DEI is about what you "are", and reduces what you do/did/can/... to stuff that was decided when you were born. In a perfect "DEI" world, your status would be decided the moment you are conceived and would be utterly unchangeable. It's fundamentally a status game. It's about "blood", what blood, skin, hair, ... you're born with.
DEI has advanced in society to the point that, ironically, it's not tolerant of other viewpoints. And the ideology doesn't see this as a problem, in fact like all zero-merit ideologies (meaning they don't value individuals at all, and certainly not on personal achievement), they're actively proud of being bullies. Except this is a bullies club where entry is based on your genes.
DEI as "let's make a meritocracy more meritocratic" is great. Fantastic even. And it certainly was a necessity. DEI appears to not be that, anymore.
And even this is disregarding that DEI is at least partially a coverup for dumb spending cuts by government. Or that it's failing. The advancement of DEI is certainly not making the poor better off.
Isn't IQ both highly inherited and highly correlated with achievement? And if both those are true then isn't the idea of meritocracy ultimately mostly still down to luck of birth?
DEI isn’t only focused on race. And even if so, if there are more statistically distributed poor people of one race getting by than another, that is a problem.
> Black and Hispanics make up just 14 percent of students admitted from outside the automatic threshold, even though they make up 60 percent of Texas high school graduates. Meanwhile, white and Asian students make up 73 percent of non-automatically admitted students, while they make up 39 percent of Texas high school graduates overall.
mdorazio|2 years ago
And likely anyone who values true freedom of speech: https://themissingdatadepot.substack.com/p/is-dei-destroying...
candiodari|2 years ago
DEI has advanced in society to the point that, ironically, it's not tolerant of other viewpoints. And the ideology doesn't see this as a problem, in fact like all zero-merit ideologies (meaning they don't value individuals at all, and certainly not on personal achievement), they're actively proud of being bullies. Except this is a bullies club where entry is based on your genes.
DEI as "let's make a meritocracy more meritocratic" is great. Fantastic even. And it certainly was a necessity. DEI appears to not be that, anymore.
And even this is disregarding that DEI is at least partially a coverup for dumb spending cuts by government. Or that it's failing. The advancement of DEI is certainly not making the poor better off.
cool_dude85|2 years ago
Can you find some concrete examples of prominent proponents of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs making the claims you attribute to them?
hotpotamus|2 years ago
gotoeleven|2 years ago
iinnPP|2 years ago
teux|2 years ago
DEI isn’t only focused on race. And even if so, if there are more statistically distributed poor people of one race getting by than another, that is a problem.
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/23/race-and-admissions-...
> Black and Hispanics make up just 14 percent of students admitted from outside the automatic threshold, even though they make up 60 percent of Texas high school graduates. Meanwhile, white and Asian students make up 73 percent of non-automatically admitted students, while they make up 39 percent of Texas high school graduates overall.