10 ms·

DEI statements are culty. I see it no different than a religious fundamentalist college asking faculty to sign an oath of allegiance. At least in such a case, y

DEI statements are culty. I see it no different than a religious fundamentalist college asking faculty to sign an oath of allegiance. At least in such a case, you can always know beforehand the BS you'll put up with, unlike secular universities that are adopting DEI statements.

MrSkelter 2y ago
There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done, and whatever you think a religious “pledge of allegiance” is. A pledge to God? The mishandling of DEI doesn’t invalidate the need to fix broken systems which fail to select the best people instead of those who score highest in easily gamed and inherently biased metrics.
- 6312783123 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - MissTake 2y ago
    The article actually doesn’t say any such thing. It simply assumes that a Chinese propaganda machine is focused only on “wokeism”. Dog forbid that they should seek to use propaganda to attack both sides - which is far more effective at spreading division.
    - 6312783123 2y ago
      Here's a book about it: David M. Jones, The Strategy of Maoism in the West - Rage and the Radical Left: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Strategy-Maoism-West-Rage-Radical/dp/180220945X https://www.amazon.co.uk/Strategy-Maoism-West-Rage-Radical/d... https://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/bafykbzacedx5ta6zzpq2ix4km2x5sf23nzt6eqb5nhnark75zry23yc56zcao?filename=David%20M.%20Jones%2C%20M.%20L.R.%20Smith%20-%20The%20Strategy%20of%20Maoism%20in%20the%20West_%20Rage%20and%20the%20Radical%20Left-Edward%20Elgar%20Publishing%20%282022%29.pdf https://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/bafykbzacedx5ta6zzpq2ix4km2x5sf... "This notwithstanding, the passionate fervour that informs contemporary anti-racist rhetoric, and that of environmental groups such as Extinction Rebellion, and the LGBTQI+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and other) movements that share its goals and feed off its righteous indignation, constitutes a calculated iconoclastic assault on the West’s history and culture." "Culture war was, after all, one of the People’s Republic’s earliest exports to the West. In fact, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has, for years, explicitly viewed it as its ‘magic weapon’. Why, then, this book asks, did a twentieth-century Chinese revolutionary ideology become so adaptable and spectacularly successful in the West?" By the way, I've been censored multiple times on this site, for criticizing the Chinese Communist Party and it's connections with the woke movement, by the way. It's awful. My submission is now the top Google result for "beijing woke" and "woke propaganda war" right now, and the HN censorship is plainly visible for everyone to see worldwide. It's the 7th result for the term "woke propaganda", by the way. 13:08 UTC: To any potential Chinese Communist Party trolls, the more you try to censor me, the more I'm going to be posting about you. Same for russian trolls. Your propaganda is destroying the lives of innocent people here in the West.
      - MissTake 2y ago
        The massive amount of ignorance in your reply is quite galling. It’s awfully apparent that you subscribe to a political extreme right wing view if you feel that Climate and LGBTQ issues are extremism. Climate concern and LGBTQ pride were barely even a thing during Mao’s time, yet to listen to you you’d think the Chairman himself created and pushed those onto the public stage. Meanwhile the MCPC is not the same thing as the CCP, despite your apparent belief to think they are. And give us a break with this “poor me, I’ve been censored on this site” mentality. Everyone here is free to say what they want. It’s up to the collective here to decide (by and large) if such messages are deemed worthwhile or not. If they’re not then they’ll get flagged and downvoted.
        6312783123 2y ago
        [flagged]
        MissTake 2y ago
        I have posted messages on right wing sites such as Gateway Pundit and Breitbart and have been moderated out of existence (as I suspected I would). Both strong right wing sites. That wasn’t censorship and nor do I complain about it. I am however happy to observe it. They’re both privately run websites are and free to do what they like. The trouble is that you have apparently mistaken the MCPC with the CCP. The Maoists are an underground faction in China, and see the CCP are a political enemy. Yet you’re so reverently “anti woke” (despite “woke” being simply an umbrella term used the the extreme right to group anything they don’t like together without it actually meaning anything), that you come accross as the same sort of person who thinks anyone to the left of Nixon can only be a Marxist/Communist/Liberal flag waving pinko. Your position lacks nuance, empathy, and understanding. I’ll have to admit, whilst I often see claims of me being Marxist or Communist because I’m trans, this is the first time I’ve been grouped in as a Maoist.
