In your experience, has DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) been more effective at fostering meaningful change, or has it faced more challenges in practice? What specific aspects do you think contribute to its success or limitations?
The Army has an EO (equal opportunity) program that is fairly effective. It ensures no one is disparaged, punished, or discriminated against because of race, age, gender, religion, sexuality etc… DEI is wrong, BECAUSE it considers all these things as a means of how we should treat each other. DEI is the opposite of equal opportunity.
An issue/concern that I have is that DEI often requires you to essentialize people into discrete or stereotyped groups (i.e Asianess, Blackness, Whiteness) and talk about people in the aggregate. For example, I teach high school and I was once handed “professional development” materials that told me not to use “white teaching methods”. I asked what was meant by “White teaching methods”, and I was told that it was lecture. As a rule, I keep my direct instruction/lecture to 15 minutes tops for a 45 minute period as much as possible. I was not a big fan of being negatively stereotyped, but, because it was under the banner of “anti-racism”, I couldn’t really push back without looking like a horrible human being. Some of these practices seem really harmful because it robs people of their individual identity in favor of a group one.
I notice a lack of viewpoint diversity in your panel of students. This is despite satisfying all DEI criteria (well enough given small sample size). When meeting a goal is measured by a proxy measure (here, diversity and identity) the proxy measure becomes the new goal, to the detriment of the original goal. This is a general phenomenon, is it not?
There are places in the world where for example women or homosexuals are not treated very well at all. I would like to think that DEI would be more necessary in those places?
@@SOC119 to me it’s like all other theories. Looks great on paper but the practical application always seems to fall short of the desired effect. Like you said in the lecture where do you draw the line. Some one is always going to be left holding the short end of the stick. If we could go to a truly merit based system where for example test scores were the only consideration for entry into a college then you’d have a score cut off. Drop all the questions on race, gender, national origin make the selection process truly “color blind”. Even that could be problematic if all the students apply were scoring above the minimum level and you only had so many slots then the scale would have to slide up. There is no black and white answer to most social problems the way I see it. The harder we try to make society a utopia the more we find out it’s not really possible. Life in general isn’t fair and a certain amount of luck is always involved. The only real difference between humans and animals is that humans are able to communicate abstract thoughts. How fair is nature where only the strongest survive?
I do a man’s job (fix cars). Being hired solely because I’m female, takes away from my accomplishment. It discredits my skills. Respect means acknowledgement of accomplishment. So hiring me because I’m woman is disrespectful. Hire me because I’m a badass. Not because I fill a quota.
Coming from a rough industry I have to tell you that will always be the first assumption when men meet you. I've learned to work to disregard this and evaluate based on skills. You must understand that in certain fields that is exactly what is happening, and people are impotent to stop it. Cleaning up your incompetent co-worker's mess is no fun and then being told to "shut up" about it.
@@timmattle4730 one guy told me he could not hire me because the way the men speak in the shop is asking for a lawsuit. He should not have said that because he could get in trouble but I appreciated his honesty and insight as to why I wasn’t getting hired. That was 20 years ago. Times have changed but incompetent co-workers haven’t lmao
@@KimberlyShinsky That is awesome that you are thriving in a male dominated field. And not because of a handout, but because of your tenacity, expertise, and ability to do the job. Maybe instead of the current iteration of a type of DEI as a quota based system “forcing” diversity in workplaces, it would be better to increase the focus on a field like auto mechanics, to be more inviting to women by encouraging training and providing financial incentives that help with associated costs, as well as increased recruitment of females in high school and community college vocational programs. Just a thought. Keep kicking ass Kim!! 👊
I wish we could clone this professor. I don't know his politics and I don't care. He's reaching critical thinking and making it fun. The fact he's been broadcasting this openly for years is amazing. Thank you, the pursuit of truth shouldn't be kept in the dark.
@@silveryfeather208 I agree with @texanallday. It’s impossible to remain completely unbiased all the time. The only way to do that would be to never make any decisions.
The Army has an EO (equal opportunity) program that is fairly effective. It ensures no one is disparaged, punished, or discriminated against because of race, age, gender, religion, sexuality etc… DEI is wrong, BECAUSE it considers all these things as a means of how we should treat each other. DEI is the opposite of equal opportunity.
@@Ratryggva1090 long enough to see 2 1sg’s get fired because of EO complaints. Anytime I’ve seen or heard of an EO complaint hitting the desk, shit gets taken real serious. Company level and up don’t play around with EO or SHARP.
I personally feel there is a difference between DEI programs and equal opportunity in practice, equal opportunity should be to prevent people from being discriminated against by hirers. But instead it is used as qualifiers for hiring through DEI. These programs should be preventing discrimination based on characteristics, not giving quotas to employers that force them to discriminate solely based on race or gender or religion in the name of practicing DEI.
