4 ms·

The only large company news of note I've heard is Costco not cancelling its DEI initiatives. The resulting political pressure is high: https://content.govdeliv

by sho_hn 2y ago

The only large company news of note I've heard is Costco not cancelling its DEI initiatives. The resulting political pressure is high: https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/IACIO/2025/01/27/file_attachments/3144563/FINAL%20Costco%20Lettet%20%281%29.pdf https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/IACIO/2025/01/27...

Drofus 2y ago
[flagged]
- palmotea 2y ago
  > Cancelling DEI is "not far left" but there's quite a distance between "not far left" and "far right". Honestly, I can't help but think that certain groups with "language setting power" (like the media) have gotten in the habit of using deliberate imprecision to tar ideas and people they oppose. For instance, build up a term like "extremist" or "far right" as a pejorative, then start applying it to mainstream opponents and fairly popular ideas. It's probably part of the arrogant 50%+1 strategy that failed so badly it got us our second Trump term.
  - hitekker 2y ago
    I believe the Chinese call it “discourse power” https://digichina.stanford.edu/work/lexicon-discourse-power-or-the-right-to-speak-huayu-quan/ https://digichina.stanford.edu/work/lexicon-discourse-power-...
  - Timon3 2y ago
    > It's probably part of the arrogant 50%+1 strategy that failed so badly it got us our second Trump term. I find this perspective fascinating, considering how much of Trumps playbook is doing exactly this. Just look back at all the culture war topics of the last years. All of Trumps enemies were smeared as radical far-left Marxist communist CRT DEI traitors to the country, but this doesn't seem to hurt his chances, only increase them. Why does the right apparently eat this stuff up so much more readily than the left?
    - palmotea 2y ago
      Honestly, it might be because Trump has basically zero credibility, so the attempts at this kind of manipulation don't grate as much. I read things like "far-left Marxist communist CRT DEI traitors to the country" as basically meaning "our hated enemy" and I expect no real descriptive content. However, if some New York Times editorial misleadingly uses "far right" to tar someone, I'm annoyed because I expect better of them. Also, attempts to "go down to their level" when attacking, for things like this, seem to have the practical effect of actually legitimizing "them," because it cedes more valuable high ground.

by sho_hn 2y ago

Drofus 2y ago

[flagged]

palmotea 2y ago
> Cancelling DEI is "not far left" but there's quite a distance between "not far left" and "far right". Honestly, I can't help but think that certain groups with "language setting power" (like the media) have gotten in the habit of using deliberate imprecision to tar ideas and people they oppose. For instance, build up a term like "extremist" or "far right" as a pejorative, then start applying it to mainstream opponents and fairly popular ideas. It's probably part of the arrogant 50%+1 strategy that failed so badly it got us our second Trump term.
- hitekker 2y ago
  I believe the Chinese call it “discourse power” https://digichina.stanford.edu/work/lexicon-discourse-power-or-the-right-to-speak-huayu-quan/ https://digichina.stanford.edu/work/lexicon-discourse-power-...
- Timon3 2y ago
  > It's probably part of the arrogant 50%+1 strategy that failed so badly it got us our second Trump term. I find this perspective fascinating, considering how much of Trumps playbook is doing exactly this. Just look back at all the culture war topics of the last years. All of Trumps enemies were smeared as radical far-left Marxist communist CRT DEI traitors to the country, but this doesn't seem to hurt his chances, only increase them. Why does the right apparently eat this stuff up so much more readily than the left?
  - palmotea 2y ago
    Honestly, it might be because Trump has basically zero credibility, so the attempts at this kind of manipulation don't grate as much. I read things like "far-left Marxist communist CRT DEI traitors to the country" as basically meaning "our hated enemy" and I expect no real descriptive content. However, if some New York Times editorial misleadingly uses "far right" to tar someone, I'm annoyed because I expect better of them. Also, attempts to "go down to their level" when attacking, for things like this, seem to have the practical effect of actually legitimizing "them," because it cedes more valuable high ground.