        6312783123 2y ago
        I dislike all forms of censorship of lawful speech, whether it's coming from the Left or the Right. And the spirit of the First Amendment is what matters. I do understand that private sites can censor your lawful speech legally, but I still think it's somewhat morally wrong to do so. In the 2010s and 2020s the censorship[1] (and cancelling of open-source software authors) is coming mostly from the Left - and I hate it. In the 1990s the censorship was coming from the Right - and I hated that as well. I still remember a group called "Focus on the Family" and its pressure on the government to adopt widespread Internet filtering. I have no problem with trans people in any way whatsoever, what they do with their bodies and in their private lives is absolutely none of my business. I only get annoyed when segments of their political movement start to enact speech codes[1] and other means of impeding our right to freedom of speech. I understand it doesn't mean all trans people are doing this, it is just a vocal minority. To clarify: When I complain about "Woke" I complain about those people within the movement who are trying to take our hard-earned Western liberties away, including freedom of speech and thought. These liberties were acquired over hundreds of years of hardship by so many people, throughout history. People who chose to suffer in the name of liberty, for the good of other people. And certain segments of the Left want to diminish or even eliminate them. And by the way I agree with the goals of the Black Lives Matter movement, yes there is a serious problem with discrimination against Black people by law enforcement. And other minorities too. Those with less power in society tend to be discriminated against the worst. It really does appear to be a "pecking order", almost something from the animal world, which is terrible. But I still don't think censorship (and especially cancelling people) is ever a suitable response to discrimination or offensive speech. Offensive speech should be countered with further, lawful speech. The quoted text in my first post above is taken from the book, it's not my specific personal opinion. If it were to be the case that Extinction Rebellion and other peaceful protest groups were to be labelled "extremist" I would be seriously considering that we are living in a police state. It's completely unacceptable to brand peaceful political movements as "extremist" to me. That has no place in a free society. As demonstrated before by history, I'm worried that the left-wing Woke movement might provoke a right-wing backlash, and it's why Trump or someone even worse could get into power at some point. I think we need to keep protecting our individual liberties, so people don't end up voting a right wing party into power, as a knee-jerk reaction. I hope I've thought it all through properly. So it looks like I'm a bit of a fence sitter on the matter, but are still strongly in favor of individual liberty. By the way, many of my posts here are getting 50:50 with an almost equal number of upvotes as they are downvotes. Many just "0", or "1", but not -1 or any worse than that. So HN opinion seems to be split on it? 1. The "Contributor Covenant" code of conduct and others. These codes of conduct are the main censorship issue I'm bothered about nowadays.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- blackhawkC17 2y ago
  > There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done. This is the Trojan Horse, just like the fundamentalists coming to spread peace and love in society of course. Fortunately, people are judged by outcome and action, not stated intention, and we can see DEI has failed in this regard.
- hagbard_c 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - 6312783123 2y ago
    [flagged]
- simonsarris 2y ago
  > easily gamed and inherently biased metrics IQ tests are not easily gamed and suggesting otherwise is mostly lying. They might be too easy, or have too low a ceiling (SAT), or might have some mild response to coaching. But a very stupid person cannot come out the other side with the very high score, and a very smart person should be able to figure them out sufficiently that they prove their utility.
