Diversity is our strength
https://x.com/RealC0rnP0p/status/1877158531163443455/photo/1
share"it's hard to tell what's an enemy attack on the United States and what is just the natural result of diversity programs"
True or false?
False.
sharehttps://x.com/AntiLeftMemes/status/1877102427519787397/photo/1
shareNot sure if you think this proves the contrary. But it doesn't.
shareThat picture proves that diversity is our strength
shareIf you say so.
shareWould you want one of them to save you or a physically fit man?
shareWould you want any of these to chase a mugger on your behalf?
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/police-face-the-sack-for-being-fat-7573651.html
Could even answer a simple question huh?
shareThe answer is a fit person is better in physically demanding roles. However diversity in employment, which is indeed a strength does not usually mean required diversity in body size, especially where inappropriate - hence the drive to eliminate fat cops. But, good try.
share"The answer is a fit person is better in physically demanding role"
You're getting it. Maybe there is hope for you.
See my answer before and read and understand where it says "does not usually mean requiring diversity in body size". (Also, if there were only fat policemen i.e. with no diversity, would that be better?)
Diversity in the workplace is the representation of a range of differences and similarities among employees. These differences can include:
age, gender, sexual orientation, religion, language, abilities, professional background, socioeconomic background, educational background, and family responsibilities. Glad to help.
Right, diversity is not always our strength. You are doing well.
shareHowever diversity in employment, which is indeed a strength
Is it? Based on what? The gauzy supposition that they allegedly bring new ideas to the table? How does one quantify such an assertion? Face it, your claim that diversity is a strength is simply a matter of faith to you, programming installed in you by teachers, media, and friends.
Is it? Based on what?
Based on what employers say. Many employers see diversity as a good thing. Many companies have pages on the web explaining why they value diversity. In its most direct form, it comes down to getting input from a much wider range of people than, for example, able-bodied white cis-gender male American college graduates. The 2022 Department for Work and Pensions employer survey shows that 80% of UK employers already see the benefits of having a diverse workforce. Research also shows that teams with more diversity with regard to gender or underrepresented minorities are smarter (Rock and Grant 2016), achieve better team performance (Deloitte 2013), and achieve better business outcomes (Hunt et al. 2015). Do you know of any who says it is not? And would you say that workplaces, to be at their best, and most reflecting a modern society, should only reflect one sex, one sexuality, one religion and one race, say?
https://hbr.org/2017/03/teams-solve-problems-faster-when-theyre-more-cognitively-diverse share
Larry Fink and Blackrock forced those companies to do that.
share "it comes down to getting input from a much wider range of people than, for example, able-bodied white cis-gender male American college graduate"
Who is only hiring white males? You are living in a make believe world.
It was a theoretical example, not a representation of life. If such discrimination in hiring policies was allowed however, would it be better than bad old diversity, equity and inclusion?
shareIf the companies in question were run by certain races, yes. For other races, not so much.
You really believe in the blank slate, don't you?
If the companies in question were run by certain races, yes. For other races, not so much.
Exactly why we have anti-discrimination laws for the workplace.
You really believe in the blank slate, don't you?
I really believe in appropriate adversity, equity and inclusion, yes. It does not need a clean slate, just erasing some of the bias on the old one. share
No, the blank slate means that with rare exceptions all humans can be molded into any type of society. It means that Eritreans could put a man on the moon with the right tools in place. It means that Peruvians could develop cutting edge technology if they just had enough money and access to those with a head start.
It's the sort of belief that translates into the magic dirt theory that so many leftist Westerners are enamored with, i.e. as soon as a Palestinian sets foot on the shores of Old Blighty or a Salvadoran swims across the Rio Grande, they're ready to sustain and contribute to the societies that Northern Europeans built.
But what of anti-discrimination laws? Do you believe them to be moral? I don't. I don't find it moral to force upon any human being rules governing with whom he or she can associate. Fundamentally, they boil down to the requiring everyone to get permission from the state to place their body next to - or not next to - other humans. I find that grossly immoral and tantamount to a form of slavery. Why you don't find that unjustifiable is the question.
the blank slate means
Thank you for your opinions and cynicism. The differences between ethnic groups are less than they are within them. And the way people turn out can be attributed in varying degrees to genetics as well as environment, the exact balance of which is still being argued over, with the right characteristically favouring the former. In the case of employment, which is the context here, notions of DEI does not mean an employer takes on staff of poorer quality, just of greater variety. Happy to continue your education.
But what of anti-discrimination laws? Do you believe them to be moral? I don't.
Which probably tells one about you than the laws.
I don't find it moral to force upon any human being rules governing with whom he or she can associate.,, they boil down to the requiring everyone to get permission from the state to place their body next to - or not next to - other humans. Why you don't find that unjustifiable is the question.
