I said.

Who do you think the destruction of SDEI is "coming for" and why is that a good thing to you?
 
arthwollipot said:
Thank you, I am familiar with it, like I said.

Who do you think the destruction of SDEI is "coming for" and why is that a good thing to you?
Click to expand...
I've explained this to you over and over again. DEI discriminates against people who aren't members of certain ideologically favored identity groups with the (supposed) goal of attaining equal outcomes for all identity groups. The goal of removing DEI is equal opportunity for individuals without regard to their immutable characteristics.
 
jt512 said:
I've explained this to you over and over again. DEI discriminates against people who aren't members of certain ideologically favored identity groups with the (supposed) goal of attaining equal outcomes for all identity groups. The goal of removing DEI is equal opportunity for individuals without regard to their immutable characteristics.
Click to expand...
You're - again - describing SDEI, not DEIA.

Mate, the E in DEIA stands for Equity. You just said the goal of removing DEI is equity. You can't have equal opportunity for individuals without regard for their immutable characteristics when you're banning equity. You can't ban diversity and still claim to have equal opportunity for individuals without regard for their immutable characteristics! You can't have equal opportunity without inclusion or accessibility!

Do you not see the utter absurdity of what you're saying?
 
arthwollipot said:
You're - again - describing SDEI, not DEIA.

Mate, the E in DEIA stands for Equity. You just said the goal of removing DEI is equity.
Click to expand...
No, I said the goal of banning DEI is to restore (or at least strive for) equal opportunity.
arthwollipot said:
You can't have equal opportunity for individuals without regard for their immutable characteristics when you're banning equity.
Click to expand...
Huh?
arthwollipot said:
You can't ban diversity and still claim to have equal opportunity for individuals without regard for their immutable characteristics!
Click to expand...
Nobody is "banning diversity." We are banning an an institutional ideology called "DEI."
arthwollipot said:
You can't have equal opportunity without inclusion or accessibility!
Click to expand...
"Without inclusion" is incoherent. "Without accessibility" (ie, for the disabled) I agree with you. And the US has had sweeping accessibility laws for decades. So we don't need DEI for that.
arthwollipot said:
Do you not see the utter absurdity of what you're saying?
Click to expand...
No. I see what you're saying is nonsensical and incoherent.
 
arthwollipot said:
That I'm calling SDEI because it has absolutely ◊◊◊◊ all to do with actual DEIA.
Click to expand...
For the millionth time, what you're calling "SDEI" is actual DEI as practiced throughout the United States, and in fact as had been mandated throughout the entire federal government bureaucracy until about two weeks ago. Whereas, what you are calling "actual DEIA," has not been shown to exist anywhere other than in your own mind (and, no, statements on websites of DEI consultants don't get much evidential weight).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom