5 ms·

It was made by people promoting intersectionality with redistributive "justice." It was often promoted and enforced by such people. Many consultants also have h

It was made by people promoting intersectionality with redistributive "justice." It was often promoted and enforced by such people. Many consultants also have highly negative views of white people. So, it's not speculation. What it does, taking away from one group to give to favored groups, is exactly what intersectionality/woke/etc called for.

mmooss 1y ago
> taking away from one group to give to favored groups That's right out of the playbook of how to promote racism and descrimination - tell people that the 'Blacks', etc. are taking their jobs. It literally goes back to the days of slavery, when they would turn poor whites against black slaves. God forbid the poor and oppressed got together; then they might vote out the wealthy and powerful. DEI is not redistribution. It's eliminating bias that favors the powerful groups, mostly white guys, that have benefitted - many unwittingly - from that bias for all of US history. If you want your job on merit, if you want a fair chance rather than a handout, you should favor DEI. If you think there's no bias, you are living in a fantasy - it's gone on for centuries, the documentation and research are overwhelming, and it's boomed since 2016.
- nickpsecurity 1y ago
  No, it's out of the playback of the people who invented and promoted intersectionality, redistribution of wealth/power, and DEI. Then, pushed their ideology into universities, corporations, and governments by lying that it was merely promoting diversity or fighting discrimination. Once it is in place, they always take from specific groups that they label as advantaged, privileged, or oppressors. They give to other groups they favor. I'll let you guess who the bad guys always are. Even if minorities become dominant, they still talk like white males are the advantaged people and still work against them. So, it's just hateful and systematically racist against specific groups.
  - ryandrake 1y ago
    What did "they" take from you? Be specific and quantify it.
    - nickpsecurity 1y ago
      It's a strange question to ask me about DEI policy since they specifically aim to hire or promote non-white and non-male people. So, jobs or promotions based on official policy. I cant quantify it since the non-whites and women who got hired or promoted didnt tell me their salaries. How about some examples of what I ran into. Please note these are not arguing race is the cause but a specific culture that comes with DEI. This is not how I think about black organizations or anything like that. These are all DEI, liberal run, etc. At one employer, they did a hiring event that caused the entire workforce to be mostly black within a week or so. Then, management and corporate people were that way. They put out big, "diversity" signs in front showing non-whites being promoted. They were evil and into cronyism like the whites before them but looked different so society is better? When I lost my job, it was hard to find new ones. Our area was more equally white and black than most places. The companies now were mostly black: workers, managers, and who hired. At some, the white people acted more black than white. So, add any of those jobs. Some would laugh at or mock white people. My friend gets in a hospital that's also DEI. The mostly-black staff were always rude. One knocked her on the ground to move her as she worked. People there said whites and women never last. That it was pointless to try to correct it. My step-dad was at a warehouse at the time. Of nearly 100 people, only a few were white. They were treated more strictly and petty. For instance, he said they got in trouble for not having the new shirts but only the black people knew about them. They didnt bother telling the white people. Many tech companies I looked at overtly said they wanted diversity (not whites). They showed pictures of their staff that had few to no white people. Some like Babbel played up transgender a lot. Local and remote companies had special, support groups for non-whites, women, and LGBT people (eg Plaid). Groups like Best Buy offered in-house mini-MBA's for advancement... unless you're white. Many of the organizations doing training, networking, mentoring, and grants were focusing on needy minorities. The minority members often got more at the EBT office. The media would always talk about their plight, too, like many of us didnt have empty fridges and no insurance. So, however you would quantify all that multiplied by however many whites or men were financially or medically impacted by it. I'm glad it's starting to reverse under the Trump administration. At least one politician thinks whites, males, and straight people are human beings, too.
  - mmooss 1y ago
    You're just saying this stuff, but it's not only badly misconceived, it's repeating that playbook. You can easily find - even in this discussion - why it's false. Anything that teaches you to hate and fear is a red flag - a sign to run the other way. They are doing it for a reason, they are appealing to the worst and most emotional parts of people for a reason. (And no, DEI doesn't teach that; it's just the propagandists that portray it that way).
    - nickpsecurity 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - mmooss 1y ago