I’m not sure about the US, however, in Europe it’s illegal to pay someone differently based on race, sexual preference, class or gender. For many DEI is the antithesis of merit and equality.
Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. The ruling The court ruled that race-conscious affirmative action violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The court found that students should be treated based on their individual experiences, not their race. The court's decision fundamentally altered the landscape of college admissions nationwide.
@@michaelhoudecki3657 June of 2023 In a historic decision, the Supreme Court severely limited, if not effectively ended, the use of affirmative action in college admissions on Thursday. By a vote of 6-3, the justices ruled that the admissions programs used by the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause, which bars racial discrimination by government entities. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that college admissions programs can consider race merely to allow an applicant to explain how their race influenced their character in a way that would have a concrete effect on the university. But a student “must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual - not on the basis of race,” Roberts wrote.
If I have two equally capable candidates, then hiring someone that fills a diversity need is fine. Without knowing that, the assumption tends to, as you have, assume a minority is less capable.
@@zzztek You’re not stupid as you’re making out here mate. Stop feigning ignorance. DEI has nothing to do with incompetence and you know that. Pilots go through thousands of hours of training before being employed. No company would employ anyone unqualified to fly a jet worth $100 million with 350 people on board. Get out. There is a few words of choice I would love to add but I don’t want to get banned.
@@stevesedio1656 What you describe is normal hiring practices, not a DEI hiring practice There is nowhere in my statement that I said a minority was less capable. Stop "race-baiting"
@@stevesedio1656 the problem is that DEI artificially makes the judgement call for you. Someone is always more qualified to do a job. Finding 2 candidates for any given job that are 100% equally qualified is like finding 2 people with the same fingerprints. DEI gives an unfair advantage to someone based on stereotypes, for lack of a better word. I would think that testing equally qualified candidates might work. Especially in the example of an airline pilot or some other job that requires a high level of proficiency. If a candidate didn’t perform well due to the stress of a test that tells you everything you need to know.
Watching your discussion one thing hit me. Do your students realize that if we were a true democracy instead of a representative republic then depending on the majority women and minorities or any other groups that the majority of voting age people disliked or didn’t agree with could and would be excluded legally with no recourse. As it stands now all of the above are protected from discrimination. Merit based is inclusive of all qualified people regardless of differences. It is more inclusive than quotas.
Have you checked housing costs? The majority of real estate owners vote and use their majority voting block to pass laws disadvantaging younger generations. Republic is not really working.
@@theBear89451 I check it every month. I’m 65 and on a fixed income. I don’t really see how “land owners voting together” are working to put the younger generation at a disadvantage nor how that applies to my comment. At the federal level our representatives do the voting on policy. With the majority of representatives voted in directly and the majority of those are from urban areas where land ownership is lower than rural areas I’d say the opposite. I like to see some facts to back up your position.
I'm thinking Mitra is talking about equal opportunity not equity. Equity of outcome indicates fairness based on each individual's race, gender sexual orientation. Equality indicates each person gets an equal OPPORTUNITY of outcome regardless of any individual race, gender, sexual orientation.
It’s actually the opposite. Equity is just access to resources needed according to someone’s circumstances. Equality assumes everyone is the same and has the same circumstances
@@TemerityPascal "circumstances" is not correct. It's based on skin color, gender, sexual orientation. It assumes white males have a built in advantage by means of their privilege.
I would love to see the execution of DEI into a framework that accounts more for socioeconomic status than race. That being said, most current research shows that diversity of opinion contributes to the efficacy of shared decision making. And that diversity of opinion emerges from a persons sociocultural background.
@@gersonadr2I disagree. I’m from a low socioeconomic background. I would never want to get a job because I grew up poor. Very very poor. The only time I think this should come up is in opportunity for experiences. Like educational trips or something like that where $$$ is needed. The irresponsible spending of schools on brand new stadiums when the current stadium is just fine, needs to be turned to scholarship opportunities.
Sociology/Psychology are extremely corrupted fields. Also I don't think you understand the "study", you are referring to. In education, it's probably marginally positive to "think outside the box", but even then, it depends on the child & subject & delivery... Well, right now we are dealing with these issues in Education. All that Postmodern Deconstruction & Subjectivity... And maybe you can't teach that stuff. Smart people actually can do it naturally, and nobody has discovered a method of making people smarter, or dramatically changing their personality...
"Diversity of opinion emerges from sociocultural background". Diversity of opinion., even extreme diversity of opinion, often exists even between siblings raised together.
@@crystalchili3823 Don't underestimate yourself. I've met more brilliant people without any formal education than people with the formal education. If you want to learn more & to learn their jargon, it's all available online. Listen to free Psychology lectures. You will be smarter than all of them.
