Split Thread DEI in the US

[wareyin]

I wonder how prevalent Darat thinks people who "consider black folk to be less intelligent than white folk becuase they are black" are.

Progressives: Systemic racism means black people are less well-educated, and less able to compete in the workforce.

Also progressives: Black people are just as qualified as white people, and just as deserving of the best jobs.

The problem with DEI is that it's aimed at the wrong end of the pipeline, trying to make the most of subpar candidates that these corporations had no hand in educating or training for the real world. Meanwhile, the progressive-run US education establishment seems incapable of turning out black graduates who are actually competitive in job interviews. Hence the need for DEI: It penalizes Evil Corporations for hiring based on merit rather than skin color, instead of reforming the dog's breakfast that is progressive-run education in the US. Fix the teachers, and DEI goes away.

The irony of asking 'Who actually thinks this way?' followed immediately by someone calling black candidates "subpar"...

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Who are all these people who “consider black folk to be less intelligent than white folk becuase they are black”? You must live in a very racist country.

Most of the 52 people who signed Linda Gottfredson's 1994 letter to the WSJ ("Mainstream Science on Intelligence") identified themselves as associated with universities and other institutions located within the United States. Of the 25 numbered statements allegedly "regarded as mainstream among researchers on intelligence", these two may be relevant to your question:

7. Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level...The bell curves for some groups (Jews and East Asians) are centered somewhat higher than for whites in general. Other groups (blacks and Hispanics) are centered somewhat lower than non-Hispanic whites.

8. The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered.

Correlation is not causation, of course, but 20 of the 52 who signed were funded by the Pioneer Fund, which most definitely promoted the idea of a causal link. (Circa 2022, the Pioneer Fund morphed into the Human Diversity Foundation, which continues to promote a causal link between race and intelligence.)

As for how mainstream that "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" letter actually was, we should note that Gottfredsen solicited signatures from 131 "experts in intelligence and allied fields". 48 of those experts explicitly refused to sign the letter, and 31 just ignored Gottfredsen's solicitation.

Similar racism persists today. One month ago, The New York Times reported recent mishandling of data from an NIH study:

A group of fringe researchers thwarted safeguards at the National Institutes of Health and gained access to data from thousands of children. The researchers have used it to produce at least 16 papers purporting to find biological evidence for differences in intelligence between races, ranking ethnicities by I.Q. scores and suggesting Black people earn less because they are not very smart.

It is of course true that, in the United States, such racism is nowadays most commonly found within the far right. If you turn a blind eye to the US far right, and to those who associate with the far right, then it is just barely possible to remain unaware of how many people still consider black folk to be less intelligent than white folk just because they're black.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Who are all these people who “consider black folk to be less intelligent than white folk becuase they are black”? You must live in a very racist country.

Yes, we do. It's called the United States of America. The racism is so rampant, that the government is run by white supremacists.

 

[thaiboxerken]

The irony of asking 'Who actually thinks this way?' followed immediately by someone calling black candidates "subpar"...

It's the white supremacist view that they aren't racist; that they are just pointing out the "fact" that black people are not as intelligent as white people.

 

[theprestige]

The irony of asking 'Who actually thinks this way?' followed immediately by someone calling black candidates "subpar"...

Except I don't actually think that black people are less intelligent. Just that they're poorly served by our education system, and that this necessarily plays a part in why they don't always get hired at the same rate as white people.

 

[wareyin]

Except I don't actually think that black people are less intelligent. Just that they're poorly served by our education system, and that this necessarily plays a part in why they don't always get hired at the same rate as white people.

Oh, it isn't a lack of intelligence but a lack of an arbitrary degree from a system you claim is a "dog’s breakfast" that makes someone subpar? And that this applies more to the groups that DEI is trying to help? Do tell...

 

[theprestige]

Oh, it isn't a lack of intelligence but a lack of an arbitrary degree from a system you claim is a "dog’s breakfast" that makes someone subpar?

Makes someone less qualified.

And that this applies more to the groups that DEI is trying to help? Do tell...

I already told.

 

[wareyin]

Makes someone less qualified.

So you want a "dog’s breakfast" of a system to tell you who is qualified?

I already told.

I hadn't pegged you as pro-DEI, but it's good to see you think black people are equally qualified but are disproportionally negatively affected by arbitrary requirements.

 

[theprestige]

So you want a "dog’s breakfast" of a system to tell you who is qualified?

I hadn't pegged you as pro-DEI, but it's good to see you think black people are equally qualified but are disproportionally negatively affected by arbitrary requirements.

You've put this much better than I did. Thanks!

