Your primary source is a Nazi tweet on a Nazi website.
I bet the banned user was a racist making bullshit claims along the lines of the “reverse racism” dogwhistle.
Aren’t there better places than Tech Tips subreddit to “condemn racism”? Banning flooders and offtopers is a common practice in narrow-themed communities.
I’d put money on the user in question being a right wing nutjob making bad faith arguments, judging from how fash the twitter account linked in this post seems to be.
There often is this idea of overcompensating for the inequalities experienced by one side in the past. While being a fundamentally plausible thought, this idea will never work because who is to decide and uphold the rules for that like when to stop it or how much to overcompensate. The more realistic and less patronizing approach is to always strive for a good world to live in by learning from the past and not trying to correct it.
Capitalism makes this an ineffective strategy. It compounds the advantages held by the descendants of the historically powerful rather than eroding them.
Good point, but I stand by my statement, because the problem persists, even if there is a large potential to compensate.
DEI and affirmative action aren’t perfect solutions, sure, but doing nothing and hoping the problem goes away is a response that is known to exacerbate the issue, not gradually solve it.
When believing in Equality of Outcome, I think they are pretty sound solutions, aren’t they? But I for one am not.
If your outcomes keep being unequal, you have two options:
- Concede that the opportunities weren’t as equal as you thought they were
- Convince yourself that the people with the worse outcomes are somehow inferior
I prefer the first solution.
I somewhat agree, but note that the inferiority you are describing is always only a relative measurement within the ruling system of economy, not necessarily some kind of (seemingly detached) moral measure which the connotation may imply.
That being said, I tend to the second option, acknowledging that capitalism, besides every other form of economy, is more of a challenge to some individuals than to others. But my initial statement persists.
capitalism, besides every other form of economy, is more of a challenge to some individuals than to others.
And you have no desire to change that?
And that’s why proactive DEI is necessary. Otherwise you end up with (for example) tech companies that continue to hire mostly nerdy guys because that’s what the interviewers relate with most comfortably, and reject female candidates because it’s harder for them to relate, even when the female in question is eminently qualified.
This implies that empathy is the number one reason for employment across the board, I doubt that is true.
You will also end up with people obtaining jobs and never knowing whether they did because they were skilled and convincing or because of their DEI-relevant attributes, to which they will now even be reduced to by law.