I really like how he's helping these students see. I'd find it highly disrespectful if I were chosen just because I'm hispanic. Merit is earned where as race and gender are not. Kudos to the students for participating
I noticed at first you didn't ask the white man his ethnicity. You asked everyone else but not the white guy. This is one sympton of what I call racism 2.0 - the idea that the ethnicity of white people doesn't matter so you skipped right over it. I see you caught yourself and corrected that problem several minutes later. If that was me on stage I would have pointed that out to you and told you my ethnicity was a mix of Scottish, English and German. Lumping all white people into a single ethnic batch that doesn't matter is a form of racism. Thanks for for noticing what you did and fixing it later. We all swim in this super racism environment these days and its hard sometimes - especially in real time conversations - to stay above the ignorance.
DEI seems to be run like any quota system. Skill is unimportant in such a system. I tried to apply for a city job in the 80s and was told i wouldn't be hired but i could apply.
Why would you say it's okay to say... man give up your salary for women? It's that even makes sense? LOL. We will fight for our position and for our families livelihood. If women want to create companies that hire all women leaders... go for it. Why do we force these things? Anyone should be able to compete and not get special treatment in expense of someone already in that position.
Broad range of cultures, etc. is generally positive. But, is it SO positive that it should be more important than other factors? And is there a diversity of thought? It would be important if you are trying to specifically meet disparate needs. Varying perspectives are important. Not so important if you are trying to meet generic needs. It also undermines the perceived qualifications of the person in the position. DEI was closer to necessary when stereotyping (including self-stereotyping) was more pervasive. Where I dislike the “generational wealth” stereotype about white people is the claim that we all have money. Sorry, but I left for bootcamp at 18 with nothing but the clothes that I was wearing. Even those got taken away. Afterwards, I didn’t take anything from my family (but gave plenty) until my single mom passed at 62. I got her sewing machine and some photos as my inheritance. Not exactly “inherited wealth.” So the concept that I would be treated as if I was no different from a Rockefeller is dehumanizing.
I think he hit the nail on the head, no program put in place will ever BE fair. You can't fairly make up for the atrocities of the past. Also, DEI has proven more to be more beneficial to white women than anything else, just like AA was more beneficial to women due to the gender weight. I also hate the whole pull yourself up by your bootstraps too because sometimes no matter how hard you work you can't catch up. One thing he didn't mention was legacy college admittance and the hiring of family and friends instead of based on merit. How do you square those pegs?
@@thelionofjudah007 DEI is saying that certain minority groups are incapable of competing with others. How does that make someone in the minority group feel?
@@thelionofjudah007there are already laws in place that prohibit discriminatory hiring practices i.e. hiring based on race, gender, etc. per the EEOC (federally mandated). DEI is quota based, meaning ‘x’ amount of employees/students WILL be ‘y’ race, gender, etc. DEI is discriminatory hiring.
If by “non traditional” you mean older students, that is a good idea. I don’t have any or many. But I will take this idea and run with it. Let me see who I can find. Great idea.
You could just treat everyone equally and let the meritocratic process do its job. Let the most worthy people win. If you fail then reassess your position and make corrections so you can do better next time. No one should get free handouts because of your skin or gender.
My former company (30,000 employees, $9 billion revenue ) had a DEI program, with required training, before I retired about 3 years ago. It was all common sense, nothing objectionable whatsoever. Just about people from different backgrounds working together harmoniously as a team. DEI does not inherently imply hiring less qualified people simply on the basis of minority status. That is a pernicious notion sometimes spread as a political wedge issue. When a choice is made between equally qualified candidates, there is nothing wrong in improving representation of the most underrepresented demographics.
Bro, he's been doing that since his first year of teaching. Would it be better for him to listen to people tell him to change or for him to continuing being him? ;) ~ Mod team
I see something divisive about how you are defining diversity. Equity is a divisive term. Inclusion and belonging are fine Diversity in race olny? Diversity of thought. Diversity of political affiliation Equity is a divisive term. It means to give some one the advantage because of race or reason other then merit
it's a generational catch up. It's fine as long as there are no barriers... people with good culture on discipline, hard work, and frugality will eventually get to a better place. Being rich is overhype. Most of them if abuse that money and in managed decline.
Pay is based on passport, accent, connection, and previous salary. HR will try their best to lower the salary expectations. It's on you to create a good leverage. It's not about ethnic... a lot of people with non-white earning a lot of money. It's an excuse to have a lower salary.
Long long back before DEI was a concept, I used to lean towards hiring women. I worked in a consulting firm and ran a big team. Lots of ladies after I had been in there a while. I'm not sure if it was conscious or unconscious at first. I just looked at the resumes. It was organic and better because of it. The guys did not swear as much, dressed better and did not screw around at work as much 😂 The only negative I saw was that my team got too big and I had to move a group of specialists into a different wing of the buidling. Without noticing, this group was almost all women. Lots of fighting, and I had to hear about it instead of witnessing it as I was not in the same area.
