3 ms·

But everyone can have biases even if they don’t think they do. So having some law to make you check your hiring practises is reasonable. But American businesse

But everyone can have biases even if they don’t think they do. So having some law to make you check your hiring practises is reasonable. But American businesses really over shot. And the correction will overshoot in the other direction.

unclebucknasty 2y ago
>But American businesses really over shot. Did they though? There was a race to declare DEI-friendliness in the wake of Floyd, but I wonder how much was actually done and how impactful it was at most of these companies?
- bdangubic 2y ago
  america is black&white - there is just never gray. affirmative action, dei… all these programs come from “a good place” so-to-speak but america is not capable of making a sensible policy. blame the two-party system who knows nothing more than to kill whatever policies other side puts in place. so each side goes overboard as it knows every policy has a shelf-life. some longer than others but eventually they all die. and to answer your question, I think these policies were supposed to be impactful for us as society more so than for companies…
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    What government policies compelled companies to create DEI programs?
    - 2muchcoffeeman 2y ago
      Fair. It’s probably companies that went above and beyond with their own programs. But the people in charge are either too ideological or manipulative.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - bdangubic 2y ago
      what government policies are causing ALL companies right now to fire everyone who is not a white male? :)
  - unclebucknasty 2y ago
    >I think these policies were supposed to be impactful for us as society more so than for companies Well, I believe the idea was two-fold, but it would depend on who you ask. Certainly the societal benefit was a consideration. But there are also those who do genuinely believe that DEI is good for a company. A third consideration is the PR angle. That is, I don't think it's overly cynical to say that PR was a primary driver for some of these companies, especially given the moment. And that's really what I'm asking: how much actual work was done? How much real change was there versus the headlines?
- gosub100 2y ago
  This is precisely the point where the facts no longer matter and it morphs into a faith based initiative: - not enough blacks at your company? We need to keep running the program and try harder (aka new "programs") to get more diversity. - Have enough black/women at your company? That's wrongthink, you can never have enough diversity, and don't you dare get rid of the program, only a racist would do such a thing. I think it was a supreme court judge who said "Where does it end? At what point do you declare victory?". The far left has no answer to that because their political existence depends on being social justice warriors. Either people need to continue suffering, or they need to extend the definition of suffering to make it appear they and their irreversible government programs are the last and only line of defense from a world full of racism.
ihsw 2y ago
[dead]

unclebucknasty 2y ago

>But American businesses really over shot. Did they though? There was a race to declare DEI-friendliness in the wake of Floyd, but I wonder how much was actually done and how impactful it was at most of these companies?

bdangubic 2y ago
america is black&white - there is just never gray. affirmative action, dei… all these programs come from “a good place” so-to-speak but america is not capable of making a sensible policy. blame the two-party system who knows nothing more than to kill whatever policies other side puts in place. so each side goes overboard as it knows every policy has a shelf-life. some longer than others but eventually they all die. and to answer your question, I think these policies were supposed to be impactful for us as society more so than for companies…
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  What government policies compelled companies to create DEI programs?
  - 2muchcoffeeman 2y ago
    Fair. It’s probably companies that went above and beyond with their own programs. But the people in charge are either too ideological or manipulative.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - bdangubic 2y ago
    what government policies are causing ALL companies right now to fire everyone who is not a white male? :)
- unclebucknasty 2y ago
  >I think these policies were supposed to be impactful for us as society more so than for companies Well, I believe the idea was two-fold, but it would depend on who you ask. Certainly the societal benefit was a consideration. But there are also those who do genuinely believe that DEI is good for a company. A third consideration is the PR angle. That is, I don't think it's overly cynical to say that PR was a primary driver for some of these companies, especially given the moment. And that's really what I'm asking: how much actual work was done? How much real change was there versus the headlines?
gosub100 2y ago
This is precisely the point where the facts no longer matter and it morphs into a faith based initiative: - not enough blacks at your company? We need to keep running the program and try harder (aka new "programs") to get more diversity. - Have enough black/women at your company? That's wrongthink, you can never have enough diversity, and don't you dare get rid of the program, only a racist would do such a thing. I think it was a supreme court judge who said "Where does it end? At what point do you declare victory?". The far left has no answer to that because their political existence depends on being social justice warriors. Either people need to continue suffering, or they need to extend the definition of suffering to make it appear they and their irreversible government programs are the last and only line of defense from a world full of racism.

ihsw 2y ago

[dead]