Split Thread DEI in the US

[dirtywick]

We were considering assertions that eliminating DEI is an attempt to roll the clock back to Jim Crow or apartheid South Africa. These are not ideas which need to be taken all that seriously, they are just nightmarish extrapolations of what would happen in the event that MAGA keeps going well beyond their stated goals.

you expressed skepticism the maga movement was white supremacist in your post number 853 which was what spurred our discussion

 

[ponderingturtle]

We were considering assertions that eliminating DEI is an attempt to roll the clock back to Jim Crow or apartheid South Africa. These are not ideas which need to be taken all that seriously, they are just nightmarish extrapolations of what would happen in the event that MAGA keeps going well beyond their stated goals.

At least we will stop having all those black doctors, totally DEI all of them. And we can confidently say such a position is not racist, it is just a fact that all blacks are DEI hires.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Shouldn't come as any great surprise that people who voted against Trump don't do a good job of promoting his movement's message.

That's an example of common ground between those who voted for and those who voted against Trump.

 

[d4m10n]

you expressed skepticism the maga movement was white supremacist in your post number 853 which was what spurred our discussion

Right, but my question at the end of that post was intended to try to see if it is possible to have an on-topic discussion about how white supremacy is driving anti-DEI efforts, if at all. Personally, I'd go with your hypothesis that a "bunch of billionaires…gave up on america and got together to strip the copper out of the country" and posit that they quickly discovered an effective way to do that by appealing to the issues upon with their opposition is relatively unpopular, a sample of which you can find in the PDF from post 890 on page 15.

Several of the issues upon which Dems were statistically extreme according to survey respondents arguably fall under the ambit of DEI: Affirmative Action, racial preferences for minority owned small businesses, increasing asylum admittance rates, mandating lessons about LGB issues in public schools and trans-inclusion in school sports leagues, and legalizing or protecting gender affirming surgeries for minors. This is too broad an issue set to fall under "white supremacy" and I don't particularly credit the notion that 6,000 randomly selected American voters are particularly motivated by white supremacy in the first place, though I do expect they are generally self-interested.

 

[dirtywick]

Right, but my question at the end of that post was intended to try to see if it is possible to have an on-topic discussion about how white supremacy is driving anti-DEI efforts, if at all. Personally, I'd go with your hypothesis that a "bunch of billionaires…gave up on america and got together to strip the copper out of the country" and posit that they quickly discovered an effective way to do that by appealing to the issues upon with their opposition is relatively unpopular, a sample of which you can find in the PDF from post 890 on page 15.

Several of the issues upon which Dems were statistically extreme according to survey respondents arguably fall under the ambit of DEI: Affirmative Action, racial preferences for minority owned small businesses, increasing asylum admittance rates, mandating lessons about LGB issues in public schools and trans-inclusion in school sports leagues, and legalizing or protecting gender affirming surgeries for minors. This is too broad an issue set to fall under "white supremacy" and I don't particularly credit the notion that 6,000 randomly selected American voters are particularly motivated by white supremacy in the first place, though I do expect they are generally self-interested.

i think it’s important to acknowledge whether or not maga is a white supremacy movement or not before tackling whether or not their white supremacy ideology has impacted their anti dei efforts.

like, you could easily make the case their propaganda network pushing white supremacist rhetoric has influenced voter perceptions on all of those issues you listed, which is what i believe, including dei programs. but i cant really do that if we are working under a flawed premise where there is no white supremacist element and it’s just libtards freaking out again and it’s all off topic which is often where this ends up.

which is really why i would like to clarify whether or not you believe there’s any merit to the idea that maga views are white supremacist or not.

 

[arthwollipot]

Is it racist to pursue self-interest by becoming the individual beneficiary of an Affirmative Action program (e.g. placement/scholarship at a highly selective school) or is pursuing self-interest only racist when white folks do it?

It's always racist. It's also sexist, ableist, ageist and xenophobic.

Self-interest means that you're putting your own needs over those of other people. Any other people. All other people.