DEI has primarily been a tool for the top 10% to jockey for position and power. We should focus on the poor and that will help POC in a fair way as it should. First generation immigrants of privilege leverage the programs when implement based on shallow identity. Nigeria is an incredible country with incredible people. Nigerian immigrants on average are significantly wealthier than the average white American, same for Indians. We see in media, academic and political personalities that are first generation from educated and well off families (relative to the average american) wrap themselves in the mantle of oppression as a weapon to get ahead. The number one predictor of a person success is their parents. You could see the young black man knowing that leveraging the benefit of color in his situation is unfair and unwarranted but he did not want to give up that lever
Your definition of diversity as being positive assumes so much. How is it positive? Why is it positive? To whom is it positive? As Sociology has died as a discipline, we cannot define culture beyond music, food and dress. Culture means little if we cannot discuss it honestly. The issue is that we then must categorize people these superfluous characteristics. Let's ignore that people are individuals, make up so many cultures that it is silly to even try to identify anything according to that label. Basically, DEI is a concept that we can break people up into groups to compare them against each other to create additional power of influence for decision maker in whatever position he holds. It could be HR, marketing, management or admissions office. We can simplify not for the benefit of the powerless but the benefit of the person in charge.
Diversity is negative because different cultures don’t mix well, and different ethnic and racial groups in the same nation will have way too much tension and will war over political power (just as we are seeing now across the western world).
This is a hot take, I guess having a hard core feminist and a super traditional man as roommates wouldn't work, but I'd argue that it's possible for diversity if the cultures are somewhat aligned, plus time helps
I don't have a problem with someone telling new hires to be polite, respectful and to be aware of our biases and that everyone has merit. That's common sense. But to be tole everyone is prejudice especially white people is just silly. Bias is not always prejudice.
American is an idea, an ethos. One can be American without even physically occupying "American" space. When do you become an Amercan? When you choose to live, support, and behave like one.
I also easily got social work jobs probably because I was a male... so it works in all sorts of ways.....I had basic credentials but I probably wasn't the most qualified.
Nope, men were the ones that gave women the right to vote and go to college, and wear pants. This teacher has a tendency to randomly make up his own rendition of history.
@@deguilhemcorinne418 exactly the feminists wrote some papers and did some demonstrations, then the group that could vote, for argument's sake we can call them "men" voted to allow the group that could not vote, again for argument's sake we can call them "women" to be allowed to vote, the group that could not vote were not allowed to vote in that voting process or else there would have been nothing to vote on, Thus, painfully obviously Men are by definition the ones that allowed women to vote...
We address this comment in Office Hours #5. Go to the channel and find the live stream from January 29 :) Should be towards the end of the live stream.
I do believe Sam asks him a few minutes afterwards. Someone on the live stream chat mentioned the same thing. York is a county in Southern Central Pennsylvania between Lancaster, Harrisburg and Gettysburg near the Pennsylvania/Maryland state line.
China has solved this DEI problem already long time back. It's by providing a standardized test. Rich would have an advantage but poor people can now compete and has a chance to win. And that's all that you can do. If you want to remove generational wealth you should ban parents helping their kid. All parents will try their best to give their kids the best chance in expense of everyone. That's just human nature and there is no point arguing against it. Standardizing test and establishing competence and merit is the best choice for everyone. There are no perfect solution.
They generally are paying to attend for a degree of a specific major. Our class is a "general education" course which includes hundreds of classes students can take to become more well-rounded individuals. No student is required to take the class, it's an elective.
Why does he need to 'bro' and 'dude' everyone all the time? It reminds me of the 'cool' uncle trying way too hard to be cool with the kids, ending up just being awkward.
According to this teacher the 1965 Civil Rights Act was forcing unwanted change on people. Making discrimination on grounds of race, sex, gender etc etc is the same. Ending redlining in housing sales is also forcing unwanted change on people. Ending slavery by a Civil War was forcing unwanted change on people. Ending segregated schooling was forcing unwanted change. So, according to this teacher, all that was bad because it was forced. So, according to him, ALL change to make life better and fairer for people deliberately left out of society's benefits is BAD?? What kind of far right conservative Trumpist MAGA elitist is this guy?
Also, the opposite of the Irish-American student is the Nigerian-American student. He and his family are actually appropriating benefits that should go to the native African-Americans because he's considered "black". His ancestors were never enslaved and never suffered. This is also a huge problem and a tragedy!
In your experience, has DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) been more effective at fostering meaningful change, or has it faced more challenges in practice? What specific aspects do you think contribute to its success or limitations?
The Army has an EO (equal opportunity) program that is fairly effective. It ensures no one is disparaged, punished, or discriminated against because of race, age, gender, religion, sexuality etc… DEI is wrong, BECAUSE it considers all these things as a means of how we should treat each other. DEI is the opposite of equal opportunity.
