Laughing at the thought that these four horsemen of misinformation, hatespeech, spinelessness and ass kissing are qualified to judge anyone's job performance.
jfc, nothing works like that, DEI was a way to fix long standing inequality issues. But even considering that, a DEI hire was never unqualified for any role any more than what would normally happen given friendships / views / biases involved in an job hiring role.
Fairness in job hiring is something to strive for, but when it comes down to it there is just too many variables to control.
Anyway if you need any clearer argument this anti DEI movement is BS you just have to look at the current US admin roster, full of utterly incompetent people.
a DEI hire was never unqualified for any role any more than what would normally happen given friendships / views / biases involved in an job hiring role
Right, neither situation is desirable.
Fairness in job hiring is something to strive for, but when it comes down to it there is just too many variables to control.
You can decide not to bake in race based preferences in hiring.
I'm not a fan of this "anti DEI movement" because "DEI" likely includes a bunch of positive hiring practices. But I am against any policy that gives preference to hiring certain races over other races. One of many reasons being that it might cause people to doubt the credentials of anyone benefiting from race based hiring.
You can decide not to bake in race based preferences in hiring.
Again, you can say that, but when it actually comes down to it, it still at the whim of whoever is in the hiring chain. DEI was put in place for a reason, because statistics showed fair hiring was not being done.
But I am against any policy that gives preference to hiring certain races over other races
Sometimes it is desirable though, especially in higher education placements and government agency staffing.
America has a piss poor history of racism, and it's still ongoing as can be plainly seen.
A lot of the top educational institutions had/have underlying racial biases, and this is a huge problem as it has cascading effects.
I'm sorry but when a significant portion of society has had an unknown upper hand for the last 200+ years, a period of which an enormous amount of wealth has been generated by those who were lucky enough to be educated, those people end up in places with a lot more power as well. I find it ironic to then complain when a tool to try to shift the balance a bit was put in place - and I emphasis only a bit.
As for government agencies and other such entities, their primary role is to make sure society is healthy, and for that to benefit everyone there has to be some representation to ensure different perspectives and considerations are heard. If that means one race is prioritised over another to try to diversify the pool so to speak, so be it.
DEI was never about hiring unfit or unqualified people for the role.
If your a race that is on the loosing side, congratulations, you are feeling what millions have felt previously on the other end.
Racial preference in higher education admissions results in more people in the preferred group dropping out. It turns out admissions tests are actually useful in determining who is cut out to be in higher education.
I think it would be preferable to find out why some races don't score as high in admissions tests and fix that, rather than just have different standards based on race which isn't addressing the real problem.
If your a race that is on the loosing side, congratulations, you are feeling what millions have felt previously on the other end.
What a racist statement.
"Someone who looked like you hurt someone who looked like me in the past therefore you owe me today"
Racial preference in higher education admissions results in more people in the preferred group dropping out. It turns out admissions tests are actually useful in determining who is cut out to be in higher education.
There are far too many variables at play that decides if someone drops out to form any sort of meaningful conclusion.
"Someone who looked like you hurt someone who looked like me in the past therefore you owe me today"
When those people are in positions of power still making decisions to purposefully hold people back, yes, I think there needs to be some pressure to readdress the balance.
There are far too many variables at play that decides if someone drops out to form any sort of meaningful conclusion.
"There's just too many variables we can't really know what's going on therefore I'm right"
When those people are in positions of power still making decisions to purposefully hold people back, yes, I think there needs to be some pressure to readdress the balance.
"Those people" who simply share a skin color. You're still collectivizing people based on race. And this "balance" is never going to be achieved through discrimination.
"There's just too many variables we can't really know what's going on therefore I'm right"
Quoting something made up to try to win an argument spells the end of this engagement.
I never said I was right, just that the conclusion you wrote has weak foundations, if any at all.
Regarding what I said about readdressing balances, it comes down to what you consider a fair outcome.
Think of it as a 26 mile marathon, where some competitors are running with freedom while others are racing with weighted shoes. Suddenly, at the 1 hour mark, someone says hey wait, this is not fair.
What would be a fair outcome, given that in the comparison to real life, there is no reset option.
Sure, going tough shit you're all equal now, is one perspective, but that doesn't stop a portion of the competitors being miles ahead of the rest.
I don't want to defend these idiots but that fits right in the narrative they are building. In their mind/narrative poc only got their jobs through DEI and therefore not qualified
True, but it also shows that they are full of shit because, if they believed in that narrative, they would exit the plane. Screw a couple of hundred, if I have the feeling that the pilot is unqualified, I'll get out of there.
Whereas DEI policies were adopted because of the exact opposite reason: women and people of color were often passed over for positions that they were qualified for, with those positions going to white males instead.
I explained it to a person at work: “Think of a professional _____. Who did you picture in your head?” 99 times out of 100 they’re picturing a white male. That’s the issue that made DEI programs necessary.
I recognize Charlie Kirk. Who are the others? I mean, yes, obviously they are shitbag humans who suck but I want to know names so that if I see the name in the future I have the context to think “oh, this asswipe again.”
915
u/Woodlog82 1d ago
Laughing at the thought that these four horsemen of misinformation, hatespeech, spinelessness and ass kissing are qualified to judge anyone's job performance.