Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

whyevolutionistrue.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 807 posts

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#261

Post by hotdogscout »

marcosdumay wrote: post #199
lazide wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Authoritarianism would be if it was top down. This is more a leftist version of McCarthyism. Aka intellectual purity testing and purges.

> Authoritarianism would be if it was top down. If a minority can impose their will into institutions, destroying the life of anybody that opposes them, you need a quite messed-up conception of power structures to place that minority "down".

Because you can't put the power to influence behavior on a straight line.

Each clique has it's own power structure.

Charisma, rule of law, pity, revenge, resentment, morality, resources, it's all a part of it.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#262

Post by dgfitz »

GIFtheory wrote: post #207
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #81

In the spirit of trying to learn something from the community: while I can certainly understand the rationale and goals behind DEI programs (many of which I agree with, others not), I honestly can't understand these "DEI statements" at all. They always seemed very "1984" to me, and almost designed to engender resentment in a way that would ultimately backfire. So perhaps I'm in a like-minded echo chamber, but is ther…

My first reaction to this news was, “fine, sounds like a silly requirement.” However, being a PhD graduate from a minority background, I really have to thank my advisor for the undergraduate outreach work he did, without which there is realistically a negligible chance I would have ended up with a PhD and a great research career. I don’t know what motivated him to do this work, but from a purely pragmatic perspective…

Perhaps you were simply evaluated against your noggin and not your skin?

Edit: what are the arguments against this?

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#263

Post by pfdietz »

slenocchio wrote: post #248
pfdietz wrote: post #219

I'm getting the impression a lot of Americans are now not just comfortable with systemic inequality, but are gravitating toward a position that it's actually desirable. In this environment, DEI bafflegab just pushes them in that direction.

That's a mischaracterization. No one is _for_ inequality. The opposition you speak of is _for_ race/gender blind meritocracy. Anyone with a little knowledge of economics understands that groups of people cut across any dimension will always have different outcomes; Russian Americans earn more than French Americans, Japanese Americans earn more than Fillipino Americans, taller people earn more than shorter people, etc…

> No one is _for_ inequality.

I suggest that's an extraordinarily naive statement.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#264

Post by andy99 »

nwoli wrote: post #255
andy99 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Cowardice selected for by ejecting the non cowards through filters that makes them not hired at these places

Universities typically have an old guard. They all cared too much about keeping their heads down and collecting their pay cheques too oppose this. It's not just new screening, it's active cowardice.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#265

Post by samastur »

rebeccaskinner wrote: post #244
collingreen wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am very interested in increasing diversity but I don't like the idea that anyone disagreeing with any dei suggestion should be labeled as intentionally disruptive and bad faith. Calling 80% of discussion here bad faith aimed at holding particular groups down is a big claim that shouldn't be thrown around lightly in a good faith post.

> I don't like the idea that anyone disagreeing with any dei suggestion should be labeled as intentionally disruptive and bad faith. My point isn't that anyone disagreeing with a particular suggestion is arguing in bad faith, it's that there are enough bad faith arguments that it becomes effectively impossible to have a productive discussion. > Calling 80% of discussion here bad faith aimed at holding particular grou…

Personally I’d focus on arguments instead of motivations and skip arguing with those were it seems it will be or when it becomes unproductive.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#267

Post by JumpCrisscross »

jltsiren wrote: post #226
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> support kids and young adults with extra classes, trainings If that support is available to those who need it irrespective of race, sex, et cetera , sure. Targeting underserved populations is one thing. Restricting access based on protected characteristics is illegal under any commonsense interpretation of the law.

There is no such thing as a fully inclusive community. A community is defined as much by the people it excludes as the people it includes. If you try to ensure that everyone is welcome, someone else will make the decisions who to exclude. Typically by making things too uncomfortable for some groups. If you genuinely want to target underserved populations, you must be prepared to exclude those who are not in the targe…

> no such thing as a fully inclusive community

We have agreed as a society on a set of protected classes. Not being allowed to discriminate based on race or sex doesn’t mean not being able to discriminate at all.

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#268

Post by gverrilla »

skissane wrote: post #259
gverrilla wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> There is no such a thing as cultural Marxism. That's a conspiracy theory the nazis first created. There is such a thing as "cultural Marxism", and it is not a conspiracy theory invented by the Nazis or anyone else. Consider for example the 1981 book by academic Richard Weiner, "Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology" [0] – it discusses "cultural Marxism" as a real thing, in a positive light, and it is a real acad…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Bolshevism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_th...

Re: MIT abandons requirement of DEI statements for hiring and promotions

#269

Post by JumpCrisscross »

darkhorse222 wrote: post #205
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is based on culture If one can define culture without relying on biological heredity, sure again. It would be better, however, to address the underlying issue: lack of cross-cultural knowledge that causes the reduced outcomes. (And why Māori students aren't getting into those programmes in a race-neutral process.)

I feel that deconstructing the entire culture of race is not really a practical suggestion for solving the issue. This outcome is not uncommon when you ask those against DEI how they would solve it. Often they recommend systematic solutions that they would in the end also be against because those solutions would surely use race as a targeting mechanism.

> deconstructing the entire culture of race is not really a practical suggestion for solving the issue

Sure. But normalising discrimination based on race entrenches it.

Post reply on HN