2 ms·

> he equated active racial, gender, etc. inclusion with active racial exclusion. I believe this to be correct. Explain the difference. People use it to stick i

• dragonwriter 5y ago
  > I believe this to be correct. That's the thing about of posting bare conclusions without support. It appeals to those who already agree with you, while doing nothing to convince those who don't. > Explain the difference. One targets a group and excludes them from the institution in question, the other a seeks to prevent any group from being excluded from the institution. > People use it to stick it to some people they don't like. No, DEI isn't about sticking it to people that the advocates don't like. > They justify it with oppression. No, German racial exclusion want justified by past oppression it was justified by racial supremacist ideology (in no small part inspired by American White supremacy.)
  • leereeves 5y ago
    > seeks to prevent any group from being excluded from the institution No group is being excluded from the institution. That's been illegal for decades. Many individuals are being excluded because they aren't part of the "right" group. The victims of that exclusion are mostly Asian and don't matter to "progressives". The author's proposed "academic evaluations based on academic merit" would open elite universities to tens of thousands of Asian students currently being excluded by race-based admissions.