7 ms·

So first they demand "Merit-Based Hiring Reform" and "Merit-Based Admissions Reform", and then it continues to demand "Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hir

by arp242 2y ago

So first they demand "Merit-Based Hiring Reform" and "Merit-Based Admissions Reform", and then it continues to demand "Viewpoint Diversity in Admissions and Hiring". I can't even engage with these levels of cognitive dissonance. Or bad faith. Or whatever it is.

saalweachter 2y ago
Never mistake a man's rhetoric for his principles.
enaaem 2y ago
I have never been a "woke" person, but Trump really makes me doubt the meritocracy argument. If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now.
- overfeed 2y ago
  > If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now. It sounds like you're aware of the present reality of race and how it impacts how one is treated in America just for being who they are. > I have never been a "woke" person I have news for you! Edit: to be clear, I'm certain you don't match the the adversarially bastardized caricature of what a "woke person" is, but it sounds like match the original, well-meaning definition.
- baked_beanz 2y ago
  You have come to the realization that systemic racism exists, and it grants privileges to the dominant socioeconomic groups. Congratulations, you are now "woke"! That's what the term originally meant, before it was turned into a strawman for "anything I don't like" by the conservative media machine and weaponized to divide people.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  > If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now If Trump were a black woman (or man), he would have never survived the release of the Hollywood Access tape and therefore would have never gotten elected.
  - koolba 2y ago
    Yes a black man can only (politically) get away with something less risque like smoking crack cocaine on video during an FBI sting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/local/fbi-video-of-undercover-sting-on-marion-barry/2014/11/23/e1e35f00-7336-11e4-95a8-fe0b46e8751a_video.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/local/fbi-video-of-unde... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry
    - insane_dreamer 2y ago
      Pretty bad false equivalency. Barry was barred from running and went to federal prison. Yes, he was eligible to run (and was re-elected) but only _after_ he served his sentence. Did I miss the part where Trump went to jail? You also can't compare a mayoral election with a presidential one.
      - koolba 2y ago
        > Pretty bad false equivalency. Barry was barred from running and went to federal prison. Yes, he was eligible to run (and was re-elected) but only _after_ he served his sentence. Did I miss the part where Trump went to jail? Nope. Though you also missed the part where the manufacturing of "felony" charges was so novel they had never been attempted before. The closest parallel is probably the case of John Edwards who was acquitted: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/us/edwards-jury-returns-not-guilty-verdict-on-one-count.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/us/edwards-jury-returns-n... But you probably think it's because he was also a white man and not because there was no criminal act. I'm curious if you can even sum up what exactly was the felony that Trump was convicted, or even better, who's the victim? Because all I saw was an overzealous DA in NY with utter disregard for the actual law. > You also can't compare a mayoral election with a presidential one. Yes. And clearly people of DC would rather elect a Democrat crackhead over any Republican.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mtalantikite 2y ago
  As others have pointed out to you, "woke" is just from AAVE, meaning to be awake to the racial prejudices and social injustices of the world. Leadbelly used it at the end of his "Scottsboro Boys" [1] in 1938, and it likely was in use many years before that. Erykah Badu's "Master Teacher" also uses it prominently, which probably helped bring it out of AAVE into more mainstream use [2]. Anyway, that's all to say I find it sad and funny that people are all up in arms about being "woke" these days. It's like stating "I'd prefer to be ignorant". [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrXfkPViFIE&t=249s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrXfkPViFIE&t=249s [2] whole song is great, but I forgot about this second section of the song: https://youtu.be/Dieo6bp4zQw?si=fCPJpWIbQV_g5yx3&t=203 https://youtu.be/Dieo6bp4zQw?si=fCPJpWIbQV_g5yx3&t=203
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - nailer 2y ago
    > "woke" is just from AAVE, meaning to be awake to the racial prejudices and social injustices of the world. Yes, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a democracy that serves the people of Korea. Sometimes expressions have meaning beyond what advocates for the related concepts claim. For example, as I’m sure you are aware, ‘woke’ viewpoints repeatedly advocate for racial discrimination in American universities.
    - kelnos 2y ago
      Lately it feels like "woke" in political discourse just means "anything Republicans don't like". What a waste of an otherwise useful term.
      - nsingh2 2y ago
        I don't recall the term "woke" being all that useful. I really only started noticing it as a right-wing pejorative, often times being used by straight up racists, and to lesser extent by people pointing out performative solidarity, and this is not a recent thing either. The meaning of "woke" changes depending on the person saying it, and the one listening, which makes it hard to tell what the person is _really_ trying to say. Edit: Apparently it was recently popularized by BLM activists, but then took on a different meaning [1]. So it seems ambiguous, which to me makes it not that useful. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
sys32768 2y ago
Harvard admitted it needs to "...broaden the intellectual and viewpoint diversity within our community..." This is a no-brainer considering only 2.3% of their faculty identifies as conservative. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-2023-politics/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-...
- pesus 2y ago
  How is this a no brainer? How many of their faculty identity as believers in a flat earth? Are we concerned about that viewpoint being underrepresented as well?
- comte7092 2y ago
  Yeah what Harvard definitely needs is more faculty who will defend sending people to Salvadoran prisons without due process. /s
- arp242 2y ago
  So pick one or the other: having a broad representation from many walks of life is important or it's not. You can't mix or match depending on which group you like. And that is what I'm commenting on. I'm not a fan of Trump's "war on DEI" but if it was applied with some consistency I could take it as a genuine difference in viewpoints. That would be okay. But the movement is railing hard and vitriolic against anything with even a whiff of "DEI" while applying wildly different standards to themselves. This is hard to take as a genuine difference in viewpoints.
- janalsncm 2y ago
  I am against admissions discrimination so I disagree. Conservatives should get into schools based on merit.
  - arrosenberg 2y ago
    Do they ask for your political ideology on the Harvard application?
NoImmatureAdHom 2y ago
It's not cognitive dissonance, or bad faith. Of course. If you let Harvard do "merit-based hiring", they'll move a little in the direction of actually complying with employment law, but not much. If you institute a regime such as the one that existed for race and sex for decades (i.e., if you don't have "enough" black people, you need to show how your recruitment pipeline means that's necessarily the case, like not enough get the required type of degree), you'll get much better compliance.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  >If you institute a regime such as the one that existed for race and sex for decades Do you really think this administration is doing anything close to that?
  - NoImmatureAdHom 2y ago
    Frankly no. I don't think they actually care in the way that equal outcomes was baked into what it meant to be Blue Team for a while, and the bureaucracy ("deep state") is against them, especially in Massachusetts, and I don't think they're competent enough.
jdthedisciple 2y ago
If you genuinely cannot distinguish the two then that's about equally as bad as cognitive dissonance: Phenotype diversity != Viewpoint diversity The former is what current academia and DEI focus on, the latter is what the administration demands. Does this simple logic need to be expressed in Rust for HN folks to wrap their mind around it?
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  the contradiction is that "viewpoint hiring" =/= "merit based hiring". I think you should give better faith to the community instead of breaking the guidelines here trying to prove a point.

