• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Diversity Equity and Inclusion and merit in employment etc

Yes some mysterious tapes turned up long after Johnson died that turned everything he previously said 180 degrees. I'm not convinced but its not related to DEI
 
arthwollipot said:
The problem is that the people in charge are getting rid of both the people who are doing great ◊◊◊◊ and the people who are just doing ◊◊◊◊. They are not making any kind of distinction. All DEI, ◊◊◊◊ or otherwise, is bad and must be ended.

That's the problem. There are babies in the bathwater. But the anti-DEI activists don't care about the babies. Won't someone think of the babies?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was a loser in the DEI debate for most of my life, now I am a winner. One example of DEI that I can think of was that they did not want to pair whites together in billets in the Army, so they spread them out equally. This is one example of how DEI sucks is that they did not consider whether or not the people would get along they just split them because they were afraid of whites gathering and plotting. Yeah, so DEI has nothing to with workplace rights and welfare as far as I can see.
 
jt512 said:
I am opposed to any such targets. Hiring should be based strictly on merit.
Click to expand...
"Hiring strictly on merit" is what got you to the 90%+ white male situation in the first place. Because "hiring on merit" never seems to work that way - it always assumes that minorities are by default less merited.

"Hiring on merit" is another dogwhistle for white supremacy.
 
Was RFKJr hired "entirely on merit"?

This administration has absolutely no interest in hiring on merit. They just want to get rid of everything that benefits minorities.
 
Susheel said:
Racial Bias In Hiring Process
Trends in racial and ethnic discrimination in hiring in six Western countries
New Research Reveals Resumes With Black Names Experience Bias In The Hiring Process
...Lot more where that came from. Now, your turn.
Click to expand...

Assuming that these articles (which I'm sure you've actually read ;)) show discrimination (note the second paper, a meta-analysis, appears to suffer from publication bias—see the funnel plots in the supplemental data), what makes you think that preferential hiring of minorities would solve it? You can force "equity," but only at the expense of merit. Discrimination on the basis of race, etc. is illegal in this country. Efforts should be made to better-enforce our anti-discrimination laws rather than hire people because they belong to some currently favored identity group.
 
jt512 said:
Assuming that these articles (which I'm sure you've actually read ;)) show discrimination (note the second paper, a meta-analysis, appears to suffer from publication bias—see the funnel plots in the supplemental data), what makes you think that preferential hiring of minorities would solve it? You can force "equity," but only at the expense of merit. Discrimination on the basis of race, etc. is illegal in this country. Efforts should be made to better-enforce our anti-discrimination laws rather than hire people because they belong to some currently favored identity group.
Click to expand...
Like white men, for example?
 
jt512 said:
Discrimination on the basis of race, etc. is illegal in this country. Efforts should be made to better-enforce our anti-discrimination laws rather than hire people because they belong to some currently favored identity group.
Click to expand...
That rather begs the question - what "better enforcement" are you claiming is feasible, especially when such is being restricted to being practiced on an individual scale from the start?
arthwollipot said:
Like white men, for example?
Click to expand...
If, say, there's a bias towards white men in part because there's the underlying expectation that they'll be better able to be chums with other white male CEOs and thus be more advantageous at base when dealing with other companies, that would be an example of a self-reinforcing bias cycle, right there. Justified discrimination, in fact, based on "merit." :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
arthwollipot said:
Was RFKJr hired "entirely on merit"?

This administration has absolutely no interest in hiring on merit. They just want to get rid of everything that benefits minorities.
Click to expand...
Oh, goodness. No political appointee is picked on merit. Are you new to the planet?
 
Manger Douse said:
Yes some mysterious tapes turned up long after Johnson died that turned everything he previously said 180 degrees. I'm not convinced but its not related to DEI
Click to expand...

Trausti said:
It seems alot of progressive talking points is just hatred of White people.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and by that logic, the conservative talking points is to ensure continuance of white privilege (dare I say superiority?)
 
arthwollipot said:
I can't be the only person who has noticed that despite being loudly and forcefully anti-DEI, the current administration is not doing a lot to promote meritocracy.
Click to expand...
Sure it is. By ending crap like this.

GlRwbLWWEAAtQg6

https://freebeacon.com/biden-admini...e-ngo-recipient-has-experience-doing-neither/
 
Susheel said:
Yeah, and by that logic, the conservative talking points is to ensure continuance of white privilege (dare I say superiority?)
Click to expand...
"White privilege" is a blood libel. Can you cite an example in the last 30 years where a non-White person or part-White person pretended to be White to gain advantage? We certainly have examples of pretendians going the other way.
 
jt512 said:
Assuming that these articles (which I'm sure you've actually read ;)) show discrimination (note the second paper, a meta-analysis, appears to suffer from publication bias—see the funnel plots in the supplemental data), what makes you think that preferential hiring of minorities would solve it? You can force "equity," but only at the expense of merit. Discrimination on the basis of race, etc. is illegal in this country. Efforts should be made to better-enforce our anti-discrimination laws rather than hire people because they belong to some currently favored identity group.
Click to expand...
Yes, contrary to expectations I do read. Quite profusely. I have also spent and continue to spend a huge portion of my life as researcher and editor primarily in the area of socio-economics. And yes, I did include a meta-analysis, because it references other studies that you may want to look at if you so wish.
Sometimes equity has to be forced, when actual "laws" are circumvented to ensure a comfortable status quo that continues to privilege the already privileged. For instance, the de-segregation of schools. Just because something is illegal does not mean that it does not continue to occur and some of the articles I linked to, provide evidence of those.
Well, DEI IS an attempt to better enforce anti-discrimination laws because as those articles show, current hiring practices do currently favour a privileged identity group.
 
MinnesotaBrant said:
Yeah, I was a loser in the DEI debate for most of my life, now I am a winner. One example of DEI that I can think of was that they did not want to pair whites together in billets in the Army, so they spread them out equally. This is one example of how DEI sucks is that they did not consider whether or not the people would get along they just split them because they were afraid of whites gathering and plotting. Yeah, so DEI has nothing to with workplace rights and welfare as far as I can see.
Click to expand...
I thought the army was about getting people to work together regardless of racial prejudices towards a common objective. Perhaps the exercise was to ensure that either party would be able to shake off their prejudices and come together. How would your attitude translate in a conflict situation where you may not have a choice about who you are working with...would you say "I would rather have a white guy beside me?" Why did you feel you couldn't get along? Was it because the other person wasn't like you? Was it the "other guys fault" you couldn't get along?
 
Trausti said:
"White privilege" is a blood libel. Can you cite an example in the last 30 years where a non-White person or part-White person pretended to be White to gain advantage? We certainly have examples of pretendians going the other way.
Click to expand...
Probably the terribly incompetent white folk who are trying to get in. That isn't as much a white superiority flex as you expected it to be.
 
Susheel said:
Yeah...no. Any more information on the project? How did they handle the job. The article is just a long whine about "brown people" appointed to the job.
Click to expand...
Just the fact that it's being used in a DEI argument is cause for me to doubt it. The details are almost certainly not what is being reported - they never are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom