6 ms·

The points "Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring" and "Discontinuation of DEI" seem inconsistent. Enforcing "viewpoint diversity" is a DEI practice in a

The points "Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring" and "Discontinuation of DEI" seem inconsistent. Enforcing "viewpoint diversity" is a DEI practice in all but name. Actually, it is even in the name. Also with the merit-based stuff, of course. What if people of merit skew towards certain viewpoints? Then hiring/admissions won't be merit based after all?

bad_user 2y ago
DEI has led to anything but viewpoint diversity, fostering ideological conformity via practices such as DEI statements, DEI metrics, mandatory trainings, or cancel culture leading to censorship. That the current administration is also purging viewpoints it doesn't like, adopting the same authoritarian mindset, but having it enforced by the government (which is worse, IMO), that goes to show horseshoe theory is true.
- titzer 2y ago
  > DEI statements Just going to point out that this is absolutely not the same thing as rescinding research grants using some lazy grepping of abstracts like the absolute clown show going on now. > horseshoe theory is true. Had to look this one up. Apparently the "far left" and "far right" are somehow the exact things we are dealing with here and now. Nope, sorry. Not equivalent. Not at all.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
mhb 2y ago
Was this pedantry really worthwhile? The current interpretation of "diversity" is of outward characteristics, not points of view. So, technically, you're right. Kudos.
- rocqua 2y ago
  It is far from universally accepted that 'the current interpretation of diversity is of outward characteristics, not points of view'. In fact, I would be surprised if anyone who favors DEI aggrees with that statement. Moreover, the actual interpretation of most proponents of diversity is very much that we desire a diversity of views, which it wants to get through getting a diversity of backgrounds. That is, of course, not the only reason behind DEI. There is also the fact that it is fair to allow people of all backgrounds the same opportunity.
  - ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
    Wikipedia[1] says >Diversity refers to the presence of variety within the organizational workforce in characteristics such as race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, age, culture, class, veteran status, or religion. Brittanica[2] says >Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs—meant to address historical and systemic disparities based on race, gender, age, ability, and sexual orientation in the workplace CNN lists the following as examples of the title of this article[3] ("DEI programs benefit many groups, not just Black and brown communities"): >White women >LGBTQ+ people >Families who need IVF >Disabled people >Veterans This is the first three links I clicked on, so it seems to be broadly agreed upon. It's (obviously) not an exhaustive search of the literature, and I'd love to see your side of it. I have heard ideological diversity used as a defense of DEI, but it doesn't seem to be central. I've never heard of a DEI push to get more conservatives in tech or academia, for example. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusi... [2]https://www.britannica.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-programs https://www.britannica.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclus... [3]https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/us/dei-programs-diversity-list/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/us/dei-programs-diversity-lis...
  - zdragnar 2y ago
    Try talking about race as a white man during a DEI seminar. Unless you very carefully follow the approved messaging, you will be in trouble.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
bearjaws 2y ago
> What if people of merit skew towards certain viewpoints? What if admissions is actually a cyborg alien race??? I am just asking questions! Having the government dictate University level programs is bad, we should all agree to let Universities and colleges run themselves.
kolbe 2y ago
While you are completely right about the impossible/conflicting legal standards here, this is not an unusual state of things. For example: it has been illegal to discriminate for a very long time, but it has also been de facto illegal to have demographic compositions substantially different from the general population. So, they've always been faced with the problem of needing to either discriminate to get the numbers to match, or not discriminating and risking the numbers falling out of line. The real law has always been, and always will be, prosecutorial discretion. Whatever party is in control will choose whether they go after you or not, and they can because you're always violating one side of something.
- ajross 2y ago
  > de facto illegal to have demographic compositions substantially different from the general population The Trump administration mid level staffing decisions are something like 70%+ white men! This seems laughable. Controversial maybe, certainly not "illegal" or they wouldn't have done it.
  - kolbe 2y ago
    You need to read what I wrote more carefully. The entire point is that whoever is in power decides which law actually gets applied and to whom. Do you think for some reason that the Trump administration risks being prosecuted by the Trump administration?
    - davorak 2y ago
      This seems like an argument against the rule of law. When arguing for demographic compositions, at least for my personal admittedly limited experience, I see arguments for how policy X upholds the law, or maybe only the spirit of the law in Y ways. I do not see that here for the current admins demands for diversity.
    - ericjmorey 2y ago
      The executive branch is afforded some discretion, but the judicial system decides how law gets applied as directed by Congress when they write laws.
throw_m239339 2y ago
[flagged]
- jltsiren 2y ago
  Viewpoint diversity is not the same as diversity of opinion. When someone is seriously trying to justify DEI practices, viewpoint diversity is usually the first thing they talk about. They argue that having people from diverse backgrounds is important, as diverse experiences lead to diverse viewpoints, which may allow the organization notice and do things it could otherwise not do. They may even argue that if viewpoint diversity and diversity of opinion are in conflict, viewpoint diversity should prevail, as it contributes directly to the mission of the organization. Or at least that's how it started, before DEI became a big controversial topic.
throw_m239339 2y ago
[flagged]
- nhinck2 2y ago
  > telling things (as) they really are Lol, what reality do you live in?
- intended 2y ago
  You are using a throwaway. Your own views are not valuable enough for you to risk your livelihood for.
  - dani__german 2y ago
    Our founding fathers dressed as indians to throw tea into the Boston Harbor. You and your ilk demand the bank account information of anyone opposing your views.
    - intended 2y ago
      Slashdot, the venerable ancient for tech discussions, allowed temp accounts under the term anonymous_cowards. Their camouflage was tactics, not cowardice. Don't bring the courage of courageous men as a shield for someone lacking convictions. For what its worth, I sympathize. I live in a country where I recognize that I am not as free as America used to be. That means I recognize the courage of those who take actual risks, and I also understand the weight of my words and the risks they may carry. I don't shoot from the hip.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
watwut 2y ago
Viewpoint diversity is that you want fsr right propagated more. Bonus points for open racism and sexism. However, left of any kind is not part of diversity. No one arguing for Palestine, no one arguing for equality. I was tempted to say "no communists" but those kind of don't matter.
belter 2y ago
Cowards are now saying it was a mistake: "Trump Officials Blame Mistake for Setting Off Confrontation With Harvard" - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-letter-mistake.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-le...

bad_user 2y ago

DEI has led to anything but viewpoint diversity, fostering ideological conformity via practices such as DEI statements, DEI metrics, mandatory trainings, or cancel culture leading to censorship. That the current administration is also purging viewpoints it doesn't like, adopting the same authoritarian mindset, but having it enforced by the government (which is worse, IMO), that goes to show horseshoe theory is true.

titzer 2y ago
> DEI statements Just going to point out that this is absolutely not the same thing as rescinding research grants using some lazy grepping of abstracts like the absolute clown show going on now. > horseshoe theory is true. Had to look this one up. Apparently the "far left" and "far right" are somehow the exact things we are dealing with here and now. Nope, sorry. Not equivalent. Not at all.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

mhb 2y ago

Was this pedantry really worthwhile? The current interpretation of "diversity" is of outward characteristics, not points of view. So, technically, you're right. Kudos.

rocqua 2y ago
It is far from universally accepted that 'the current interpretation of diversity is of outward characteristics, not points of view'. In fact, I would be surprised if anyone who favors DEI aggrees with that statement. Moreover, the actual interpretation of most proponents of diversity is very much that we desire a diversity of views, which it wants to get through getting a diversity of backgrounds. That is, of course, not the only reason behind DEI. There is also the fact that it is fair to allow people of all backgrounds the same opportunity.
- ToValueFunfetti 2y ago
  Wikipedia[1] says >Diversity refers to the presence of variety within the organizational workforce in characteristics such as race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, age, culture, class, veteran status, or religion. Brittanica[2] says >Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs—meant to address historical and systemic disparities based on race, gender, age, ability, and sexual orientation in the workplace CNN lists the following as examples of the title of this article[3] ("DEI programs benefit many groups, not just Black and brown communities"): >White women >LGBTQ+ people >Families who need IVF >Disabled people >Veterans This is the first three links I clicked on, so it seems to be broadly agreed upon. It's (obviously) not an exhaustive search of the literature, and I'd love to see your side of it. I have heard ideological diversity used as a defense of DEI, but it doesn't seem to be central. I've never heard of a DEI push to get more conservatives in tech or academia, for example. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity,_equity,_and_inclusi... [2]https://www.britannica.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-programs https://www.britannica.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclus... [3]https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/us/dei-programs-diversity-list/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2025/02/08/us/dei-programs-diversity-lis...
- zdragnar 2y ago
  Try talking about race as a white man during a DEI seminar. Unless you very carefully follow the approved messaging, you will be in trouble.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

