2 ms·

DEI is truly division and exclusion. It is a euphemism for new types of discrimination. Hopefully Supreme Court rules on this soon as they did on affirmative ac

DEI is truly division and exclusion. It is a euphemism for new types of discrimination. Hopefully Supreme Court rules on this soon as they did on affirmative action. You cannot fix the world by implementing new types of bias and discrimination, even if it is being wrapped up and sold as diversity and inclusion or however else it is pitched. This should be unconstitutional and against the Equal Protection Clause in the Constitution period. We cannot and should not ever judge a book by its cover. We must always focus on merit, ability, and equality first. However, I do think society needs to provide social nets to help people get free education that are not able to afford it if the education has promise to lead to great career opportunities. From the film Lincoln, 'Euclid's first common notion is this: "Things which are equal to the same thing are equal to each other." That's a rule of mathematical reasoning. It's true because it works; has done and will always will do. In his book, Euclid says this is "self-evident." You see, there it is, even in that two-thousand year old book of mechanical law: it is a self-evident truth of things which are equal to the same thing, are equal to each other. We begin with equality. That's the origin, isn't it? That balance-that's fairness, that's justice.' We are all homo sapiens and need to be treated fairly, equally. No one should be given structural preferential bias on a public or private level. We have fought so hard for equality in this country, DEI is a step backwards in equality by sanctioning new biases.

OkayPhysicist 3y ago
How many centuries do you think is an acceptable timeframe to quote people when they want a problem solved? Right now, we're about a century and half out from when Black Americans were first recognized as people, about 3/4 of a century out from when the last slaves were freed, and less than half a century past living in an overt Apartheid state. If you look at the rich and powerful, the vast majority of them started from a position that was simply impossible for POC at the time. Each generation benefits from the prosperity of the last, giving them a leg up over those without that advantage. Over time, random chance may reduce the resulting advantage to below the noise floor, but how long should those affected be expected to wait? Or maybe we can try to remedy the situation, now, for the living. Overt diversity initiatives try to solve the problem that someone from a marginalized group is likely to be less qualified than their unmarginalized peers because they've had fewer opportunities to become qualified exactly because of that marginalization. If you don't take corrective action, then you just perpetuate the problem. So, if you still are opposed to corrective action: How many centuries is enough?
- blondie9x 3y ago
  Implementing new bias initiatives makes the cycle never ending, for all time. We must focus on equality now to prevent preferential bias going forward.
- Izkata 3y ago
  So you can look to the past and present, but don't want to look to the future? What about the people growing up now who have only ever been discriminated against? What happens to these demographics in 20 or 30 years? We're lucky the backlash is happening now and not then. Creating more discrimination is never the solution, it just creates more problems.

OkayPhysicist 3y ago

How many centuries do you think is an acceptable timeframe to quote people when they want a problem solved? Right now, we're about a century and half out from when Black Americans were first recognized as people, about 3/4 of a century out from when the last slaves were freed, and less than half a century past living in an overt Apartheid state. If you look at the rich and powerful, the vast majority of them started from a position that was simply impossible for POC at the time. Each generation benefits from the prosperity of the last, giving them a leg up over those without that advantage. Over time, random chance may reduce the resulting advantage to below the noise floor, but how long should those affected be expected to wait? Or maybe we can try to remedy the situation, now, for the living. Overt diversity initiatives try to solve the problem that someone from a marginalized group is likely to be less qualified than their unmarginalized peers because they've had fewer opportunities to become qualified exactly because of that marginalization. If you don't take corrective action, then you just perpetuate the problem. So, if you still are opposed to corrective action: How many centuries is enough?

blondie9x 3y ago
Implementing new bias initiatives makes the cycle never ending, for all time. We must focus on equality now to prevent preferential bias going forward.
Izkata 3y ago
So you can look to the past and present, but don't want to look to the future? What about the people growing up now who have only ever been discriminated against? What happens to these demographics in 20 or 30 years? We're lucky the backlash is happening now and not then. Creating more discrimination is never the solution, it just creates more problems.