  - 6312783123 2y ago
    [dead]
    - skellington 2y ago
      You can go pretty deep if you try to discover the fundamental belief systems or reasoning behind the 'core' DEI people. A lot of people just casually agree that "being fair" and "not being racist" is good. And it certainly is. And like many movements that involve propaganda/control/power, the key to enlisting large support is to hide the real motivations and goals within a cozy shell of easily consumable "moral" niceties. Ironically, the methods that the DEI types use are not even hidden. There are numerous books and "scholarly" articles that discuss their methods in detail and also their true purpose. At it's root DEI is one of the byproducts of Critical Race Theory which is derived from Critical Theory which is (arguably) the root of Marxism and a bunch of other -isms. You can think of Critical Theory as the most abstract form of that particular tree of political theory and Marxism applies it to class inequality and CRT applies it to race/gender inequality. This is a simplification, but it's good enough for now. The CRT leader types are without a doubt anti-meritocracy, anti-science, anti-civilization, anti-family, etc.. They have said so directly and emphatically in books, papers, talks, etc..
      - smolder 2y ago
        I don't think your post here is substantive. You are only vaguely complaining about an ill-defined group of people, as is customary in political speech. If you wanted to discredit "numerous books" you should have named at least one. Do you have an example?
- Kamq 2y ago
  > There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done, and whatever you think a religious “pledge of allegiance” is. There is, but there's definitely some similarities too. Specifically that if you happen to believe in these things, advancement of their goals is one of the most important things you can do, which causes a big temptation to misappropriate institutional power to further the cause. Regarding the pledges specifically, both require employees to take personal positions to advance at work, which I think is the part blackhawkC17 finds "culty".
- bozhark 2y ago
  What other metric is so valuable then?
- inglor_cz 2y ago
  I think the OP doesn't either trust the declared goals of "countering institutional prejudice" and "improving the quality of the student body", or doesn't believe that DEI actually does anything relevant in this sense. Even for banal acne treatments, proof of safety and efficiency through several stages of trials is required before people are actually subject to it. With DEI, we are just expected to believe that it actually works and should be applied across the country because some smart people say so.
- gameman144 2y ago
  > There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done, and whatever you think a religious “pledge of allegiance” is. In the eyes of the advocates for each, I actually don't know that there is. Religious pledges likely are intended to say "we want faculty who will teach and represent the values this school holds and that students expect out of this institution", which feels pretty much exactly like the rationale for DEI pledges.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
MisterBastahrd 2y ago
If students uttered a DEI statement every morning in their homeroom classes over the Pledge of Allegiance to a flag, we'd all be in a much better place culturally.

MrSkelter 2y ago

There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done, and whatever you think a religious “pledge of allegiance” is. A pledge to God? The mishandling of DEI doesn’t invalidate the need to fix broken systems which fail to select the best people instead of those who score highest in easily gamed and inherently biased metrics.

6312783123 2y ago
[flagged]
- MissTake 2y ago
  The article actually doesn’t say any such thing. It simply assumes that a Chinese propaganda machine is focused only on “wokeism”. Dog forbid that they should seek to use propaganda to attack both sides - which is far more effective at spreading division.
  - 6312783123 2y ago
    Here's a book about it: David M. Jones, The Strategy of Maoism in the West - Rage and the Radical Left: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Strategy-Maoism-West-Rage-Radical/dp/180220945X https://www.amazon.co.uk/Strategy-Maoism-West-Rage-Radical/d... https://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/bafykbzacedx5ta6zzpq2ix4km2x5sf23nzt6eqb5nhnark75zry23yc56zcao?filename=David%20M.%20Jones%2C%20M.%20L.R.%20Smith%20-%20The%20Strategy%20of%20Maoism%20in%20the%20West_%20Rage%20and%20the%20Radical%20Left-Edward%20Elgar%20Publishing%20%282022%29.pdf https://gateway.ipfs.io/ipfs/bafykbzacedx5ta6zzpq2ix4km2x5sf... "This notwithstanding, the passionate fervour that informs contemporary anti-racist rhetoric, and that of environmental groups such as Extinction Rebellion, and the LGBTQI+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and other) movements that share its goals and feed off its righteous indignation, constitutes a calculated iconoclastic assault on the West’s history and culture." "Culture war was, after all, one of the People’s Republic’s earliest exports to the West. In fact, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has, for years, explicitly viewed it as its ‘magic weapon’. Why, then, this book asks, did a twentieth-century Chinese revolutionary ideology become so adaptable and spectacularly successful in the West?" By the way, I've been censored multiple times on this site, for criticizing the Chinese Communist Party and it's connections with the woke movement, by the way. It's awful. My submission is now the top Google result for "beijing woke" and "woke propaganda war" right now, and the HN censorship is plainly visible for everyone to see worldwide. It's the 7th result for the term "woke propaganda", by the way. 13:08 UTC: To any potential Chinese Communist Party trolls, the more you try to censor me, the more I'm going to be posting about you. Same for russian trolls. Your propaganda is destroying the lives of innocent people here in the West.
