4 ms·

DEI is focused on the identify insofar as that identity has been the basis of discrimination preventing equality on the basis of abilities, skills, etc. > they

DEI is focused on the identify insofar as that identity has been the basis of discrimination preventing equality on the basis of abilities, skills, etc. > they signals it's the reason they got hired to this position That does not follow. When an organization communicates that Obama was the first US president born in Hawaii, that does not signal that he was elected because he was from Hawaii. The local paper had a short article last year that for the first time the entire crew of three people on a truck were women. The article added that the scheduling was happenstance, and not deliberately done. A couple of years ago, Teri Eidson and her daughter, Nicole McAllister made the news because they were the first mother-daughter team to co-pilot an international flight. Neither of these should be interpreted to mean that those women were hired specifically to get that reported result. Sergei Volkov was the first second-generation cosmonaut, that is, his father was the cosmonaut Aleksandr Volkov. When that made the news, did it also signal that the son got the position not due to abilities, skills, etc., but because of his father? And so on, and so on, and so on. It also does not follow because you have to know if there are complicating factors. For example, if other cities discriminate against LGBT department heads while LA does not, then the population of qualified potential department heads would be higher for LA than other cities.

franktankbank 2y ago
I see the whole thing as a triangle: nepotism on one point dei on another point and meritocracy on the third Each presents different ways to make selection and each has intrinsic biases which are in tension with one another. Neither one can be the end all be all solution because each leads to unhealthy endpoints if carried on for long enough. I suspect Sergei Volkov did in fact benefit from nepotism but maybe that's not a bad thing on its own?
- eesmith 2y ago
  Where is discrimination on that triangle? If discrimination is on that triangle, where do you place efforts to counter discrimination? You suspect because it fits with your worldview, or you suspect because of your knowledge of the cosmonaut program, and their willingness to have less-than-the-best in what is otherwise a very competitive field?
  - franktankbank 2y ago
    What kind of discrimination isn't covered by motives of nepotism or DEI? To be clear I think its not necessarily bad, its the dose. The Cosmonaut had proven genetics, that counts for something on top of meritocracy.
    - eesmith 2y ago
      Do you consider slavery, the Trail of Tears, the internment of Japanese-Americans, and the restrictions on women from serving in combat or some juries as discrimination? In many states, it is okay to discriminate based on political views. Here's an example of a socialist working at Goodwill who was fired for being a socialist - https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/07/can-your-boss-fire-you-for-your-political-beliefs.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/07/can-your-boss-fi... with the quote: “The law is pretty clear that a private employer can fire someone based on their political speech even when that political speech does not affect the terms and conditions of employment.” Is that form of discrimination either DEI or nepotism? Some US veterans get preferential employment in the Postal Service. Is that form of discrimination DEI or nepotism? The Freedmen's Bureau assisted only former slaves. Was that discrimination? Was it DEI? Japanese-Americans who were interned or their heirs received payment as reparations. Was that discrimination? Was it DEI?
      - franktankbank 2y ago
        Feel like we are talking past each other honestly. I don't think its worthwhile to label something discrimination without a clear motive behind it. Nepotism == My tribe > other tribe DEI == Diversity > mono-culture Meritocracy == job skills > political skills Note there is no prescribed method how you balance those forces for "peak results" because there is no generic "peak result". Maybe I should have stated Meritocracy is also a form of discrimination but one where its "common-sense" standard. Restrictions on foreign influence in war time would be meritocracy and nepotism at the expense of DEI for example. Can you see any use in the above definitions or would you add another point to the tension graph? Or is there no use in considering these in tension with one another?

franktankbank 2y ago

I see the whole thing as a triangle: nepotism on one point dei on another point and meritocracy on the third Each presents different ways to make selection and each has intrinsic biases which are in tension with one another. Neither one can be the end all be all solution because each leads to unhealthy endpoints if carried on for long enough. I suspect Sergei Volkov did in fact benefit from nepotism but maybe that's not a bad thing on its own?

eesmith 2y ago
Where is discrimination on that triangle? If discrimination is on that triangle, where do you place efforts to counter discrimination? You suspect because it fits with your worldview, or you suspect because of your knowledge of the cosmonaut program, and their willingness to have less-than-the-best in what is otherwise a very competitive field?
- franktankbank 2y ago
  What kind of discrimination isn't covered by motives of nepotism or DEI? To be clear I think its not necessarily bad, its the dose. The Cosmonaut had proven genetics, that counts for something on top of meritocracy.
  - eesmith 2y ago
    Do you consider slavery, the Trail of Tears, the internment of Japanese-Americans, and the restrictions on women from serving in combat or some juries as discrimination? In many states, it is okay to discriminate based on political views. Here's an example of a socialist working at Goodwill who was fired for being a socialist - https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/07/can-your-boss-fire-you-for-your-political-beliefs.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2002/07/can-your-boss-fi... with the quote: “The law is pretty clear that a private employer can fire someone based on their political speech even when that political speech does not affect the terms and conditions of employment.” Is that form of discrimination either DEI or nepotism? Some US veterans get preferential employment in the Postal Service. Is that form of discrimination DEI or nepotism? The Freedmen's Bureau assisted only former slaves. Was that discrimination? Was it DEI? Japanese-Americans who were interned or their heirs received payment as reparations. Was that discrimination? Was it DEI?
    - franktankbank 2y ago
      Feel like we are talking past each other honestly. I don't think its worthwhile to label something discrimination without a clear motive behind it. Nepotism == My tribe > other tribe DEI == Diversity > mono-culture Meritocracy == job skills > political skills Note there is no prescribed method how you balance those forces for "peak results" because there is no generic "peak result". Maybe I should have stated Meritocracy is also a form of discrimination but one where its "common-sense" standard. Restrictions on foreign influence in war time would be meritocracy and nepotism at the expense of DEI for example. Can you see any use in the above definitions or would you add another point to the tension graph? Or is there no use in considering these in tension with one another?