        > Many colleges and workplaces mandate programs teaching these ideologies What makes them ideologies? By using disparaging language, it's a way to skip the discussion about whether they are valuable - you just skip to your conclusion. The ideologies are freedom and liberty, and for those to be real, they must apply to everyone - of all genders and skin colors. Clearly that hasn't been the case. Just waiting for it to change hasn't worked - for centuries. For freedom to be real, we need diversity - and the lack of it is a signal of discrimination. DEI is a set of solutions to these problems. I'm open to any but the absurdity of denial or embrace of racism and hate. The obsession with Marxism is a clear sign that you are reading right-wing propaganda - they are the only people that talk about it. Nobody involved with DEI, for example, even thinks about it. It's another way to disparage and demonize the targets of oppression. Oppression is ok if you call them bad names, it seems.
- Manuel_D 1y ago
  > DEI is not redistribution. It's eliminating bias that favors the powerful groups, mostly white guys, that have benefitted - many unwittingly - from that bias for all of US history. If you want your job on merit, if you want a fair chance rather than a handout, you should favor DEI. This runs directly contrary to my experience with DEI. I demoed setups for anonymized zoom interviews, and blinded resume review. HR didn't want any of it. Instead, we made exec's bonuses contingent on keeping the percentage of male employees in their org below a cap - exceed the cap, lose your bonus. The cap was lower than men's representation in the field. If DEI was about promoting merit, it would be focused on making interviews more objective, and anonymizing as much of the hiring process as we can. In practice, it's the opposite: directly tying incentives to the demographics of the candidates and penalizing those who don't adhere to the desired ethnic and gender ratio.
  - mrguyorama 1y ago
    Funny, whenever HN talks about how poor management is at managing software projects, we can recognize that doing management poorly is management's fault. Yet whenever it's DEI, it's the fault of DEI for some manager being incompetent. >HR didn't want any of it Why would they? I've never seen an HR department that actually cared about outcomes. I've been in multiple companies that struggle to hire people because HR insists on being the one writing the requirements, and they blatantly fuck it up, like asking for multiple years experience in a brand new tool, or "requiring" a programming language fluency that we don't use. Why is it DEIs fault that HR sucks at their job? If we had this same standard for other ways HR sucks, we would have reverted to Waterfall design methods, and we would eliminate sexual harassment training since sometimes companies retaliate. Meanwhile how quickly lots of companies are running from DEI shows they never really cared about it, and did not hire competent people to run it. Why is that DEI's fault? Funny how this standard only applies to DEI >it would be focused on making interviews more objective, and anonymizing as much of the hiring process as we can It literally is in a shitload of companies. Why do you think you get to generalize from your singular experience?
    - Manuel_D 1y ago
      I have not been at a single company that anonymizes its interview pipeline. Are there some examples of companies that do this? I know Interviewing.io does, but they don't have the final say in hires. They just forwarded candidate to companies, which were under no obligation to maintain anonymity. Ironically Interviewing.io's anonymity is why Meta refused to work with them: https://interviewing.io/blog/i-love-meritocracy-but-all-the-recent-anti-dei-rhetoric-is-bad https://interviewing.io/blog/i-love-meritocracy-but-all-the-...
Spivak 1y ago
My guy you clearly have no idea what intersectionality even means. Like this is firmly in the "not even wrong" territory where the word doesn't make sense in the sentence. Intersectionality is a descriptive term to understand how a person's advantages (say from being white) and disadvantages (say from being gay) interact and how all the different combinations have unique struggles and challenges. It doesn't do or call for anything.
- nickpsecurity 1y ago
  The People that promote it call for "redistributive justice" that takes away from groups they see as advantaged to give to groups they see as disadvantaged. Advantaged, privilege, and power are synonyms for them. In practice, they always treat whites, males, and straight people as the problem. The DEI policies they pushed certainly "call for" Something.
  - Spivak 1y ago
    Ya know, reading this I start to understand the backlash against DEI programs when real life, presumably educated, people such as yourself seem to genuinely believe in such a cartoonish narrative. That's not even what redistributive justice means— welfare and public education are redistributive justice, progressive taxation is redistributive justice. It's a political and economic theory supported by the well known woke anti-white and anti-male institution The Catholic Church. You don't need a whiteness tax or other nonsense, when you have equitable systems (like heating assistance programs) the benefits naturally flow to disadvantaged groups because they'll be the ones disproportionately qualifying for aid.