An issue/concern that I have is that DEI often requires you to essentialize people into discrete or stereotyped groups (i.e Asianess, Blackness, Whiteness) and talk about people in the aggregate. For example, I teach high school and I was once handed “professional development” materials that told me not to use “white teaching methods”. I asked what was meant by “White teaching methods”, and I was told that it was lecture. As a rule, I keep my direct instruction/lecture to 15 minutes tops for a 45 minute period as much as possible. I was not a big fan of being negatively stereotyped, but, because it was under the banner of “anti-racism”, I couldn’t really push back without looking like a horrible human being. Some of these practices seem really harmful because it robs people of their individual identity in favor of a group one.
I notice a lack of viewpoint diversity in your panel of students. This is despite satisfying all DEI criteria (well enough given small sample size).
When meeting a goal is measured by a proxy measure (here, diversity and identity) the proxy measure becomes the new goal, to the detriment of the original goal.
This is a general phenomenon, is it not?
There are places in the world where for example women or homosexuals are not treated very well at all. I would like to think that DEI would be more necessary in those places?
@@SOC119 to me it’s like all other theories. Looks great on paper but the practical application always seems to fall short of the desired effect. Like you said in the lecture where do you draw the line. Some one is always going to be left holding the short end of the stick.
If we could go to a truly merit based system where for example test scores were the only consideration for entry into a college then you’d have a score cut off. Drop all the questions on race, gender, national origin make the selection process truly “color blind”. Even that could be problematic if all the students apply were scoring above the minimum level and you only had so many slots then the scale would have to slide up. There is no black and white answer to most social problems the way I see it. The harder we try to make society a utopia the more we find out it’s not really possible. Life in general isn’t fair and a certain amount of luck is always involved. The only real difference between humans and animals is that humans are able to communicate abstract thoughts. How fair is nature where only the strongest survive?
I do a man’s job (fix cars). Being hired solely because I’m female, takes away from my accomplishment. It discredits my skills. Respect means acknowledgement of accomplishment. So hiring me because I’m woman is disrespectful. Hire me because I’m a badass. Not because I fill a quota.
Coming from a rough industry I have to tell you that will always be the first assumption when men meet you. I've learned to work to disregard this and evaluate based on skills. You must understand that in certain fields that is exactly what is happening, and people are impotent to stop it. Cleaning up your incompetent co-worker's mess is no fun and then being told to "shut up" about it.
💪Keep being a badass 😎
@@timmattle4730 one guy told me he could not hire me because the way the men speak in the shop is asking for a lawsuit. He should not have said that because he could get in trouble but I appreciated his honesty and insight as to why I wasn’t getting hired. That was 20 years ago. Times have changed but incompetent co-workers haven’t lmao
@@KimberlyShinsky That is awesome that you are thriving in a male dominated field. And not because of a handout, but because of your tenacity, expertise, and ability to do the job. Maybe instead of the current iteration of a type of DEI as a quota based system “forcing” diversity in workplaces, it would be better to increase the focus on a field like auto mechanics, to be more inviting to women by encouraging training and providing financial incentives that help with associated costs, as well as increased recruitment of females in high school and community college vocational programs. Just a thought. Keep kicking ass Kim!! 👊
Being celebrated as a "badass" just because you do a job that typically only men do.... wow
I wish we could clone this professor. I don't know his politics and I don't care. He's reaching critical thinking and making it fun.
The fact he's been broadcasting this openly for years is amazing. Thank you, the pursuit of truth shouldn't be kept in the dark.
occasionally his bias bleeds through tho...
@@silveryfeather208 I agree with @texanallday. It’s impossible to remain completely unbiased all the time. The only way to do that would be to never make any decisions.
@@silveryfeather208 lol don’t we all….? We are human 🤷♂️ unless you can find a perfect human.
@@ac25420 I mean of course
Equality and Equity are very different things!
The Army has an EO (equal opportunity) program that is fairly effective. It ensures no one is disparaged, punished, or discriminated against because of race, age, gender, religion, sexuality etc… DEI is wrong, BECAUSE it considers all these things as a means of how we should treat each other. DEI is the opposite of equal opportunity.
Agreed
Fairly effective?😂 How long did you serve?
@@Ratryggva1090 long enough to see 2 1sg’s get fired because of EO complaints. Anytime I’ve seen or heard of an EO complaint hitting the desk, shit gets taken real serious. Company level and up don’t play around with EO or SHARP.
I personally feel there is a difference between DEI programs and equal opportunity in practice, equal opportunity should be to prevent people from being discriminated against by hirers.
But instead it is used as qualifiers for hiring through DEI. These programs should be preventing discrimination based on characteristics,
not giving quotas to employers that force them to discriminate solely based on race or gender or religion in the name of practicing DEI.
I’m not sure about the US, however, in Europe it’s illegal to pay someone differently based on race, sexual preference, class or gender. For many DEI is the antithesis of merit and equality.
Same in the U.S.
Im not sure why but people still feel the need to make more legislation despite it already being illegal
Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard.
