DEI — short for diversity, equity and inclusion — has become the latest dog-whistle term in the conservative war of words to frame basic egalitarianism as a net negative.
I totally blanked on that acronym. It was a few paragraphs in.
This should have been a no brainer once these idiots started calling the Baltimore Mayor the “DEI mayor”.
These racist, misogynistic, homophobic, and anti-Semitic/islamophobic assholes are always looking for a new dog whistle to use or a new popular thing to corrupt, or even seemingly innocent things to corrupt.
Of course using DEI as a pejorative or a slur is reactionary, but there are legitimate criticisms of DEI. Diversity, equity, and inclusion sound good on their face, but things get complicated when even a little critical thinking is applied. Diversity of what, exactly? Diversity of culture, beliefs, ideals? Ok, but some cultures have beliefs that DEI proponents might find problematic, like homophobic ideas or sexist ideas. So, clearly, we don’t actually want too much diversity of ideals. DEI proponents don’t want to be inclusive to people they see as intolerant, so clearly there are limits to diversity and inclusion.
Equity is justice and fairness, but what is considered just and fair can change from culture to culture. If we are a diverse and multicultural country, which culture’s conception of justice and fairness do we use to determine what is equitable?
You’ve misapplied progressive language in such a way as to make me suspect this comment is an example of astroturfing. I almost hope that is the case, because the alternative is that you have allowed ignorance and implicit bias to lead you down a path of self justified racism/bigotry. As the dominant culture, it is not our place to decide to exclude groups of people based on a preconception. Every culture has blindspots. But none of them are absolutes. You tolerate the culture, and try to discourage behavior that is detrimental to the whole. Otherwise we’d ban most religions. Even western ones.
As the dominant culture, it is not our place to decide to exclude groups of people based on a preconception.
I’m not sure progressives are the dominant culture in America, but regardless exclusion based on preconception is not the only kind of exclusion. You can exclude cultures based on behaviors that have demonstrated to lead to unacceptable consequences, and that does include white conservatives. It’s clear that liberals believe white, Christian conservative culture is at least partly unacceptable, even dangerous, and yet you insist it be tolerated. This seems, foolish. Especially since those conservatives seem hell bent on destroying your culture. It’s like refusing to remove a murderer from your home because that would go against the spirit of inclusion.
Every culture has blindspots. But none of them are absolutes. You tolerate the culture, and try to discourage behavior that is detrimental to the whole. Otherwise we’d ban most religions. Even western ones.
But what you’re describing isn’t inclusion, it’s passive assimilation. Discouraging behaviors you consider detrimental isn’t inclusion, it’s the opposite. Even if you are not excluding the whole culture, you are excluding part of it. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, but it’s not inclusivity and diversity, it’s promoting cultural homogeny, at least homogeny of some core principles. So, even if you don’t want to outright ban most religions, even western ones, because that would go against your core principles, you do want to “ban” (albeit not overtly) some aspects of those cultures.
This sounds like armchair/keyboard intellectual semantic circle jerk. It completely ignores history, the effects and affects of that history, and thus the actual present reality that is the result.
If we are a diverse and multicultural country, which culture’s conception of justice and fairness do we use to determine what is equitable?
Def not yours. Playing at intellectual arguments on the level of a high school debate may make you feel good. Beyond that not very helpful and certainly lacking humanity.
Republicans are always in search of ways to cause Democrats to cede ground. And Democrats keep falling for it because they love to surrender and call it compromise.
I’m not right wing, but I have a general distaste for some people in DEI solely because of their reputation of proactive hatred and shame tactics. See localizers propping up GamerGate 2.0. Literally the most pathetic kinds of nuisances, the ones that will cleanse and sensor all media to fit their agenda but will scream bloody mary if you dare try and censor something they like. Hypocritical drama queens that want to dominate culture so they can mold it as they see fit and won’t have it any other way.
For examples of pathetic, see Sweet Baby Inc (censorship, racism, unlawful hiring practices), Veritable Joy Studios (sexism and racism my employees on Twitter), awkwardtheturtle/DrewiePoodle (career online community manager who gets off to reactions from conducting racist and sexist harassment, their ego seems to be the only reason they still wake up in the morning). I feel like I’m forgetting someone, but I’m sure Keffles needs no introduction, none of these even compare to that disgrace.
Exactly. They should be ignored and de-platformed. But some idiots still keep validating them so they will continue to be a nuisance until something gives.
Oh boy! It’s “Cultural Marxism” all over again. I wonder if an incel somewhere is going to use this as a justification for committing mass murder, a la a certain Norwegian.