mmooss 1y ago

> taking away from one group to give to favored groups That's right out of the playbook of how to promote racism and descrimination - tell people that the 'Blacks', etc. are taking their jobs. It literally goes back to the days of slavery, when they would turn poor whites against black slaves. God forbid the poor and oppressed got together; then they might vote out the wealthy and powerful. DEI is not redistribution. It's eliminating bias that favors the powerful groups, mostly white guys, that have benefitted - many unwittingly - from that bias for all of US history. If you want your job on merit, if you want a fair chance rather than a handout, you should favor DEI. If you think there's no bias, you are living in a fantasy - it's gone on for centuries, the documentation and research are overwhelming, and it's boomed since 2016.

nickpsecurity 1y ago
No, it's out of the playback of the people who invented and promoted intersectionality, redistribution of wealth/power, and DEI. Then, pushed their ideology into universities, corporations, and governments by lying that it was merely promoting diversity or fighting discrimination. Once it is in place, they always take from specific groups that they label as advantaged, privileged, or oppressors. They give to other groups they favor. I'll let you guess who the bad guys always are. Even if minorities become dominant, they still talk like white males are the advantaged people and still work against them. So, it's just hateful and systematically racist against specific groups.
- ryandrake 1y ago
  What did "they" take from you? Be specific and quantify it.
  - nickpsecurity 1y ago
    It's a strange question to ask me about DEI policy since they specifically aim to hire or promote non-white and non-male people. So, jobs or promotions based on official policy. I cant quantify it since the non-whites and women who got hired or promoted didnt tell me their salaries. How about some examples of what I ran into. Please note these are not arguing race is the cause but a specific culture that comes with DEI. This is not how I think about black organizations or anything like that. These are all DEI, liberal run, etc. At one employer, they did a hiring event that caused the entire workforce to be mostly black within a week or so. Then, management and corporate people were that way. They put out big, "diversity" signs in front showing non-whites being promoted. They were evil and into cronyism like the whites before them but looked different so society is better? When I lost my job, it was hard to find new ones. Our area was more equally white and black than most places. The companies now were mostly black: workers, managers, and who hired. At some, the white people acted more black than white. So, add any of those jobs. Some would laugh at or mock white people. My friend gets in a hospital that's also DEI. The mostly-black staff were always rude. One knocked her on the ground to move her as she worked. People there said whites and women never last. That it was pointless to try to correct it. My step-dad was at a warehouse at the time. Of nearly 100 people, only a few were white. They were treated more strictly and petty. For instance, he said they got in trouble for not having the new shirts but only the black people knew about them. They didnt bother telling the white people. Many tech companies I looked at overtly said they wanted diversity (not whites). They showed pictures of their staff that had few to no white people. Some like Babbel played up transgender a lot. Local and remote companies had special, support groups for non-whites, women, and LGBT people (eg Plaid). Groups like Best Buy offered in-house mini-MBA's for advancement... unless you're white. Many of the organizations doing training, networking, mentoring, and grants were focusing on needy minorities. The minority members often got more at the EBT office. The media would always talk about their plight, too, like many of us didnt have empty fridges and no insurance. So, however you would quantify all that multiplied by however many whites or men were financially or medically impacted by it. I'm glad it's starting to reverse under the Trump administration. At least one politician thinks whites, males, and straight people are human beings, too.
- mmooss 1y ago
  You're just saying this stuff, but it's not only badly misconceived, it's repeating that playbook. You can easily find - even in this discussion - why it's false. Anything that teaches you to hate and fear is a red flag - a sign to run the other way. They are doing it for a reason, they are appealing to the worst and most emotional parts of people for a reason. (And no, DEI doesn't teach that; it's just the propagandists that portray it that way).
  - nickpsecurity 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - mmooss 1y ago