The ruling
The court ruled that race-conscious affirmative action violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The court found that students should be treated based on their individual experiences, not their race.
The court's decision fundamentally altered the landscape of college admissions nationwide.
When was this?
@@michaelhoudecki3657
June of 2023
In a historic decision, the Supreme Court severely limited, if not effectively ended, the use of affirmative action in college admissions on Thursday. By a vote of 6-3, the justices ruled that the admissions programs used by the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause, which bars racial discrimination by government entities.
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that college admissions programs can consider race merely to allow an applicant to explain how their race influenced their character in a way that would have a concrete effect on the university. But a student “must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual - not on the basis of race,” Roberts wrote.
@@michaelhoudecki3657 June of 2023 How come UA-cam delays my entries when I tried to expand of the ruling!
Equity is discrimination. Discrimination should be illegal.
Discrimination IS illegal
Discrimination is illegal in many, many instances my man.
@@cwu913 sadly the left think it’s ok to discriminate against white men and Asians
@@TemerityPascal not if you call it equity…
@@StayFly87 That’s not the definition of discrimination
Brain / Heart surgeon: Want them to be a DEI hire?
Airline pilot?
If you say: want fries with that, DEI hires are awesome
If I have two equally capable candidates, then hiring someone that fills a diversity need is fine.
Without knowing that, the assumption tends to, as you have, assume a minority is less capable.
@@zzztek You’re not stupid as you’re making out here mate. Stop feigning ignorance. DEI has nothing to do with incompetence and you know that. Pilots go through thousands of hours of training before being employed. No company would employ anyone unqualified to fly a jet worth $100 million with 350 people on board. Get out. There is a few words of choice I would love to add but I don’t want to get banned.
@@thelionofjudah007 If you feel the need to use "words of choice", you need to evaluate why
@@stevesedio1656 What you describe is normal hiring practices, not a DEI hiring practice
There is nowhere in my statement that I said a minority was less capable. Stop "race-baiting"
@@stevesedio1656 the problem is that DEI artificially makes the judgement call for you. Someone is always more qualified to do a job. Finding 2 candidates for any given job that are 100% equally qualified is like finding 2 people with the same fingerprints. DEI gives an unfair advantage to someone based on stereotypes, for lack of a better word.
I would think that testing equally qualified candidates might work. Especially in the example of an airline pilot or some other job that requires a high level of proficiency. If a candidate didn’t perform well due to the stress of a test that tells you everything you need to know.
Watching your discussion one thing hit me. Do your students realize that if we were a true democracy instead of a representative republic then depending on the majority women and minorities or any other groups that the majority of voting age people disliked or didn’t agree with could and would be excluded legally with no recourse. As it stands now all of the above are protected from discrimination. Merit based is inclusive of all qualified people regardless of differences. It is more inclusive than quotas.
Have you checked housing costs? The majority of real estate owners vote and use their majority voting block to pass laws disadvantaging younger generations. Republic is not really working.
That’s deep
@@theBear89451 I check it every month. I’m 65 and on a fixed income. I don’t really see how “land owners voting together” are working to put the younger generation at a disadvantage nor how that applies to my comment. At the federal level our representatives do the voting on policy. With the majority of representatives voted in directly and the majority of those are from urban areas where land ownership is lower than rural areas I’d say the opposite.
I like to see some facts to back up your position.
DEI is racist. If you are hired based on race. I don't like judging people by their skin. Because if we are judging here, what else are we judging?
I'm thinking Mitra is talking about equal opportunity not equity. Equity of outcome indicates fairness based on each individual's race, gender sexual orientation. Equality indicates each person gets an equal OPPORTUNITY of outcome regardless of any individual race, gender, sexual orientation.
...and then there is reality - "life's not fair".
It’s actually the opposite. Equity is just access to resources needed according to someone’s circumstances. Equality assumes everyone is the same and has the same circumstances
@@TemerityPascal "circumstances" is not correct. It's based on skin color, gender, sexual orientation. It assumes white males have a built in advantage by means of their privilege.
I would love to see the execution of DEI into a framework that accounts more for socioeconomic status than race. That being said, most current research shows that diversity of opinion contributes to the efficacy of shared decision making. And that diversity of opinion emerges from a persons sociocultural background.
@@caliguy1260 agreed. Diversity of opinion is highly desirable
@@gersonadr2I disagree. I’m from a low socioeconomic background. I would never want to get a job because I grew up poor. Very very poor. The only time I think this should come up is in opportunity for experiences. Like educational trips or something like that where $$$ is needed. The irresponsible spending of schools on brand new stadiums when the current stadium is just fine, needs to be turned to scholarship opportunities.
Sociology/Psychology are extremely corrupted fields.
Also I don't think you understand the "study", you are referring to.
In education, it's probably marginally positive to "think outside the box", but even then, it depends on the child & subject & delivery...
