What Republicans really mean when they blame 'DEI' - eviltoast

Summary

The term “DEI” (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) has become a coded way for Republicans to conceal their anti-Black racism, echoing past racist dog whistles.

This parallels with Lee Atwater’s 1981 admission that conservatives used abstract terms like “states’ rights” to mask racism.

Today, figures like Alina Habba, Tim Burchett, and far-right influencers use “DEI hire” to discredit qualified Black figures.

The media’s failure to challenge this rhetoric allows racism to persist, making “DEI” a modern substitute for explicit racial slurs.

  • snakedrake@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    1 day ago

    Isn’t this why DEI needs to be pulled back though?

    People of color and women do get their status on their own but the policy of DEI implies that they got additional assistance even if they didn’t. This policy robs them of their achievements and it generates as much resentment towards protected groups as it provides protection. You can’t just tell the people not to feel resentment, or you’ll get republicans in office forever. We should start advocating for class based workplace assistance rather than dividing ourselves up by race and sex. You’ll help out basically the same people, but you’ll get class solidarity.

    • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      DEI isn’t a hiring quota or mandate to prefer a minority candidate over a non-minority candidate. It is the mindset that different experiences, backgrounds, cultures, and viewpoints provide more variety and richer ideas than a single homogenous set, and as such, those differences should be considered as a positive along with other qualifiers as part of the hiring process. A company that values DEI still hires straight white men (speaking as one who works for such a company), as ours is still a viewpoint that should be represented and adds value. But they may also choose a minority candidate over a white male candidate with comparable qualifications if they fill a gap in experiences or culture that the company/team is missing. However, in fact, the reverse is true. If a team is oversaturated with, say, Indians, women, LGBT, etc., a straight American male candidate may be the preferred hire in that case. Should that white guy feel like he needs to justify his position?

      • snakedrake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Um no. No one should have to justify the spot in an organization based on their culture, race, sexual orientation or gender. I think your scenario illustrates how ridiculous caring intensely about cultural background is for hiring situations. Wouldn’t diversity of hobbies, or college education backgrounds be just as valid? Business should be about business, not crafting the perfect society. If you’re a good person and a good fit for the role then you’re a good fit.

        I believe diversity is a admiral goal for an organization. I just don’t think DEI policies give enough benefits to the groups they want to protect to be worth the negative second order effects.

        • futatorius@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          believe diversity is a admiral goal for an organization.

          Well, at least a general objective.

        • kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          Wouldn’t diversity of hobbies, or college education backgrounds be just as valid?

          They are. I’ve been asked about hobbies and such before in interviews (my boss even brings somw of them up when we are doing introductions to new hires/interns) and my boss remarked in my interview that he had never interviewed someone that went to my college. Those things are factors.

      • Bgugi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        The practice you describe is explicitly illegal in almost all employment circumstances in the United States.

    • MothmanDelorian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 day ago

      DEI is popular in finance. If a bank is engaging in polices to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion it is because it makes them more money than not following these programs.

    • Tinidril@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I won’t say if I agree or disagree with you, but the argument you make is absolutely a legitimate one that we as a society should be considering in an ongoing process. Some level of forced integration was absolutely necessary after the end of slavery, but we all should want to live in a future where it’s not necessary at all. How far along that scale we are, and how we push further in that direction are questions that current policy discussions largely ignore.

      However, we also have to contend with the fact that overt racism is still rampant and that a large part of this country doesn’t want a reasonable national conversation on the topic. The noise coming from the right makes it next to impossible for these conversations to occur. Sadly, that’s why the politicians who rely on bigotry embrace that rhetoric, whether they are personally racist or not.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        However, we also have to contend with the fact that overt racism is still rampant and that a large part of this country doesn’t want a reasonable national conversation on the topic.

        Aye, there’s the rub

    • Sc00ter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Getting rid of a DEI initiative doesnt fix any of that though. We’d simply go back to the times of, “oh who’d she sleep with to get this job?”

      • snakedrake@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Inefficient and poorly managed companies might. I think it’s obvious that women are often more competent then their peers, and their workplace value is obvious to anyone in leadership positions.