by arp242 2y ago

saalweachter 2y ago

Never mistake a man's rhetoric for his principles.

enaaem 2y ago

I have never been a "woke" person, but Trump really makes me doubt the meritocracy argument. If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now.

overfeed 2y ago
> If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now. It sounds like you're aware of the present reality of race and how it impacts how one is treated in America just for being who they are. > I have never been a "woke" person I have news for you! Edit: to be clear, I'm certain you don't match the the adversarially bastardized caricature of what a "woke person" is, but it sounds like match the original, well-meaning definition.
baked_beanz 2y ago
You have come to the realization that systemic racism exists, and it grants privileges to the dominant socioeconomic groups. Congratulations, you are now "woke"! That's what the term originally meant, before it was turned into a strawman for "anything I don't like" by the conservative media machine and weaponized to divide people.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
insane_dreamer 2y ago
> If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now If Trump were a black woman (or man), he would have never survived the release of the Hollywood Access tape and therefore would have never gotten elected.
- koolba 2y ago
  Yes a black man can only (politically) get away with something less risque like smoking crack cocaine on video during an FBI sting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/local/fbi-video-of-undercover-sting-on-marion-barry/2014/11/23/e1e35f00-7336-11e4-95a8-fe0b46e8751a_video.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/local/fbi-video-of-unde... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    Pretty bad false equivalency. Barry was barred from running and went to federal prison. Yes, he was eligible to run (and was re-elected) but only _after_ he served his sentence. Did I miss the part where Trump went to jail? You also can't compare a mayoral election with a presidential one.
    - koolba 2y ago
      > Pretty bad false equivalency. Barry was barred from running and went to federal prison. Yes, he was eligible to run (and was re-elected) but only _after_ he served his sentence. Did I miss the part where Trump went to jail? Nope. Though you also missed the part where the manufacturing of "felony" charges was so novel they had never been attempted before. The closest parallel is probably the case of John Edwards who was acquitted: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/us/edwards-jury-returns-not-guilty-verdict-on-one-count.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/us/edwards-jury-returns-n... But you probably think it's because he was also a white man and not because there was no criminal act. I'm curious if you can even sum up what exactly was the felony that Trump was convicted, or even better, who's the victim? Because all I saw was an overzealous DA in NY with utter disregard for the actual law. > You also can't compare a mayoral election with a presidential one. Yes. And clearly people of DC would rather elect a Democrat crackhead over any Republican.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mtalantikite 2y ago
As others have pointed out to you, "woke" is just from AAVE, meaning to be awake to the racial prejudices and social injustices of the world. Leadbelly used it at the end of his "Scottsboro Boys" [1] in 1938, and it likely was in use many years before that. Erykah Badu's "Master Teacher" also uses it prominently, which probably helped bring it out of AAVE into more mainstream use [2]. Anyway, that's all to say I find it sad and funny that people are all up in arms about being "woke" these days. It's like stating "I'd prefer to be ignorant". [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrXfkPViFIE&t=249s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrXfkPViFIE&t=249s [2] whole song is great, but I forgot about this second section of the song: https://youtu.be/Dieo6bp4zQw?si=fCPJpWIbQV_g5yx3&t=203 https://youtu.be/Dieo6bp4zQw?si=fCPJpWIbQV_g5yx3&t=203
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- nailer 2y ago
  > "woke" is just from AAVE, meaning to be awake to the racial prejudices and social injustices of the world. Yes, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a democracy that serves the people of Korea. Sometimes expressions have meaning beyond what advocates for the related concepts claim. For example, as I’m sure you are aware, ‘woke’ viewpoints repeatedly advocate for racial discrimination in American universities.
  - kelnos 2y ago
    Lately it feels like "woke" in political discourse just means "anything Republicans don't like". What a waste of an otherwise useful term.
    - nsingh2 2y ago
      I don't recall the term "woke" being all that useful. I really only started noticing it as a right-wing pejorative, often times being used by straight up racists, and to lesser extent by people pointing out performative solidarity, and this is not a recent thing either. The meaning of "woke" changes depending on the person saying it, and the one listening, which makes it hard to tell what the person is _really_ trying to say. Edit: Apparently it was recently popularized by BLM activists, but then took on a different meaning [1]. So it seems ambiguous, which to me makes it not that useful. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

sys32768 2y ago

Harvard admitted it needs to "...broaden the intellectual and viewpoint diversity within our community..." This is a no-brainer considering only 2.3% of their faculty identifies as conservative. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-2023-politics/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2023/5/22/faculty-survey-...

pesus 2y ago
How is this a no brainer? How many of their faculty identity as believers in a flat earth? Are we concerned about that viewpoint being underrepresented as well?
comte7092 2y ago
Yeah what Harvard definitely needs is more faculty who will defend sending people to Salvadoran prisons without due process. /s
arp242 2y ago
So pick one or the other: having a broad representation from many walks of life is important or it's not. You can't mix or match depending on which group you like. And that is what I'm commenting on. I'm not a fan of Trump's "war on DEI" but if it was applied with some consistency I could take it as a genuine difference in viewpoints. That would be okay. But the movement is railing hard and vitriolic against anything with even a whiff of "DEI" while applying wildly different standards to themselves. This is hard to take as a genuine difference in viewpoints.
janalsncm 2y ago
I am against admissions discrimination so I disagree. Conservatives should get into schools based on merit.
- arrosenberg 2y ago
  Do they ask for your political ideology on the Harvard application?

NoImmatureAdHom 2y ago

It's not cognitive dissonance, or bad faith. Of course. If you let Harvard do "merit-based hiring", they'll move a little in the direction of actually complying with employment law, but not much. If you institute a regime such as the one that existed for race and sex for decades (i.e., if you don't have "enough" black people, you need to show how your recruitment pipeline means that's necessarily the case, like not enough get the required type of degree), you'll get much better compliance.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
>If you institute a regime such as the one that existed for race and sex for decades Do you really think this administration is doing anything close to that?
- NoImmatureAdHom 2y ago
  Frankly no. I don't think they actually care in the way that equal outcomes was baked into what it meant to be Blue Team for a while, and the bureaucracy ("deep state") is against them, especially in Massachusetts, and I don't think they're competent enough.

jdthedisciple 2y ago

If you genuinely cannot distinguish the two then that's about equally as bad as cognitive dissonance: Phenotype diversity != Viewpoint diversity The former is what current academia and DEI focus on, the latter is what the administration demands. Does this simple logic need to be expressed in Rust for HN folks to wrap their mind around it?

johnnyanmac 2y ago
the contradiction is that "viewpoint hiring" =/= "merit based hiring". I think you should give better faith to the community instead of breaking the guidelines here trying to prove a point.