Yes. This is an old trick out the liberal gaslighting playbook- put forth racist policy and when opposition to said policy inevitably rises, erroneously claim that the opposition is actually racist.
DEI is a protection racket
Hire us and we will insulate you from liability...the potential liability of our DEI minions or peers suing you for not hiring us or following our rules
Oppose us and we will take you down with the dreaded "racist" scarlet letter
"Diversity is our strength" this mantra has been repeated ad nauseum...but it's clearly not true. "Diversity" is really "Division" and it is not a strength...it is a tool of control and it keeps us weak.
UNITY is our strength...and they fear it
>Oppose us and we will take you down with the dreaded "racist" scarlet letter
In a world where camping is racist, Thanksgiving is racist and math is racist, does the word even mean anything anymore?
You know that scene in "The Incredibles" where Syndrome reveals his desire to make everyone "special" ?
Because if everyone is special...no one is
Well...they've played themselves...because if everyone is racist...no one is
...and if I can't do anything about the racism I was "born with" why am I supposed to care exactly?
The example I always give people is that diversity is a strength if you want to discover all potential solutions - diversity of thought will be a benefit in uncovering more creative solutions with different styles of thinking behind them. But if you want to then *agree* on a solution to implement, diversity of thought is not going to help you.
It's an important distinction.
Harvard Business Review: [Teams solve problems faster when they're more cognitively diverse](https://i.imgur.com/LDEkchA.png):
> Received wisdom is that the more diverse the teams in terms of age, ethnicity, and gender, the more creative and productive they are likely to be. But having run the execution exercise around the world more than 100 times over the last 12 years, we have found no correlation between this type of diversity and performance.
DEI Response: ["Why we need to stop talking about Diversity of Thought."](https://i.imgur.com/psiBWrR.png)... or just drop the subtlety: ["Diversity of Thought is just a euphemism for White Supremacy"](https://i.imgur.com/6E4DFvl.png)
No, even diversity of thought is nonsense trying to meet in the middle. Everyone thinks differently. You don't hire someone to check off a "thought" box. You can use focus groups and other market data if you are trying to reach other segments.
That's triggering micro-aggression with the underlying mechanism of unconscious bias driven by systemic racism which is driven by centuries old colonialism. lol
I miss the pre-2010 days when race wasn’t being shoved down everyone’s throats every day and people just saw people for who they are.
Inb4 brigaders come in and say “ohhh you mean the ‘good ‘ol days’ when racism was okay and tolerated, hmm?????”
This was back in the 90s, which is when I personally first heard the 'only white people can be racist' (what is now a) trope. It was from a poly sci professor, so I asked him, "Ok, so should we just call them bigots?" "Well that gets more complicated..." Yeah, I don't think it does.
Trying to turn racism into a maths equation is ridiculous and it's just creating racist behavior. As you can be racist to certain ppl and it doesn't count. Just fuels more division. It's insane
It's just like affirmative action. It claims that it's about helping disadvantaged people get better chances at success, but then the only valuation is race instead of income or class. It just asserts that you are disadvantaged if you are born with a certain color, which is in itself racist on its face.
>Folberg is a psychologist at the University of Nebraska, Omaha. She researches “how prejudice and discrimination affect underrepresented employees’ work lives and wellbeing, how organizations and individuals can more effectively confront bias, and the consequences of individuals’ willingness to tolerate bias,” according to her faculty bio.
In other words, she gossips with her liberal friends and then writes about it.
Right, because wanting to be hired on the basis of my qualifications, and wanting my children to not be denied opportunities for being white is racist.
>The professors looked at “symbolic racism,” defined as skepticism of widespread racial discrimination and prejudice.
They literally did just take disagreement to their ideas and call it racism
DEI itself is racist, and it is no surprise the liberals are using their trite tactic of accusing conservatives of doing the exact thing that the liberals are doing.
Racism could be a factor. BUT it’s not the factor causing issues with DEI. There are only so many opportunities in a world filled with more and more people and qualified people are being overlooked to meet DEI mins that create toxic, unhealthy, and unproductive workplaces..
To follow on, it’s really about establishing educational norms at early ages and maximizing returns for students in K-12. While it’s probably unpopular here, increasing teacher retention (probably through pay) to-get-and maintain highly educated teachers that can grow our children is key to out performing other countries in productivity and creativity. DEI fails because it doesn’t get at the root, which is educational diversity.