      > Many colleges and workplaces mandate programs teaching these ideologies What makes them ideologies? By using disparaging language, it's a way to skip the discussion about whether they are valuable - you just skip to your conclusion. The ideologies are freedom and liberty, and for those to be real, they must apply to everyone - of all genders and skin colors. Clearly that hasn't been the case. Just waiting for it to change hasn't worked - for centuries. For freedom to be real, we need diversity - and the lack of it is a signal of discrimination. DEI is a set of solutions to these problems. I'm open to any but the absurdity of denial or embrace of racism and hate. The obsession with Marxism is a clear sign that you are reading right-wing propaganda - they are the only people that talk about it. Nobody involved with DEI, for example, even thinks about it. It's another way to disparage and demonize the targets of oppression. Oppression is ok if you call them bad names, it seems.
Manuel_D 1y ago
> DEI is not redistribution. It's eliminating bias that favors the powerful groups, mostly white guys, that have benefitted - many unwittingly - from that bias for all of US history. If you want your job on merit, if you want a fair chance rather than a handout, you should favor DEI. This runs directly contrary to my experience with DEI. I demoed setups for anonymized zoom interviews, and blinded resume review. HR didn't want any of it. Instead, we made exec's bonuses contingent on keeping the percentage of male employees in their org below a cap - exceed the cap, lose your bonus. The cap was lower than men's representation in the field. If DEI was about promoting merit, it would be focused on making interviews more objective, and anonymizing as much of the hiring process as we can. In practice, it's the opposite: directly tying incentives to the demographics of the candidates and penalizing those who don't adhere to the desired ethnic and gender ratio.
- mrguyorama 1y ago
  Funny, whenever HN talks about how poor management is at managing software projects, we can recognize that doing management poorly is management's fault. Yet whenever it's DEI, it's the fault of DEI for some manager being incompetent. >HR didn't want any of it Why would they? I've never seen an HR department that actually cared about outcomes. I've been in multiple companies that struggle to hire people because HR insists on being the one writing the requirements, and they blatantly fuck it up, like asking for multiple years experience in a brand new tool, or "requiring" a programming language fluency that we don't use. Why is it DEIs fault that HR sucks at their job? If we had this same standard for other ways HR sucks, we would have reverted to Waterfall design methods, and we would eliminate sexual harassment training since sometimes companies retaliate. Meanwhile how quickly lots of companies are running from DEI shows they never really cared about it, and did not hire competent people to run it. Why is that DEI's fault? Funny how this standard only applies to DEI >it would be focused on making interviews more objective, and anonymizing as much of the hiring process as we can It literally is in a shitload of companies. Why do you think you get to generalize from your singular experience?
  - Manuel_D 1y ago
    I have not been at a single company that anonymizes its interview pipeline. Are there some examples of companies that do this? I know Interviewing.io does, but they don't have the final say in hires. They just forwarded candidate to companies, which were under no obligation to maintain anonymity. Ironically Interviewing.io's anonymity is why Meta refused to work with them: https://interviewing.io/blog/i-love-meritocracy-but-all-the-recent-anti-dei-rhetoric-is-bad https://interviewing.io/blog/i-love-meritocracy-but-all-the-...

Spivak 1y ago

My guy you clearly have no idea what intersectionality even means. Like this is firmly in the "not even wrong" territory where the word doesn't make sense in the sentence. Intersectionality is a descriptive term to understand how a person's advantages (say from being white) and disadvantages (say from being gay) interact and how all the different combinations have unique struggles and challenges. It doesn't do or call for anything.

nickpsecurity 1y ago
The People that promote it call for "redistributive justice" that takes away from groups they see as advantaged to give to groups they see as disadvantaged. Advantaged, privilege, and power are synonyms for them. In practice, they always treat whites, males, and straight people as the problem. The DEI policies they pushed certainly "call for" Something.
- Spivak 1y ago
  Ya know, reading this I start to understand the backlash against DEI programs when real life, presumably educated, people such as yourself seem to genuinely believe in such a cartoonish narrative. That's not even what redistributive justice means— welfare and public education are redistributive justice, progressive taxation is redistributive justice. It's a political and economic theory supported by the well known woke anti-white and anti-male institution The Catholic Church. You don't need a whiteness tax or other nonsense, when you have equitable systems (like heating assistance programs) the benefits naturally flow to disadvantaged groups because they'll be the ones disproportionately qualifying for aid.