 

[theprestige]

It's always racist. It's also sexist, ableist, ageist and xenophobic.

Self-interest means that you're putting your own needs over those of other people. Any other people. All other people.

That's not racism. Dismissing someone because of their race is very different from dismissing someone because they're not you.

 

[arthwollipot]

That's not racism. Dismissing someone because of their race is very different from dismissing someone because they're not you.

But when they're not you, you're dismissing them for all the reasons. Race is among those reasons.

 

[d4m10n]

which is really why i would like to clarify whether or not you believe there’s any merit to the idea that maga views are white supremacist or not.

Of course there is merit to the idea if we're talking about ideas promulgated by individual actors such as Stephen Miller or the underlying rationale for specific policies such as preferential treatment for Afrikaner refugees. As much as I try to remember the principle of charity^WP it's not easy to come up with anything other than privileging people of European extraction to explain such things.

That said, I don't think Executive Order 14398^WP and the various other orders around DEI can be explained in terms of restoring special privileges to the white majority in the U.S. unless we can make a rational argument that they would foreseeably privilege European Americans over African Ameicans, Asian Americans, Caribbean Americans, etc.

What you seem to want to do here is make the case for DEI by showing that the movement against DEI is rooted in racism, but there isn't any good reason to suppose policies will have good results so long as they have bad opponents. DEI policies stand or fall on their own merits, not on the despicability of their detractors.

 

[d4m10n]

It's always racist.

To be clear, it is racist to accept a scholarship designated for BIPOC students, because doing so is in the self-interest of the BIPOC student accepting the scholarship. We live in interesting times.

 

[d4m10n]

At least we will stop having all those black doctors, totally DEI all of them.

Even if Dr. Khatibi prevails at the Supreme Court (unlikely, IMO) I am skeptical as to whether that will lead to fewer black doctors.

 

[Belgian thought]

Self-interest is racist.

This is a bit axiomatic and not really a place to build an argument from.

 

[dirtywick]

Of course there is merit to the idea if we're talking about ideas promulgated by individual actors such as Stephen Miller or the underlying rationale for specific policies such as preferential treatment for Afrikaner refugees. As much as I try to remember the principle of charity^WP it's not easy to come up with anything other than privileging people of European extraction to explain such things.

That said, I don't think Executive Order 14398^WP and the various other orders around DEI can be explained in terms of restoring special privileges to the white majority in the U.S. unless we can make a rational argument that they would foreseeably privilege European Americans over African Ameicans, Asian Americans, Caribbean Americans, etc.

What you seem to want to do here is make the case for DEI by showing that the movement against DEI is rooted in racism, but there isn't any good reason to suppose policies will have good results so long as they have bad opponents. DEI policies stand or fall on their own merits, not on the despicability of their detractors.

ok thanks for answering

 

[arthwollipot]

This is a bit axiomatic and not really a place to build an argument from.

No, not really. But I wasn't trying to build an argument from it, so we're all good.

 

[Belgian thought]

No, not really. But I wasn't trying to build an argument from it, so we're all good.

“self‑interest is racist” cannot apply to groups that are culturally cohesive or relatively homogeneous.

 

[SteveAitch]

“self‑interest is racist” cannot apply to groups that are culturally cohesive or relatively homogeneous.

Anthrophobia?

 

[ponderingturtle]

Even if Dr. Khatibi prevails at the Supreme Court (unlikely, IMO) I am skeptical as to whether that will lead to fewer black doctors.

But that is the argument of the anti DEI side, that all those doctors are only doctors because of DEI. Nothing racist about that either clearly.

 

[theprestige]

Anthrophobia?

Misanthropy.

 

[d4m10n]

But that is the argument of the anti DEI side, that all those doctors are only doctors because of DEI.

Feels like a strawman but if you say so then (as a skeptic) I'm going to trust you without asking for any quotes where they actually said that.

 

[jt512]

Feels like a strawman but if you say so then (as a skeptic) I'm going to trust you without asking for any quotes where they actually said that.

Of course it’s a straw man.