Well, right now we are dealing with these issues in Education.
All that Postmodern Deconstruction & Subjectivity...
And maybe you can't teach that stuff.
Smart people actually can do it naturally, and nobody has discovered a method of making people smarter, or dramatically changing their personality...
"Diversity of opinion emerges from sociocultural background".
Diversity of opinion., even extreme diversity of opinion, often exists even between siblings raised together.
@@crystalchili3823
Don't underestimate yourself.
I've met more brilliant people without any formal education than people with the formal education.
If you want to learn more & to learn their jargon, it's all available online.
Listen to free Psychology lectures.
You will be smarter than all of them.
I don't know how eliminating a racist policy could be a bad thing.
I completely adhere to the pendulum theory. Sensible people will try to find a balance, but it takes time and frustrations.
The problem is the politics of today amplify the swing in an attempt to stay in power.
Very good conversation. I have a question at what point would DEI stop, or would it go on forever.
We were 20 years from DEI being successful in 1970. We seem to always be 20 years away from it being no longer necessary.
It would go on until the objective (Communism) is achieved.
Another good question is, absent any discrimination, at what point are people no longer "historically oppressed" ?
Sam addressed this comment in Office Hours #5 from January 29th!
I think 60 years with bad results was long enough.
Sadly college students do not keep up with the world around them
I really like how he's helping these students see. I'd find it highly disrespectful if I were chosen just because I'm hispanic. Merit is earned where as race and gender are not. Kudos to the students for participating
I’m impressed with Sujana
Good balanced discussion as usual. I'm glad there are professors like this!
Diversity of thought is awesome. Diversity based on demographics, is silly
DEI sucks period.
I noticed at first you didn't ask the white man his ethnicity. You asked everyone else but not the white guy. This is one sympton of what I call racism 2.0 - the idea that the ethnicity of white people doesn't matter so you skipped right over it. I see you caught yourself and corrected that problem several minutes later. If that was me on stage I would have pointed that out to you and told you my ethnicity was a mix of Scottish, English and German. Lumping all white people into a single ethnic batch that doesn't matter is a form of racism. Thanks for for noticing what you did and fixing it later. We all swim in this super racism environment these days and its hard sometimes - especially in real time conversations - to stay above the ignorance.
DEI seems to be run like any quota system. Skill is unimportant in such a system. I tried to apply for a city job in the 80s and was told i wouldn't be hired but i could apply.
Dude these students sound not so smart. Your major is what? NUCLEAR ENGINEER !
Why would you say it's okay to say... man give up your salary for women? It's that even makes sense? LOL. We will fight for our position and for our families livelihood. If women want to create companies that hire all women leaders... go for it. Why do we force these things? Anyone should be able to compete and not get special treatment in expense of someone already in that position.
Broad range of cultures, etc. is generally positive. But, is it SO positive that it should be more important than other factors? And is there a diversity of thought? It would be important if you are trying to specifically meet disparate needs. Varying perspectives are important. Not so important if you are trying to meet generic needs. It also undermines the perceived qualifications of the person in the position. DEI was closer to necessary when stereotyping (including self-stereotyping) was more pervasive.
Where I dislike the “generational wealth” stereotype about white people is the claim that we all have money. Sorry, but I left for bootcamp at 18 with nothing but the clothes that I was wearing. Even those got taken away. Afterwards, I didn’t take anything from my family (but gave plenty) until my single mom passed at 62. I got her sewing machine and some photos as my inheritance. Not exactly “inherited wealth.” So the concept that I would be treated as if I was no different from a Rockefeller is dehumanizing.
"If you're white and not rich then that's your fault"
That's what I always hear
I think he hit the nail on the head, no program put in place will ever BE fair. You can't fairly make up for the atrocities of the past. Also, DEI has proven more to be more beneficial to white women than anything else, just like AA was more beneficial to women due to the gender weight. I also hate the whole pull yourself up by your bootstraps too because sometimes no matter how hard you work you can't catch up. One thing he didn't mention was legacy college admittance and the hiring of family and friends instead of based on merit. How do you square those pegs?
Imagine being incompetent and needing legal help to get a step up.
So you think incompetence is synonymous with DEI? You don't think DEI is a measure to address racist employment practices?
@ I don’t think there is massive racial discrimination in hiring. I think that’s in the left head.
@@thelionofjudah007 DEI is saying that certain minority groups are incapable of competing with others. How does that make someone in the minority group feel?
@@thelionofjudah007there are already laws in place that prohibit discriminatory hiring practices i.e. hiring based on race, gender, etc. per the EEOC (federally mandated). DEI is quota based, meaning ‘x’ amount of employees/students WILL be ‘y’ race, gender, etc. DEI is discriminatory hiring.
@ So giving veterans opportunities or people living in the suburbs opportunities to work in investment banking is discriminatory right?
I wish you would get some non-traditional students on your table. I don't feel confused. Life is complex. You do the best you can and reasses.
