this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2025
1021 points (100.0% liked)

politics

23420 readers
2611 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Won so hard the mods had to ban you to maintain their illusions

[–] [email protected] 21 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

More like he lied so hard mods decided to stop the spread of disinformation, and then followed up with a comment explaining exactly why he was wrong.

Unfortunately I get the feeling that you aren’t interested in the truth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I'm interested in the truth. Just not what you claim to be the truth. And based on what? DEI doesn't have explicit quotas? You can still discriminate without them.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

DEI stops discrimination, not the other way. If you can’t understand that then it’s clear you don’t want to.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Ah yes, the old fight fire with fire. That always turns out well

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm confused how you think DEI is discrimination- its entire purpose is to make reviewers cognizant of their own biases to make hiring more based on merit. There is no quota. There is no agenda to put unqualified people on top

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm honestly confused how you don't. If they wanted to make things unbiased, they'd just anonymise them. But they don't, they put a spotlight on their race and gender. That adds bias, it doesn't get rid of it.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 weeks ago

Making people aware of their biases is not discrimination nor favoritism- it is removing favoritism for equal odds for everyone. In short, "here's a problem we have as a community- you should be aware of it when you are hiring so you treat people equally." It's clear you don't even understand the problem- you can't remove people's innate characteristics when they come to your work for an interview, so obviously you make it so the people interviewing are less biased. The only way to make people less biased is to inform them of their possible biases.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Remember when y'all banned the word "fascist" as mods on /conservative.ee?

God damn that was funny.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Unfortunately, there aren't exactly a lot of decentralized alternatives.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

DEI is explicitly about including anyone qualified. It's explicitly anti-discrimination. It's not about quotas. It's about ensuring everyone is included in the process. It makes sure you don't only look at white men, or whatever the bias may be prioritizing. If a white man is the best candidate, they get it. If a black woman is, they get it. It's just about making sure you're actually looking at everyone and taking account of them equally.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Explicitly anti-discrimination by being pro-discrimination. If they were being honest, they'd anonymized everything, but they don't. They do the opposite and put a spotlight on their race and gender. Their actions speak louder than their words.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago

Evidence for your claims?