Split Thread DEI in the US

[thaiboxerken]

Which specific lies do you have in mind? If you were to name a few, perhaps that would help me explain my "understanding of the anti-DEI claims" which you have in mind.

That said, I don't think that we need to spend too much time on lies from partisans. It would be better to pick a few specific DEI interventions and ask whether the claims made on their behalf are backed up by science. For example, we could look into unconscious bias trainings, most of which have not been shown to produce lasting changes.

Just a few lies: DEI hires are the reason for airplane accidents, shipwrecks, poor performance in many fields, lower military readiness and that DEI is simply discrimation against white, men.

 

[d4m10n]

If you want to demonstrate that white supremacists promulgated those specific lies, go for it.

Not going to do your googling for you.

 

[thaiboxerken]

MAGA makes these claims. They are white supremacists. Also, the claims are racist, in and of themselves.

 

[ponderingturtle]

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.

I did not accuse you of saying so, but the anti DEI crowd really likes attacking any person of color or woman as only being chosen because of DEI. But hopefully we can get rid of all that DEI crap about disabilities and the like, no diversity in disability or health should be demanded.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Reminds me of this.

If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago and a racist today. - Thomas Sowell.

Exaclty which is why the ADA is wrong and discrimintory. It discriminates against the able bodied.

 

[ponderingturtle]

. For example, we could look into unconscious bias trainings, most of which have not been shown to produce lasting changes.

Hey why should it? Suggesting anything needs change is racist against white people.

 

[d4m10n]

Suggesting anything needs change is racist against white people.

Do you believe this or do you believe someone else here believes this?

If you don't believe it and no one else posting here does, what could possibly be the point in saying it?

 

[d4m10n]

MAGA makes these claims.

Do they, though? We're neck deep in Hitchens' Razor territory here.

If someone is avowedly anti-X it doesn't make much sense to trust their word on what the pro-X people are saying; far better to quote the claims made by individuals than to broad brush the entire movement.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Do you believe this or do you believe someone else here believes this?

If you don't believe it and no one else posting here does, what could possibly be the point in saying it?

The anti DEI crowd don't exactly buy into the idea that unconsious bias exists. Look be proud that the federal agency concerned about discrimination in the work place is ignoring all those BS claims by the LGBT comunity, women and non whites to focus on the most oppressed group in the US, straight white men.

https://www.npr.org/2026/03/31/nx-s1-5763966/eeoc-trump-white-men-civil-rights-dei-discrimination

 

[d4m10n]

The anti DEI crowd don't exactly buy into the idea that unconsious bias exists.

If someone is avowedly pro-DEI it doesn't make much sense to trust their word on what the anti-DEI people are saying.

...the federal agency concerned about discrimination in the work place is ignoring all those BS claims by the LGBT

All those claims? I'm seeing just the one.

(I'd comment on it here, but trans rights discussions tend to get threads shut down.)

 

[ponderingturtle]

If someone is avowedly pro-DEI it doesn't make much sense to trust their word on what the anti-DEI people are saying.

Interesting, you can only ever trust supporters of something about the thing, as anyone opposed to it is inherently untrustworthy. I guess you can't criticize any movements and have it taken seriously.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

If someone is avowedly pro-DEI it doesn't make much sense to trust their word on what the anti-DEI people are saying.

I assume that's for the same reason we shouldn't trust anti-DEI people to tell us what the pro-DEI people are saying.

 

[theprestige]

I assume that's for the same reason we shouldn't trust anti-DEI people to tell us what the pro-DEI people are saying.

On the other hand, we can probably trust the anti-DEI people to say whatever it is the anti-DEI people are saying.

 

[d4m10n]

I guess you can't criticize any movements and have it taken seriously.

Certainly not when you are mischaracterizing the movement in the process. Perhaps the "anti DEI crowd don't exactly buy into the idea that unconscious bias exists" or perhaps not, but when you make such claims without providing any evidence there isn't really any point refuting them.

 

[arthwollipot]

Has anybody read this book? (Reviewed on this week's Geologic Podcast)

Darkology: Blackface and the American Way of Entertainment by Rhae Lynn Barnes

 

[jt512]

In case anyone is interested in the actual objections to DEI in the U.S. (as opposed to the imagined, racist ones), Distinguished Professor of Psychology Lee Jussim has published a comprehensive summary of them here. As Lee clearly states, this is not a balanced discussion of DEI because arguments in favor or DEI are already discussed all over the place. The purpose of Lee's article is explicitly to summarize the arguments against.