My answer is that you lazily conflate the private and public spheres. If you really don't wish to associate with blacks, Jews, women or whatever group you dislike. (even though you told me, just earlier, that diversity is natural) then that's your problem, not that of any prospective employer or service provider. In your private life you can usually be as singular and bigoted as you want. Outside though, in the real world however you are unfortunately bound by the policies of (for instance) your employer. Sorry about that. share
Not a representation of life because diversity happens naturally. You are really learning so much today.
shareNot a representation of life because diversity happens naturally.
In which case you ought to have no objection to it. However sometimes what is natural need helping along.
You are really learning so much today.
Patronising noted.
share
Companies are claiming on their websites that their internal policies are good and effective? Who knew!
Goodness, are you thick...
Companies are claiming on their websites that their internal policies are good and effective?
More like asserting that they follow best practice.
are you thick...
An ad hominem is not an argument. share
Best practice by their own definition. Talk about a circular claim. A company could promote the fact that it refuses to hire and serve left-handed ginger Somalis simply because it's a best practice. How would you disprove such a non-falsifiable claim?
You know you can't quantify the benefits of DIE, right? It can never rise above the level of opinion.
Best practice by their own definition
With full reference to the requirements of the law. In the same way, a restaurant might promote a food hygiene rating.
A company could promote the fact that it refuses to hire and serve left-handed ginger Somalis simply because it's a best practice. How would you disprove such a non-falsifiable claim?
Because such discrimination is not legal, and it is usually best practice as a business to follow employment law - not advertise its non-observance. Have you thought this through?
You know you can't quantify the benefits of DIE, right? It can never rise above the level of opinion.
That does not mean the opinion is necessarily wrong. But saying that it is 'just opinion' is incorrect. Research on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace shows that DEI initiatives can improve performance, innovation, and creativity etc. EG
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters
https://hbr.org/2013/12/how-diversity-can-drive-innovation
Research repeatedly shows that businesses that make diversity a priority outperform their peers. 60% of respondents in a LinkedIn study said that diversity within their sales team has contributed to their teams' success which would suggest hard data.
Do you have anything but opinion that a lack of DEI works to a company's advantage? (I accept that some few special cases might apply) share
60% of people on LinkedIn day ehat their bosses want to hear. You're too much.
shareThe LinkedIn survey I think was from bosses about their sales teams. So, no then.
https://learning.linkedin.com/content/dam/me/business/en-us/amp/sales-solutions/pdf/forrester-diversity-report-2021.pdf
Again, these are people rating their own decisions. What on earth do you expect them to say? Have you ever done a year-end review?
sharethese are people rating their own decisions.
Even if this was the case, that does not necessarily mean the results are wrong, while this is just one example of many giving broadly the same positive answer to the questions around DEI.
Have you ever done a year-end review?
Indeed I have and can honestly say that in my SWOT analysis common therein, not once did I consider DEI a negative in giving a fair assessment of thing. At most such concerns were a challenge to see through as a matter of compliance. share
Goodness, are you thick...
Dumbest fuck on this site, and what keeps him so retarded is the hilarious belief that he’s the smartest guy in the room 🤣
share
It's kind of sad, isn't it?
shareYep. If he wasn’t such a nasty censorious little prick I’d feel sorry for him, but this pathetic fat kid deserves the intellectual kicking he gets whenever he tries to join in with the grown-ups.
The funniest is when he uses Latin and French phrases which he doesn’t understand. Ricky Gervais couldn’t dream up that level of cringe 🤦🏻♂️
the hilarious belief that he’s the smartest guy in the room
Don't tell me what I think.
a nasty censorious little prick.. Dumbest fuck on this site, and what keeps him so retarded ... pathetic ... foreign phrases he doesn't understand
An ad hominem fallacy, i.e. attacking the person and not what he or she says, is not an argument.
I shan't say anything more here, as trolling does not deserve an answer. share
Don't tell me what I think.
🤣
STFU, dildo.
I shan't say anything more here
Now you’re getting it.
share
ad hominem fallacy, strawman fallacy, no true scotsman fallacy ... blah blah blah
shareIt depends if they’re going to give me the kiss of life or not.
shareIt's even harder to tell if any of those three are a man or a woman. Absolutely disgusting. The chief on the left quite publicly made it her priority to promote diversity and faggotry over competence and actual fire-fighting capability. I'm sure the dying thought of those immolated in these fires was "thank God a lesbian has a chance to be a firefighter in 2025!!!"
shareThe chief on the left quite publicly made it her priority to promote diversity and faggotry over competence and actual fire-fighting capability.
OK I'll bite. What did she actually say? share
Use your search engine. There are many videos of her stressing the importance of hiring people that tick the same boxes as she does, plenty of footage of her cavorting at degenerate "Pride" parades. You don't need to be spoon fed like a toddler.
share
"What did she actually say?"
Use your search engine.... You don't need to be spoon fed like a toddler.
Oh dear. Echoes of tvfan's characteristic failure to source or substantiate here lol
Well, since you have nothing to offer, and this whole OP is ultimately to do with attributing wildfire mismanagement to diversity policies, it ought to be said that is reductionist - and ignores more significant factors at play. It is too easy and simplistic to point the finger at ideological targets, such as the leader of LA's fire department being a lesbian. So what? California’s wildfires are also driven by environmental factors exacerbated by climate change. Blaming DEI arguably distracts from addressing the root causes, e.g . of the need for sustainable land management. There is no evidence that hiring practices have negatively affected firefighting practices, despite the insistence of right wing commentators. Concerns about preparedness and resource allocation - for which blame might be attributed may be more on point.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/01/pacific-palisades-fire-altadena-santa-monica-los-angeles-donald-trump-elon-musk-misinformation-disinformation-lies-conspiracy-theories/
... degenerate "Pride" parades.
Oh my.
share
Preparedness and resource management, eh? I seem to remember a certain bad, orange man talking about those issues repeatedly over the years. And what, instead, was the priority? Budget cuts, water diversion, land mismanagement, and...DEI hiring practices. Every fucking second spent indoctrinating hires about the glories of diversity, instituting a "Racial Equity Action Plan", or speaking to the media about the need for more obese lesbians ("I'm not looking for a number, it's never enough!" according to the chief not many months ago), was a second of actual preparation wasted.
Oh dear, indeed.
.DEI hiring practices
Much as right wing commentators would have it there no link between diversity, equity and inclusion and a natural disaster - something which is reductionist - and ignores much more significant factors at play.. This was pointed out above. You are not learning very quickly today are you? share
What does box ticking have to do with fighting fires? As I said, every second the LAFD spent concerning themselves with DIE, and the evidence is that they spent a lot of time on such endeavors, was time not spent on their core mission. For example, doing random pressure checks on fire hydrants followed by corrective action on those not adequately providing water instead of sitting in on a racial grievance struggle session (of which video evidence exists).
shareAs already said, there is no hard data to make a connection between DEI policies and the strength of a natural disaster, and such right wing claims to the contrary are just reductionist. Research repeatedly shows that companies that make diversity a priority outperform their peers. No organisation is beyond reproach obviously, but the current recriminations just represent more political footballing in the the anti-woke game.
shareWhat threshold exists wherby we're allowed to critically judge an organization's performance vis-a-vis the diversity game?
Wholesale death and destruction is obviously not enough in your world.
What threshold exists wherby we're allowed to critically judge an organization's performance vis-a-vis the diversity game?
The threshold of firm, relevant data. One might as well argue that education would be better if time wasn't wasted saluting the flag every day.
Wholesale death and destruction is obviously not enough in your world.
It is, and so is playing political football. share
An organization focused on diversity at the expense of its core mission, followed shortly thereafter by a catastrophic failure to provide life-saving service. Pointing that out to you is "playing political football"? You're a horrible person.
shareAn organization focused on diversity at the expense of its core mission
Once again, there is no data to support these accusations of the right, and to suggest so is just reductionist. Diversity, as I have shown from a number of sources, overall contributes to the strength of an organisation. I ask again: would things really have been better dealt with if the LA Fire Department were all white, or excluded women, Jews or blacks, say?
by a catastrophic failure to provide life-saving service.
No doubt the management of the Fire Service (and more widely the civil authorities) have questions to answer about the more obvious failings, but to blame woke for the severity of a natural disaster is just daft.
You're a horrible person.
Stop projecting. share
Diversity, as I have shown from a number of sources, overall contributes to the strength of an organisation.
You've shown no such thing.
I ask again: would things really have been better dealt with if the LA Fire Department were all white, or excluded women, Jews or blacks, say?
Almost surely. Throw in an actual fitness requirement and you're bordering on 100%.
You've shown no such thing.
Don't remember the several links I gave. then? When you offered nothing but your own scepticism to rebut things?
"would things really have been better dealt with if the LA Fire Department were all white, or excluded women, Jews or blacks?"
Almost surely.
What was it, just recently, you said about all this all just being a matter of opinion? But the reasons to exclude these groups to the organisation's benefit would be...
Throw in an actual fitness requirement
Fat white people exist too. share
False. Diversity programs themselves are an enemy attack on the United States by an enemy within.
The enemy is Woke Marxism. It employs Marxist analysis and tactics to dismantle social norms, aiming to collapse the current system and replace it with an authoritarian form of capitalism known as Stakeholder Capitalism. This model closely resembles State Capitalism — essentially communism — akin to the system in China.
Thank you for your over the top opinions, it gave me a laugh. I always enjoy some provocative and sensationalist hyperbole.
share[deleted]
I love when I can say something so absurd that it seems impossible, yet, upon closer inspection, it turns out to be true. That’s my favorite kind of humor — the kind where you throw out something so outrageous and far-fetched that it elicits laughter, but beneath that laughter lies an unsettling truth, making it all the more absurd and surreal.
share