    - MissTake 2y ago
      The massive amount of ignorance in your reply is quite galling. It’s awfully apparent that you subscribe to a political extreme right wing view if you feel that Climate and LGBTQ issues are extremism. Climate concern and LGBTQ pride were barely even a thing during Mao’s time, yet to listen to you you’d think the Chairman himself created and pushed those onto the public stage. Meanwhile the MCPC is not the same thing as the CCP, despite your apparent belief to think they are. And give us a break with this “poor me, I’ve been censored on this site” mentality. Everyone here is free to say what they want. It’s up to the collective here to decide (by and large) if such messages are deemed worthwhile or not. If they’re not then they’ll get flagged and downvoted.
      - 6312783123 2y ago
        [flagged]
        MissTake 2y ago
        I have posted messages on right wing sites such as Gateway Pundit and Breitbart and have been moderated out of existence (as I suspected I would). Both strong right wing sites. That wasn’t censorship and nor do I complain about it. I am however happy to observe it. They’re both privately run websites are and free to do what they like. The trouble is that you have apparently mistaken the MCPC with the CCP. The Maoists are an underground faction in China, and see the CCP are a political enemy. Yet you’re so reverently “anti woke” (despite “woke” being simply an umbrella term used the the extreme right to group anything they don’t like together without it actually meaning anything), that you come accross as the same sort of person who thinks anyone to the left of Nixon can only be a Marxist/Communist/Liberal flag waving pinko. Your position lacks nuance, empathy, and understanding. I’ll have to admit, whilst I often see claims of me being Marxist or Communist because I’m trans, this is the first time I’ve been grouped in as a Maoist.
        6312783123 2y ago
        I dislike all forms of censorship of lawful speech, whether it's coming from the Left or the Right. And the spirit of the First Amendment is what matters. I do understand that private sites can censor your lawful speech legally, but I still think it's somewhat morally wrong to do so. In the 2010s and 2020s the censorship[1] (and cancelling of open-source software authors) is coming mostly from the Left - and I hate it. In the 1990s the censorship was coming from the Right - and I hated that as well. I still remember a group called "Focus on the Family" and its pressure on the government to adopt widespread Internet filtering. I have no problem with trans people in any way whatsoever, what they do with their bodies and in their private lives is absolutely none of my business. I only get annoyed when segments of their political movement start to enact speech codes[1] and other means of impeding our right to freedom of speech. I understand it doesn't mean all trans people are doing this, it is just a vocal minority. To clarify: When I complain about "Woke" I complain about those people within the movement who are trying to take our hard-earned Western liberties away, including freedom of speech and thought. These liberties were acquired over hundreds of years of hardship by so many people, throughout history. People who chose to suffer in the name of liberty, for the good of other people. And certain segments of the Left want to diminish or even eliminate them. And by the way I agree with the goals of the Black Lives Matter movement, yes there is a serious problem with discrimination against Black people by law enforcement. And other minorities too. Those with less power in society tend to be discriminated against the worst. It really does appear to be a "pecking order", almost something from the animal world, which is terrible. But I still don't think censorship (and especially cancelling people) is ever a suitable response to discrimination or offensive speech. Offensive speech should be countered with further, lawful speech. The quoted text in my first post above is taken from the book, it's not my specific personal opinion. If it were to be the case that Extinction Rebellion and other peaceful protest groups were to be labelled "extremist" I would be seriously considering that we are living in a police state. It's completely unacceptable to brand peaceful political movements as "extremist" to me. That has no place in a free society. As demonstrated before by history, I'm worried that the left-wing Woke movement might provoke a right-wing backlash, and it's why Trump or someone even worse could get into power at some point. I think we need to keep protecting our individual liberties, so people don't end up voting a right wing party into power, as a knee-jerk reaction. I hope I've thought it all through properly. So it looks like I'm a bit of a fence sitter on the matter, but are still strongly in favor of individual liberty. By the way, many of my posts here are getting 50:50 with an almost equal number of upvotes as they are downvotes. Many just "0", or "1", but not -1 or any worse than that. So HN opinion seems to be split on it? 1. The "Contributor Covenant" code of conduct and others. These codes of conduct are the main censorship issue I'm bothered about nowadays.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
blackhawkC17 2y ago
> There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done. This is the Trojan Horse, just like the fundamentalists coming to spread peace and love in society of course. Fortunately, people are judged by outcome and action, not stated intention, and we can see DEI has failed in this regard.
