I 100% understand this. Like, truly. DEI is about forcing companies to hire the best candidates regardless of attributes which have no berring on the job such as race, gender identity, creed, color, etc.
If they are saying that DEI is not a thing anymore, then let it not be a thing. DEI also protects white men from discriminatory hiring, so I say let them see that it is important.
When it comes to political corruption, corporate greed, religious extremism, racism/Nazism, etc. I tend to favor rather extreme responses. They actively reject the concepts of safety, discretion, empathy, compassion, and tolerance; so they get none of those things from me. Yes, many of those ideas do carry collateral damage, but I have always leaned towards utilitarianism. A little discomfort now to ensure a better later is an acceptable price to pay.
As an autistic person with huge amounts of trauma, I fully agree and think extreme responses are the way to go.
The idea of always staying constructive, even in the face of eg science denial (which proves that diverse workforces are much more efficient than white male dominated ones) is idealizing human nature and brought us to this mess. It is called the tolerance paradox and you can read it on wikipedia.
I would definitely go with „we will not hire any white cis males anymore“ and make a whole foundation for extreme humanist moves. You could also go for „we wont hire people with more than x privilege points“ where you add up things like wealth, education, gender etc to gauge if someone „needs this job“.
Become a radical humanist! (Btw. I can see this extended for animal rights later but lets unify here first) and no, i‘m not joking.
I 100% understand this. Like, truly. DEI is about forcing companies to hire the best candidates regardless of attributes which have no berring on the job such as race, gender identity, creed, color, etc.
If they are saying that DEI is not a thing anymore, then let it not be a thing. DEI also protects white men from discriminatory hiring, so I say let them see that it is important.
When it comes to political corruption, corporate greed, religious extremism, racism/Nazism, etc. I tend to favor rather extreme responses. They actively reject the concepts of safety, discretion, empathy, compassion, and tolerance; so they get none of those things from me. Yes, many of those ideas do carry collateral damage, but I have always leaned towards utilitarianism. A little discomfort now to ensure a better later is an acceptable price to pay.
As an autistic person with huge amounts of trauma, I fully agree and think extreme responses are the way to go.
The idea of always staying constructive, even in the face of eg science denial (which proves that diverse workforces are much more efficient than white male dominated ones) is idealizing human nature and brought us to this mess. It is called the tolerance paradox and you can read it on wikipedia.
I would definitely go with „we will not hire any white cis males anymore“ and make a whole foundation for extreme humanist moves. You could also go for „we wont hire people with more than x privilege points“ where you add up things like wealth, education, gender etc to gauge if someone „needs this job“.
Become a radical humanist! (Btw. I can see this extended for animal rights later but lets unify here first) and no, i‘m not joking.