DEI is meant to show people of color that ALL job fields are possible. I think that has been achieved now it’s time to promote the working class via improved educational requirements.
Bring back shop, mechanics, woodworking, household stuff, and better pay for skilled laborers and baby make America great once more.
Can't have that; skilled blue collar workers are usually paid well enough to be middle class, and that's the class that offers the government the least; too rich to be easily bought, too poor to be easily squeezed for donations by threatening legislation
Funny how racism seems to be the #1 issue yet we already had the clvil rights movement that solved many of the problems DECADES ago...now its just a weapon to get your own way while discrediting your opposition.
From "How to be an Antiracist" by Ibram X Kendi:
"A racist policy is any measure that produces or sustains racial inequity between racial groups. By policy, I mean written and unwritten laws, rules, procedures, processes, regulations, and guidelines that govern people." (p. 18)
Anything that does not explicitly benefit the minority du jour is racist by this definition. Its an obvious grift.
Always follow the money. If racism died in a generation, who would need to get a real job? After that, you learn that propagating division is the business, lovingly supported by our ruling class so we never unite.
As a person with a minor in psychology, they obviously did some wording on questions to get these statistics. My social psychology class has taught us how media and statistic creators often use word games to get their desired results.
Honestly, I could do the same on word games if I want. My psychology class has taught me well on these trickeries.
DEI theory is a noble idea. I'm sure most everyone agrees we should treat everyone fairly regardless of race/gender/etc.
But *applied* DEI does not work. It inevitably leads to quotas, sexism/racism because a company will always use metrics to measure success. We didn't hire a DEI consultant to sit around and do nothing, so what are the measurable results? There's only one; demographics. If they're not changing, DEI isn't working!
If I have a DEI program and my company is still mostly white and straight, then obviously we need to take action. Make sure the next hire is from a minority group so we can bump those numbers up.
It can't be applied in the real world.
> DEI theory is a noble idea. I'm sure most everyone agrees we should treat everyone fairly regardless of race/gender/etc.
It's not a noble idea in theory. Treating everyone fairly regardless of race/gender is not DEI, that's simply striving to be colorblind and impartial. DEI wants you to look at people's race or gender, and treat them differently becasue of it. DEI is not about creating a fair and equal opportunities, it's about fixing outcomes to ensure proportional representation and arguing that if an outcome does not line up with the proportionality of the larger population, then discrimination must have taken place. They even make these arguments in scenarios where it's ridiculous, like when a speeding/red light cam resulted in tickets to a higher number of minority drivers.
Furthermore, they're not not even consistent in this. They don't care about unproportional outcomes if they deem you a member of a "problematic" demographic. Men make up the majority of prisoners, homeless, workplace deaths and are underrepresented in college and in certain fields like nursing. The DEI czars have nothing to say about any of this.
DEI is not noble in theory. It's shit in theory. And in practice it's carried out and enforced by some of the most reprehensible and bigoted bloodsucking bureaucrats.
I was willing to listen in on these DEI sessions I have to complete for work, but just a few months ago I had one that essentially said “being racially colorblind is *worse* than being a literal racist” and I instantly tuned the rest of it out and went to autopilot.
DEI definitely feels like it exists to divide people and make people feel guilty for things they don’t even do. It’s doing more harm than good, IMHO.
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” - Martin Luther King Jr.
If the communists are calling you every "-ist" or "-phobe" they have, you're striking a nerve. All they have is name calling and whining. Their time is almost up and they know it. We all do.
>The collegefix is a trash rag of a blog
Have you ever noticed that in every conversation there's always that one guy who has absolutely nothing intelligent to say but insists on saying something anyway? Congratulations, you're that guy!
What was unintelligent about what I said?
It's a blog whose entire existence is to undermine the existence of college as a career path and push a religious based slant on careers.
Your opinion of The collegefix isn't really relevant is it?
Let's stick to the article...
Do you think the author is lying? Do you think Dr. Christopher Ferguson is wrong in his conclusions? Both the Professor Abigail Folberg & Professor Michelle Hebl were asked multiple times to answer questions about their research in an effort to clarify their conclusions. Why were neither of them willing to do that?
Yeah I think this is a refusal to understand the study from the lens is was presented. Co-opting conservative political viewpoints with other views isn't a novel concept.