bearjaws 2y ago

> What if people of merit skew towards certain viewpoints? What if admissions is actually a cyborg alien race??? I am just asking questions! Having the government dictate University level programs is bad, we should all agree to let Universities and colleges run themselves.

kolbe 2y ago

While you are completely right about the impossible/conflicting legal standards here, this is not an unusual state of things. For example: it has been illegal to discriminate for a very long time, but it has also been de facto illegal to have demographic compositions substantially different from the general population. So, they've always been faced with the problem of needing to either discriminate to get the numbers to match, or not discriminating and risking the numbers falling out of line. The real law has always been, and always will be, prosecutorial discretion. Whatever party is in control will choose whether they go after you or not, and they can because you're always violating one side of something.

ajross 2y ago
> de facto illegal to have demographic compositions substantially different from the general population The Trump administration mid level staffing decisions are something like 70%+ white men! This seems laughable. Controversial maybe, certainly not "illegal" or they wouldn't have done it.
- kolbe 2y ago
  You need to read what I wrote more carefully. The entire point is that whoever is in power decides which law actually gets applied and to whom. Do you think for some reason that the Trump administration risks being prosecuted by the Trump administration?
  - davorak 2y ago
    This seems like an argument against the rule of law. When arguing for demographic compositions, at least for my personal admittedly limited experience, I see arguments for how policy X upholds the law, or maybe only the spirit of the law in Y ways. I do not see that here for the current admins demands for diversity.
  - ericjmorey 2y ago
    The executive branch is afforded some discretion, but the judicial system decides how law gets applied as directed by Congress when they write laws.

throw_m239339 2y ago

[flagged]

jltsiren 2y ago
Viewpoint diversity is not the same as diversity of opinion. When someone is seriously trying to justify DEI practices, viewpoint diversity is usually the first thing they talk about. They argue that having people from diverse backgrounds is important, as diverse experiences lead to diverse viewpoints, which may allow the organization notice and do things it could otherwise not do. They may even argue that if viewpoint diversity and diversity of opinion are in conflict, viewpoint diversity should prevail, as it contributes directly to the mission of the organization. Or at least that's how it started, before DEI became a big controversial topic.

throw_m239339 2y ago

[flagged]

nhinck2 2y ago
> telling things (as) they really are Lol, what reality do you live in?
intended 2y ago
You are using a throwaway. Your own views are not valuable enough for you to risk your livelihood for.
- dani__german 2y ago
  Our founding fathers dressed as indians to throw tea into the Boston Harbor. You and your ilk demand the bank account information of anyone opposing your views.
  - intended 2y ago
    Slashdot, the venerable ancient for tech discussions, allowed temp accounts under the term anonymous_cowards. Their camouflage was tactics, not cowardice. Don't bring the courage of courageous men as a shield for someone lacking convictions. For what its worth, I sympathize. I live in a country where I recognize that I am not as free as America used to be. That means I recognize the courage of those who take actual risks, and I also understand the weight of my words and the risks they may carry. I don't shoot from the hip.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

watwut 2y ago

Viewpoint diversity is that you want fsr right propagated more. Bonus points for open racism and sexism. However, left of any kind is not part of diversity. No one arguing for Palestine, no one arguing for equality. I was tempted to say "no communists" but those kind of don't matter.

belter 2y ago

Cowards are now saying it was a mistake: "Trump Officials Blame Mistake for Setting Off Confrontation With Harvard" - https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-letter-mistake.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/18/business/trump-harvard-le...