If by “non traditional” you mean older students, that is a good idea. I don’t have any or many. But I will take this idea and run with it. Let me see who I can find. Great idea.
You could just treat everyone equally and let the meritocratic process do its job. Let the most worthy people win. If you fail then reassess your position and make corrections so you can do better next time. No one should get free handouts because of your skin or gender.
My former company (30,000 employees, $9 billion revenue ) had a DEI program, with required training, before I retired about 3 years ago. It was all common sense, nothing objectionable whatsoever. Just about people from different backgrounds working together harmoniously as a team.
DEI does not inherently imply hiring less qualified people simply on the basis of minority status. That is a pernicious notion sometimes spread as a political wedge issue. When a choice is made between equally qualified candidates, there is nothing wrong in improving representation of the most underrepresented demographics.
Using the 'bro' greeting is annoying.
Bro, he's been doing that since his first year of teaching. Would it be better for him to listen to people tell him to change or for him to continuing being him? ;) ~ Mod team
I see something divisive about how you are defining diversity. Equity is a divisive term. Inclusion and belonging are fine
Diversity in race olny? Diversity of thought. Diversity of political affiliation
Equity is a divisive term. It means to give some one the advantage because of race or reason other then merit
it's a generational catch up. It's fine as long as there are no barriers... people with good culture on discipline, hard work, and frugality will eventually get to a better place. Being rich is overhype. Most of them if abuse that money and in managed decline.
Critical Race Theory is fine if you want authoritarianism, but it is dishonest to pretend it is commensurate with humanism or liberalism.
Pay is based on passport, accent, connection, and previous salary. HR will try their best to lower the salary expectations. It's on you to create a good leverage. It's not about ethnic... a lot of people with non-white earning a lot of money. It's an excuse to have a lower salary.
Long long back before DEI was a concept, I used to lean towards hiring women. I worked in a consulting firm and ran a big team. Lots of ladies after I had been in there a while. I'm not sure if it was conscious or unconscious at first. I just looked at the resumes. It was organic and better because of it.
The guys did not swear as much, dressed better and did not screw around at work as much 😂 The only negative I saw was that my team got too big and I had to move a group of specialists into a different wing of the buidling. Without noticing, this group was almost all women. Lots of fighting, and I had to hear about it instead of witnessing it as I was not in the same area.
53:42 Uh... I guess we're saying "colored" now. No suprise, POC sounds alot like "colored".
when are we going to have a lecture about the situation in the DRC because it does not get any attention like Palestine and Israel.
We will talk about it at the beginning of Office Hours tomorrow for sure!
You don't always get what you want.
번데기 beondegi - Pupa silk worm larvae
Korea started eating beondegi in the 1960's as a source of protein. But over the years it became a delicacy.
DEI has primarily been a tool for the top 10% to jockey for position and power. We should focus on the poor and that will help POC in a fair way as it should. First generation immigrants of privilege leverage the programs when implement based on shallow identity. Nigeria is an incredible country with incredible people. Nigerian immigrants on average are significantly wealthier than the average white American, same for Indians. We see in media, academic and political personalities that are first generation from educated and well off families (relative to the average american) wrap themselves in the mantle of oppression as a weapon to get ahead. The number one predictor of a person success is their parents. You could see the young black man knowing that leveraging the benefit of color in his situation is unfair and unwarranted but he did not want to give up that lever
Your definition of diversity as being positive assumes so much. How is it positive? Why is it positive? To whom is it positive? As Sociology has died as a discipline, we cannot define culture beyond music, food and dress. Culture means little if we cannot discuss it honestly. The issue is that we then must categorize people these superfluous characteristics. Let's ignore that people are individuals, make up so many cultures that it is silly to even try to identify anything according to that label. Basically, DEI is a concept that we can break people up into groups to compare them against each other to create additional power of influence for decision maker in whatever position he holds. It could be HR, marketing, management or admissions office. We can simplify not for the benefit of the powerless but the benefit of the person in charge.
You're thinking too deeply. Bad human!
Rep York PA! WOO! 🎉
10:55 why don’t you go ask the girls in the UK when diversity is “not positive” -
Do you guys believe in presenting evidence in this class? Real evidence, not unreproducible humanities papers and polls. Not subjective garbage.
@ No
Diversity is negative because different cultures don’t mix well, and different ethnic and racial groups in the same nation will have way too much tension and will war over political power (just as we are seeing now across the western world).
This is a hot take, I guess having a hard core feminist and a super traditional man as roommates wouldn't work, but I'd argue that it's possible for diversity if the cultures are somewhat aligned, plus time helps
Tard
The way he keeps saying that's cool tells you he's woke.
I don't have a problem with someone telling new hires to be polite, respectful and to be aware of our biases and that everyone has merit. That's common sense. But to be tole everyone is prejudice especially white people is just silly. