Changing Tenor in HR Departments

NYCBlueBlood said:
Your point is valid, that this is one of the core sources of angst that MAGA has tapped into. And I get that mocking and ridiculing people for being upset they missed the boat on white privilege won't help. I'm not suggesting Dems run on a platform of "suck it up, buttercup."

The real issue here is not DEI. I's the systematic death squeeze being put on the middle class. The democrats focus on the poor, the Pubs slob the knobs of the rich. But neither party does anything more than lip service for the middle class. The middle class has been shrinking for decades. MAGA is convincing white America that it's foreigners and minorities stealing their jobs... but in truth it's a long-term structural issue where people are fighting for their slice of an ever-shrinking pie.
Click to expand...
Fwiw, a lot of that shrinking middle class is moving up and out.


As a result, Americans are more apart than before financially. From 1971 to 2023, the share of Americans who live in lower-income households increased from 27% to 30%, and the share in upper-income households increased from 11% to 19%.

Notably, the increase in the share who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income. In that sense, these changes are also a sign of economic progress overall.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
That's not how I feel, especially after spending time around talented minorities but certainly some people feel that way.
Click to expand...
It's damned hard to believe anyone stupid enough to think that way doesn't understand the impact of a bad job evaluation first hand. Course the dumbasses probably feel like they are being picked on.
 
lawtig02 said:
I agree with super on this one. Whether one agrees with it or not, the author describes a very real source of frustration among young people. It was FAR easier for me to get a great job than it will be for my kids. They don't need to be coddled, but it would do us well to listen to what has them frustrated about the job market. Same thing for the housing market.
Click to expand...
I agree with this.

I've read other articles that describe how we have worked hard to create opportunity for some groups, while others ended up left behind in some way.

As super said, it's a struggle to help all, there will be winners and losers. In my opinion some groups answer to this is to revert back to the 1950's. My opinion is that we need to work to address these concerns also, but it shouldn't be at the cost of the progress we have made.
 
NYCBlueBlood said:
Your point is valid, that this is one of the core sources of angst that MAGA has tapped into. And I get that mocking and ridiculing people for being upset they missed the boat on white privilege won't help. I'm not suggesting Dems run on a platform of "suck it up, buttercup."

The real issue here is not DEI. I's the systematic death squeeze being put on the middle class. The democrats focus on the poor, the Pubs slob the knobs of the rich. But neither party does anything more than lip service for the middle class. The middle class has been shrinking for decades. MAGA is convincing white America that it's foreigners and minorities stealing their jobs... but in truth it's a long-term structural issue where people are fighting for their slice of an ever-shrinking pie.
Click to expand...
Progressives say that the Dems are all about the middle class, and only give lip service to the poor. I think that critique is more accurate than what you have stated. No offense intended. The problem I have with progressives is a lack of realistic remedies. It's the same way that Marx was very insightful until it came time to say what communism should actually be. Then he was like, eh let me stammer for a few pages. So what we got was dictatorship of the proletariat, which was even worse than the problem it solved.
 
UNCatTech said:
I don't agree with this.

Can you provide something to support this?
Click to expand...
I think the first point is a logical argument. If two people of different races are both mediocre and they're competing for the same thing, then if as NYCblue has noted, it was a blow to mediocre majorities, it would by extension be a boon to mediocre minorities. In this micro hypothetical, it's a zero sum game.

And I think the second point is something I've described previously. Some people will inevitably judge minorities that benefited from some preference, as not having earned it.

And it's not that crazy an argument. It's basically the white privilege argument in reverse. It's just that some DEI programs are much more explicit then more nebulous things like systemic racism.
 
Last edited:
gtyellowjacket said:
I think the first point is a logical argument. If two people of different races are both mediocre and they're competing for the same thing, then if as NYCblue has noted, it was a blow to mediocre majorities, it would by extension be a boon to mediocre minorities. And this micro hypothetical, it's a zero sum game.

And I think the second point is something I've described previously. Some people will inevitably judge minorities that benefited from some preference, as not having earned it.

And it's not that crazy an argument. It's basically the white privilege argument in reverse. It's just that some DEI programs are much more explicit then more nebulous things like systemic racism.
Click to expand...
It's crazy in that you completely ignore any sort of assessment in how they do their job. That's a flaw the size of Trump's ego.
 
The author’s misplaced grievance is DEI when the proper target is found, in his specific context, in “elite overproduction” (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elite_overproduction?wprov=sfti1#) during an era of declining social mobility and overall career opportunities.

Young white men, with nearly two decades of social and educational backsliding, are particularly impacted by these social forces as they have been acculturated to expect smooth sailing in their social advancements. Instead they are having to compete for limited resources within a contingent that has grown exponentially larger by, primarily, the impact of women in the workforce but also the presence of minorities who are historically marginalized from the juiciest job opportunities. Add in the presence of highly skilled immigrants, and you’ve got a recipe for resentment that opportunistic politicians are eager to exploit.

All of this and the morbid economic inequality that exists are easily foreseeable results of the neoliberal order. Our politicians, steadfastly beholden to the donor class, are loathe to focus on the reality and thus redirect with culture wars a la the initial post.

Don’t hate the players; hate the game.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Sunnyheel said that the new right was hoping to end DEI in favor of affirmative action for white men in college admissions.

While I am sure there are some people that would want that, I don't feel like that's the aim of the overwhelming majority of conservatives that want to end DEI in college admissions. I think most conservatives want to end racial preferences whether they be black white or purple.

So I replied to Sunnyheel asking if there was any data that the new right was hoping to use racial preferences in favor of white men. Then you noted that college administrators are hoping to increase male enrollment. That's very likely true but in the context of speaking about the new right, I felt like it was extremely unlikely that most college administrators would be defined as members of the new right.
Click to expand...
I don't agree. I think a lot of the maga crowd is fine with preferential treatment as long as it is for white people. A big complaint is non white people getting jobs. Remember the chants of "You will not replace us"?

Me personally, the only reason I believe we have to address hiring is because it was so biased in the past.

I'm not sure who is a member of the new right, but I do believe they want racial preferences for white people. I think that in the case of college admission it was already there and they didn't realize that killing these programs would be the opposite of what they want.
 
Last edited:
UNCatTech said:
I don't agree. I think a lot of the maga crowd is fine with preferential treatment as long as it is for white people. A big complaint is non white people getting jobs. Remember the changes of "You will not replace us"?

Me personally, the only reason I believe we have to address hiring is because it was so biased in the past.

I'm not sure who is a member of the new right, but I do believe they want racial preferences for white people. I think that in the case of college admission it was already there and they didn't realize that killing these programs would be the opposite of what they want.
Click to expand...
Okay. Disagree that that is the majority of people who want to end DEI although I'm sure that there are some that feel that white people should have preferences. But that's purely based on my experiences.

I have seen people that advocate for a preference of Americans and that tends to be focused against Hispanic and Indian immigrants and to a lesser extent Chinese immigrants. I haven't seen that same backlash against European immigrants or for that matter African immigrants. Maybe it's a numbers thing.
 
UNCatTech said:
Me personally, the only reason I believe we have to address hiring is because it was so biased in the past.
Click to expand...
I think this is the crux of the article. It sounds like a worthy goal to address that bias from the past but that opinion seems to be more commonly held amongst people who benefited from that bias in the past versus the people who are facing very real discrimination today.

So is the remedy to discriminate to address the discrimination in the past? I don't think so, but I can certainly see why people make that argument.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top