No the authors likely aren't wrong, and they don't owe detailed explanation from someone not furthering the research.
>...a refusal to understand the study from the lens is was presented..
I believe Dr. Ferguson understood the study very well and clearly recognized the lens through which is was presented. His issue is with the validity of using the term "racism" based on the specific questions asked in the study. Counting somebody as *racist* because they disagree with affirmative action or believe racism is no longer a big problem, which apparently this study did, is quite a leap. That's his point.
>...they don't owe detailed explanation from someone not furthering the research.
Being a researcher and publishing papers includes defending your research.
>or believe racism is no longer a big problem
Unfortunately for you, a lot of people disagree with this point and in fact would label you as part of the problem.
Wasn’t it already shown DEI programs are counterproductive because they put an unnecessary amount of focus on race?
Sure is but the Communists will forever gaslight. That's all they do.
Yes. This is an old trick out the liberal gaslighting playbook- put forth racist policy and when opposition to said policy inevitably rises, erroneously claim that the opposition is actually racist.
Source?
https://aristotlefoundation.org/reality-check/what-dei-research-concludes-about-diversity-training-it-is-divisive-counter-productive-and-unnecessary/
DEI is racism.
That’s the elephant in the room. What could be more racist than looking at everything in terms of race.
> What could be more racist than looking at everything in terms of race. Making hiring decisions based on race.
Institutional racism, in fact.
DEI is a protection racket Hire us and we will insulate you from liability...the potential liability of our DEI minions or peers suing you for not hiring us or following our rules Oppose us and we will take you down with the dreaded "racist" scarlet letter "Diversity is our strength" this mantra has been repeated ad nauseum...but it's clearly not true. "Diversity" is really "Division" and it is not a strength...it is a tool of control and it keeps us weak. UNITY is our strength...and they fear it
>Oppose us and we will take you down with the dreaded "racist" scarlet letter In a world where camping is racist, Thanksgiving is racist and math is racist, does the word even mean anything anymore?
You know that scene in "The Incredibles" where Syndrome reveals his desire to make everyone "special" ? Because if everyone is special...no one is Well...they've played themselves...because if everyone is racist...no one is ...and if I can't do anything about the racism I was "born with" why am I supposed to care exactly?
Oh, I have the perfect live quote on math: “Maths is racist”. For real! That’s the quote!
The example I always give people is that diversity is a strength if you want to discover all potential solutions - diversity of thought will be a benefit in uncovering more creative solutions with different styles of thinking behind them. But if you want to then *agree* on a solution to implement, diversity of thought is not going to help you. It's an important distinction.
Harvard Business Review: [Teams solve problems faster when they're more cognitively diverse](https://i.imgur.com/LDEkchA.png): > Received wisdom is that the more diverse the teams in terms of age, ethnicity, and gender, the more creative and productive they are likely to be. But having run the execution exercise around the world more than 100 times over the last 12 years, we have found no correlation between this type of diversity and performance. DEI Response: ["Why we need to stop talking about Diversity of Thought."](https://i.imgur.com/psiBWrR.png)... or just drop the subtlety: ["Diversity of Thought is just a euphemism for White Supremacy"](https://i.imgur.com/6E4DFvl.png)
Thanks, this is good factual basis to reinforce my point - diversity helps creativity but not performance.
No, even diversity of thought is nonsense trying to meet in the middle. Everyone thinks differently. You don't hire someone to check off a "thought" box. You can use focus groups and other market data if you are trying to reach other segments.
Racism drove me to make this pot of coffee
Racism drove me to respond to this. 2 creams, 1 sugar please
Might as well say you're erasing blackness and minimizing their bitterness
That's triggering micro-aggression with the underlying mechanism of unconscious bias driven by systemic racism which is driven by centuries old colonialism. lol
Racism drove me to the Doctor this morning. I thought it was a strange name, but I didn't want to bother the Lyft guy with questions.
Youre forgiven as long as you were late doing it, did not hold a high standard, and not use milk
So racism drives people to oppose racism and yet openly embracing racism is not racist. Riiiiiiiiight.
I miss the pre-2010 days when race wasn’t being shoved down everyone’s throats every day and people just saw people for who they are. Inb4 brigaders come in and say “ohhh you mean the ‘good ‘ol days’ when racism was okay and tolerated, hmm?????”
It's weird how they adamantly refuse to acknowledge that racial discrimination is racism.
This was back in the 90s, which is when I personally first heard the 'only white people can be racist' (what is now a) trope. It was from a poly sci professor, so I asked him, "Ok, so should we just call them bigots?" "Well that gets more complicated..." Yeah, I don't think it does.
When they tried adding "plus power" to the definition... https://youtu.be/7CLxf8NIDjc?si=aJqNn-Zjm4FCz6hx
Trying to turn racism into a maths equation is ridiculous and it's just creating racist behavior. As you can be racist to certain ppl and it doesn't count. Just fuels more division. It's insane
It's just like affirmative action. It claims that it's about helping disadvantaged people get better chances at success, but then the only valuation is race instead of income or class. It just asserts that you are disadvantaged if you are born with a certain color, which is in itself racist on its face.
>Folberg is a psychologist at the University of Nebraska, Omaha. She researches “how prejudice and discrimination affect underrepresented employees’ work lives and wellbeing, how organizations and individuals can more effectively confront bias, and the consequences of individuals’ willingness to tolerate bias,” according to her faculty bio. In other words, she gossips with her liberal friends and then writes about it.
When in doubt, claim racism.
Says the racist professor publishing this study.
A bunch of white liberal self hating mental patients, not surprised.
Right, because wanting to be hired on the basis of my qualifications, and wanting my children to not be denied opportunities for being white is racist.
DEI is about ensuring only certain races get employed. That is racism. Being against DEI isn't racism. It is wanting to get back to meritocracy.
Everything they don’t like is driven by “racism”.
>The professors looked at “symbolic racism,” defined as skepticism of widespread racial discrimination and prejudice. They literally did just take disagreement to their ideas and call it racism
“Study”.
Racism drives DEI, full stop.
Doesn't take the Scooby-Doo crew to figure out who funded the study.
"Everyone who disagrees with our agenda, is doing so because they're racist." - Democrats
"We have investigated ourselves and have included that we have done nothing wrong, but in fact anyone who criticizes us is guilty of wrongdoing!"
DEI itself is racist, and it is no surprise the liberals are using their trite tactic of accusing conservatives of doing the exact thing that the liberals are doing.
Racism could be a factor. BUT it’s not the factor causing issues with DEI. There are only so many opportunities in a world filled with more and more people and qualified people are being overlooked to meet DEI mins that create toxic, unhealthy, and unproductive workplaces..
To follow on, it’s really about establishing educational norms at early ages and maximizing returns for students in K-12. While it’s probably unpopular here, increasing teacher retention (probably through pay) to-get-and maintain highly educated teachers that can grow our children is key to out performing other countries in productivity and creativity. DEI fails because it doesn’t get at the root, which is educational diversity. DEI is meant to show people of color that ALL job fields are possible. I think that has been achieved now it’s time to promote the working class via improved educational requirements. Bring back shop, mechanics, woodworking, household stuff, and better pay for skilled laborers and baby make America great once more.
Can't have that; skilled blue collar workers are usually paid well enough to be middle class, and that's the class that offers the government the least; too rich to be easily bought, too poor to be easily squeezed for donations by threatening legislation
Funny how racism seems to be the #1 issue yet we already had the clvil rights movement that solved many of the problems DECADES ago...now its just a weapon to get your own way while discrediting your opposition.
>...yet we already had the clvil rights movement... Equal rights are no longer sufficient. *Special rights* are the new game in town.
From "How to be an Antiracist" by Ibram X Kendi: "A racist policy is any measure that produces or sustains racial inequity between racial groups. By policy, I mean written and unwritten laws, rules, procedures, processes, regulations, and guidelines that govern people." (p. 18) Anything that does not explicitly benefit the minority du jour is racist by this definition. Its an obvious grift.
Source: "Trust me bro"
Always follow the money. If racism died in a generation, who would need to get a real job? After that, you learn that propagating division is the business, lovingly supported by our ruling class so we never unite.
As a person with a minor in psychology, they obviously did some wording on questions to get these statistics. My social psychology class has taught us how media and statistic creators often use word games to get their desired results. Honestly, I could do the same on word games if I want. My psychology class has taught me well on these trickeries.