hagbard_c 2y ago
[flagged]
- 6312783123 2y ago
  [flagged]
simonsarris 2y ago
> easily gamed and inherently biased metrics IQ tests are not easily gamed and suggesting otherwise is mostly lying. They might be too easy, or have too low a ceiling (SAT), or might have some mild response to coaching. But a very stupid person cannot come out the other side with the very high score, and a very smart person should be able to figure them out sufficiently that they prove their utility.
- 6312783123 2y ago
  [dead]
  - skellington 2y ago
    You can go pretty deep if you try to discover the fundamental belief systems or reasoning behind the 'core' DEI people. A lot of people just casually agree that "being fair" and "not being racist" is good. And it certainly is. And like many movements that involve propaganda/control/power, the key to enlisting large support is to hide the real motivations and goals within a cozy shell of easily consumable "moral" niceties. Ironically, the methods that the DEI types use are not even hidden. There are numerous books and "scholarly" articles that discuss their methods in detail and also their true purpose. At it's root DEI is one of the byproducts of Critical Race Theory which is derived from Critical Theory which is (arguably) the root of Marxism and a bunch of other -isms. You can think of Critical Theory as the most abstract form of that particular tree of political theory and Marxism applies it to class inequality and CRT applies it to race/gender inequality. This is a simplification, but it's good enough for now. The CRT leader types are without a doubt anti-meritocracy, anti-science, anti-civilization, anti-family, etc.. They have said so directly and emphatically in books, papers, talks, etc..
    - smolder 2y ago
      I don't think your post here is substantive. You are only vaguely complaining about an ill-defined group of people, as is customary in political speech. If you wanted to discredit "numerous books" you should have named at least one. Do you have an example?
Kamq 2y ago
> There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done, and whatever you think a religious “pledge of allegiance” is. There is, but there's definitely some similarities too. Specifically that if you happen to believe in these things, advancement of their goals is one of the most important things you can do, which causes a big temptation to misappropriate institutional power to further the cause. Regarding the pledges specifically, both require employees to take personal positions to advance at work, which I think is the part blackhawkC17 finds "culty".
bozhark 2y ago
What other metric is so valuable then?
inglor_cz 2y ago
I think the OP doesn't either trust the declared goals of "countering institutional prejudice" and "improving the quality of the student body", or doesn't believe that DEI actually does anything relevant in this sense. Even for banal acne treatments, proof of safety and efficiency through several stages of trials is required before people are actually subject to it. With DEI, we are just expected to believe that it actually works and should be applied across the country because some smart people say so.
gameman144 2y ago
> There is a huge difference between trying to counter institutional prejudice in order to improve the quality of the student body and work being done, and whatever you think a religious “pledge of allegiance” is. In the eyes of the advocates for each, I actually don't know that there is. Religious pledges likely are intended to say "we want faculty who will teach and represent the values this school holds and that students expect out of this institution", which feels pretty much exactly like the rationale for DEI pledges.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

MisterBastahrd 2y ago

If students uttered a DEI statement every morning in their homeroom classes over the Pledge of Allegiance to a flag, we'd all be in a much better place culturally.