 

[The_Animus]

You observe that a less qualified minority got the job and you file a complaint with federal EEOC, which initiates a formal investigation.

How do you know who got the job? How do you know they're a minority? How do you know they're less qualified than you?

 

[thaiboxerken]

How do you know who got the job? How do you know they're a minority? How do you know they're less qualified than you?

You really don't, unless it is an internal position. But that's the point.

 

[arthwollipot]

Finally, you say workers should be "genderless, raceless corporate drones," yet you're the one who says you were guessing backgrounds based on names to hit a recruitment quota. You weren't even treating them as drones. You were treating them as lottery tickets to get yourself paid, and it sounds like you were actively gaming the system and ignoring safety risks just to secure your own bonus.

The idea that people should be people in their jobs and not "genderless corporate drones" is one of the principles behind the Australian Public Services core values for diversity and inclusion, which are extremely successful, which are backed by legislation, and which I have posted here already several times as an example of DEI that works.

What you describe is a formula for an oppressive, joyless work environment where nobody wants to work and people burn out quickly. That is a supremely sucky way to treat employees.

 

[wareyin]

The idea that people should be people in their jobs and not "genderless corporate drones" is one of the principles behind the Australian Public Services core values for diversity and inclusion, which are extremely successful, which are backed by legislation, and which I have posted here already several times as an example of DEI that works.

What you describe is a formula for an oppressive, joyless work environment where nobody wants to work and people burn out quickly. That is a supremely sucky way to treat employees.

Well, he does repeatedly point out that he contracts with a staffing agency to fill all of his roles with temporary workers, and makes sure to get rid of them every 18 months to avoid paying benefits. It is certainly a sucky way to treat workers, but constantly forcing turnover probably doesn't give burn out enough time to set in.

 

[wareyin]

How do you know who got the job? How do you know they're a minority? How do you know they're less qualified than you?

In my experience, the idea that candidates are told who else got the job, much less what their qualifications or minority status are, is patent nonsense. I have to wonder if jt512 has ever actually hired anyone or even interviewed for a job himself. That information is strictly confidential for very obvious legal and privacy reasons.

Unless it’s an internal hire where word gets around, a candidate has no way of knowing who beat them out. Even then, "less qualified" is a subjective label from the outside. In a real workplace, a "more qualified" candidate on paper can easily lose out if they're a pompous ass that nobody wants to work with. Soft skills and shop culture are legitimate qualifications, but it seems jt512 believes he can just look through the office window to see who got hired, and if that person is a minority, then he's decided they're "less qualified" by default. Ipso facto and all that.

 

[gabeygoat]

Take Nike, Inc., for example. When Nike claims to implement a DEI policy, what problem(s) do you think this global corporation is trying to solve?

Oh! My cousin is the Executive Vice President Chief Human Resources Officer at Nike, and before that VP, Chief Talent and Diversity Officer at Nike as well. I'll ask her what she thinks.

​

 

[jt512]

It is of course true that, in the United States, such racism is nowadays most commonly found within the far right. If you turn a blind eye to the US far right, and to those who associate with the far right, then it is just barely possible to remain unaware of
how many people still consider black folk to be less intelligent than white folk just because they're black.

Which is exactly the question I asked, and exactly the one you ignored. So I ask again: how prevalent do you think that is (in the U.S., say); that is, what percentage of, say, Americans today do you think "consider black folk to be less intelligent than white folk just because they're black"?

 

[thaiboxerken]

Which is exactly the question I asked, and exactly the one you ignored. So I ask again: how prevalent do you think that is (in the U.S., say); that is, what percentage of, say, Americans today do you think "consider black folk to be less intelligent than white folk just because they're black"?

Enough people to get white supremacists to take power in the USA government.

 

[novaphile]

I've mentioned it before, but nutrition plays an important part of potential intelligence.

Getting good nutrition to infants is very important.

This is why many schools, all over the world, provide free breakfasts (and often lunches).

If you can keep people too poor to feed themselves, you can keep 'em dumb.

 

[Trausti]

What changed, and why?

Are you somehow under the impression that public schools in the US have always enjoyed high funding? Do you think the generations that industrialized the US, invited the semiconductor, and got the US to the Moon went to lavishly funded public schools? Hah.

 

[Trausti]

I've mentioned it before, but nutrition plays an important part of potential intelligence.

Getting good nutrition to infants is very important.

This is why many schools, all over the world, provide free breakfasts (and often lunches).

If you can keep people too poor to feed themselves, you can keep 'em dumb.

Yes. And if parents choose to feed their kids processed junk food instead of milk and eggs, what do you?