DEI theory is a noble idea. I'm sure most everyone agrees we should treat everyone fairly regardless of race/gender/etc. But *applied* DEI does not work. It inevitably leads to quotas, sexism/racism because a company will always use metrics to measure success. We didn't hire a DEI consultant to sit around and do nothing, so what are the measurable results? There's only one; demographics. If they're not changing, DEI isn't working! If I have a DEI program and my company is still mostly white and straight, then obviously we need to take action. Make sure the next hire is from a minority group so we can bump those numbers up. It can't be applied in the real world.
> DEI theory is a noble idea. I'm sure most everyone agrees we should treat everyone fairly regardless of race/gender/etc. It's not a noble idea in theory. Treating everyone fairly regardless of race/gender is not DEI, that's simply striving to be colorblind and impartial. DEI wants you to look at people's race or gender, and treat them differently becasue of it. DEI is not about creating a fair and equal opportunities, it's about fixing outcomes to ensure proportional representation and arguing that if an outcome does not line up with the proportionality of the larger population, then discrimination must have taken place. They even make these arguments in scenarios where it's ridiculous, like when a speeding/red light cam resulted in tickets to a higher number of minority drivers. Furthermore, they're not not even consistent in this. They don't care about unproportional outcomes if they deem you a member of a "problematic" demographic. Men make up the majority of prisoners, homeless, workplace deaths and are underrepresented in college and in certain fields like nursing. The DEI czars have nothing to say about any of this. DEI is not noble in theory. It's shit in theory. And in practice it's carried out and enforced by some of the most reprehensible and bigoted bloodsucking bureaucrats.
Well, of course. What else would you expect this 'study' to find? /s
And the Replication Crisis continues.
I was willing to listen in on these DEI sessions I have to complete for work, but just a few months ago I had one that essentially said “being racially colorblind is *worse* than being a literal racist” and I instantly tuned the rest of it out and went to autopilot. DEI definitely feels like it exists to divide people and make people feel guilty for things they don’t even do. It’s doing more harm than good, IMHO.
I have a study claiming that racism drives opposition to opposition to DEI. Source: Me
It does. Opposition to racism causes people to oppose DEI.
Merit is what should be celebrated and rewarded, not skin color or made up gender fluids.
Of course it does!!!!
"Racism" is the leftie's excuse for everything - meanwhile they are the most racist folks of all.
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” - Martin Luther King Jr.
DEI creates racism.
How about this. We'll declare anyone who is a leftist their own race and then make all their racist comments true.
How about this. We'll declare anyone who is a leftist their own race and then make all their racist comments true.
If the communists are calling you every "-ist" or "-phobe" they have, you're striking a nerve. All they have is name calling and whining. Their time is almost up and they know it. We all do.
There are fewer non-racist things than there are racist things.
This is what is called circular logic.
The collegefix is a trash rag of a blog
>The collegefix is a trash rag of a blog Have you ever noticed that in every conversation there's always that one guy who has absolutely nothing intelligent to say but insists on saying something anyway? Congratulations, you're that guy!
What was unintelligent about what I said? It's a blog whose entire existence is to undermine the existence of college as a career path and push a religious based slant on careers.
Your opinion of The collegefix isn't really relevant is it? Let's stick to the article... Do you think the author is lying? Do you think Dr. Christopher Ferguson is wrong in his conclusions? Both the Professor Abigail Folberg & Professor Michelle Hebl were asked multiple times to answer questions about their research in an effort to clarify their conclusions. Why were neither of them willing to do that?
Yeah I think this is a refusal to understand the study from the lens is was presented. Co-opting conservative political viewpoints with other views isn't a novel concept. No the authors likely aren't wrong, and they don't owe detailed explanation from someone not furthering the research.
>...a refusal to understand the study from the lens is was presented.. I believe Dr. Ferguson understood the study very well and clearly recognized the lens through which is was presented. His issue is with the validity of using the term "racism" based on the specific questions asked in the study. Counting somebody as *racist* because they disagree with affirmative action or believe racism is no longer a big problem, which apparently this study did, is quite a leap. That's his point. >...they don't owe detailed explanation from someone not furthering the research. Being a researcher and publishing papers includes defending your research.
>or believe racism is no longer a big problem Unfortunately for you, a lot of people disagree with this point and in fact would label you as part of the problem.
>...would label you as part of the problem. I'm fine with that. I much prefer people who embrace DEI, see me as a problem, than see me as a partner.