I mean… to be fair, they got the W on that one. Obviously the ADA was bipartisan but Bush signed it into law
BUT inclusion is different when you can’t infantalize the disabled. Now we’re talking about able bodied people who they can’t write off as insert insult or slur for people with disabilities here
The disabled community got that win. Bush was forcefed heaping piles of bad publicity by protesting disabled people. They worked damn hard to put that bill in front of him and apply the right kind of pressure to make sure he fucking signed. Sure, he took the win as the politicians always do but that win firmly belongs to the disabled community.
Someone should probably tell the so-called “DEI Mayor.” I think it was actually just a bunch of racists using that term, not people who just thought we had a dedicated DEI professional on city staff to champion diversity, equity, and inclusion.
He will be so shocked to learn it was racism the whole time.
This is the way things have always been. Use a word to classify something, and it’ll be quickly turned into an insult and/or slur.
Words like “idiot” were originally medical terms used to describe those with mental illness or special needs. Then people started using it to insult people they didn’t like. And every replacement quickly gets similar treatment. When I was growing up, the term “Mentally retarded” was the preferred and most common term to use. Then people hijacked it and turned it into a general-purpose insult. Today, the word “Special” is getting similar treatment. And whatever term will become the new acceptable term will get the same treatement in short order.
The same happens with race. Every classification of race eventually gets devolved and turned into a racial slur. And then when they start using a new term to describe them, the racists quickly turn that into a slur as well. This will be no different. Just like they did before, bigots have once again taken a general purpose term and turned it into an insult. And if it gets bad enough where people have to start renaming their DE&I departments and programs, whatever term is used to replace DE&! will be given the same treatment.
A professor I had in undergrad once use the term “vernacular treadmill” to describe that process. It just keeps spinning and we have to update what we define as insulting as it becomes used that way.
Yep, first they used ‘political correctness’ then it was ‘SJW’, then ‘virtue signaling’, and now ‘woke’. They’re all trying to say the same thing; that people on the left don’t actually believe the things they say but feel pressured to conform to… something? A media narrative? A desire to not be perceived as a total asshole? But we’re all totally fakers.
They’ve been using woke for awhile now, I guess it’s DEI’s turn.
They’re all trying to say the same thing; that people on the left don’t actually believe the things they say but feel pressured to conform to… something? A media narrative? A desire to not be perceived as a total asshole? But we’re all totally fakers.
It’s because there’s very little they truly believe in, so when they see people on the left have actual convictions they assume they’re liars just like themselves.
It’s not a subtle or clever tactic and it doesn’t fool anyone these days but people still insist on LARPing/concern trolling in comment sections. It’s like a compulsion.
“I’m a black gay guy and I can personally say that Obama did nothing for me, my life only changed a little bit and it was for the worse. Everything is so much better under Trump though. I feel respected - which I never do when democrats are involved.”
So, we’re on the same page that racism is a problem and we should eradicate it.
The part where we disagree is that it will be solved if we ignore it. DEI initiatives are a redress to things like systemic racism and other inequalities. Once we truly don’t have to force people to do it, it’ll be great.
Not exactly. I think we should act to alleviate inequality but we don’t need to resort to racism to do it.
How about instead of race we use economic indicators to choose who to help? It’s a far more accurate indicator and easier to test for than holding up a color chart (family income, education, tax returns) and actually helps more people that need it than only helping (insert the race you want to preference here).
What exactly is racist about diversity, inclusion or equity?
This is the big issue: we as leftists complain that liberals don’t listen to us, but when they actually adopt our language, we just accuse them of being racists.
Many left wingers are on the left solely because they hate liberals, and once they age out of protesting, almost always move to the far right. Seeing that you consider equity to be racist, I would say it is highly likely you have already began the rightwing creep and just haven’t realized it yet.
Changing the colour of your clan robes from white to black doesn’t make you less of a racist.
You’re falling into the trap so many do where they think their racism is the only good one and is right and justified. Spoiler, every racist thinks the same. Just treat people the same mate.
Please, tell me more about “my racism.” I’m genuinely curious what somebody who likely does nothing for their or anybody else’s community has to say about “my racism.”
Here it is again. We agree on the problem but not the solution. We have the same end goal. Unfortunately, racism still persists. Many of our institutions were founded on it and it’s impossible, under current laws, practices, etc to start ignoring it without negatively impacting marginalized communities immediately. It’s a process and we have to address the the consequences of past injustices while simultaneously working towards actual equality.
I don’t think we are going to see eye to eye on this one but I hope you have a good day.
People here want to pretend like only conservatives would dislike DEI but they’re wrong.
I want to live in a world where people think about the color of people’s skin the way they do hair or eye color - which is to say they don’t.
I’m sorry but I will not treat you differently based on the color of your skin.
These are the same people who were pushing “Latinx” meanwhile no one who is actually a part of that community knew what the fuck they were on about. Thankfully it seems to have died pretty quickly.
Add comment