Below, is how Lee summarizes them:

Summary of the Arguments Critical of DEI and DEI Statements​

These are the themes I have abstracted from the large literature critical of DEI and each appears as a heading below, under which you can find several sources. The themes are not completely independent, one theme often augments, strengthens or is synergistic with another. Nonetheless, I found it worthwhile to divide the themes into these groupings:

• Meritocratic Beliefs are Strong Predictors of Low Discrimination
• Diversity Does Not Produce Its Promised Benefits
• DEI Has Unintended Negative Side Effects
• DEI Demonizes “Oppressor” Groups
• DEI is Deceptive, Disingenuous, and/or Involves Outright Lies
• DEI is a Litmus Test for Subjective, Progressive-Approved Political Activism and Values
• In Many Places, Including NIH and Elite Universities, DEI Implementation Has Been, is, or May Be Illegal in the U.S.
• DEI is Harmful to Academic Freedom and Free Inquiry
• DEI Statements are Loyalty Oaths that Violate First Amendment Protections Against Compelled Speech
• DEI Bureaucracies’ Cost Exceeds Their Value or Do More Harm than Good
• DEI Worsens a Range of Academic Mal/Dysfunctions

See Lee's article if you are interested in the details.

 

[novaphile]

In case anyone is interested in the actual objections to DEI in the U.S. (as opposed to the imagined, racist ones), Distinguished Professor of Psychology Lee Jussim has published a comprehensive summary of them here. As Lee clearly states, this is not a balanced discussion of DEI because arguments in favor or DEI are already discussed all over the placed. The purpose of Lee's article is explicitly to summarize the arguments against.

Below, is how Lee summarizes them:

Summary of the Arguments Critical of DEI and DEI Statements​

These are the themes I have abstracted from the large literature critical of DEI and each appears as a heading below, under which you can find several sources. The themes are not completely independent, one theme often augments, strengthens or is synergistic with another. Nonetheless, I found it worthwhile to divide the themes into these groupings:

• Meritocratic Beliefs are Strong Predictors of Low Discrimination
• Diversity Does Not Produce Its Promised Benefits
• DEI Has Unintended Negative Side Effects
• DEI Demonizes “Oppressor” Groups
• DEI is Deceptive, Disingenuous, and/or Involves Outright Lies
• DEI is a Litmus Test for Subjective, Progressive-Approved Political Activism and Values
• In Many Places, Including NIH and Elite Universities, DEI Implementation Has Been, is, or May Be Illegal in the U.S.
• DEI is Harmful to Academic Freedom and Free Inquiry
• DEI Statements are Loyalty Oaths that Violate First Amendment Protections Against Compelled Speech
• DEI Bureaucracies’ Cost Exceeds Their Value or Do More Harm than Good
• DEI Worsens a Range of Academic Mal/Dysfunctions

See Lee's article if you are interested in the details.

I cannot imagine being less interested...

 

[jt512]

I cannot imagine being less interested...

I appreciate your honesty.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Certainly not when you are mischaracterizing the movement in the process. Perhaps the "anti DEI crowd don't exactly buy into the idea that unconscious bias exists" or perhaps not, but when you make such claims without providing any evidence there isn't really any point refuting them.

HOw about this for an anti DEI person making a blanket categorization that black pilots are incompetent.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/charlie-kirk-black-pilots/

Why wouldn't that apply to doctors as well?

 

[d4m10n]

How about this for an anti DEI person making a blanket categorization that black pilots are incompetent.

He seemed to be saying that they might be less competent on account of programs designed to increase the number of minorities who make it into flight training. Those diversity programs actually did exist at the Air Force Academy (graduates of which are disproportionally represented in USAF undergraduate pilot training, graduates of which are historically overrepresented in commercial aviation) until the second Trump administration, but there aren't really any data showing that the quality of pilots has decreased as a result of diversity initiatives in place at any level. I would be surprised if such data were forthcoming since those programs can afford to be remarkably selective about who gets a desk on day one of ground school and can also afford a high washout rate. That said, I would also be surprised if Charlie Kirk fanboys decided to take a data-driven analytical approach to this or any other problem.

Why wouldn't that apply to doctors as well?

If you want to try to extend Kirk's "logic" to doctors, feel free, but I doubt anyone here is going to seriously try to make that argument.

Perhaps you can find an anti-DEI ideologue who already has?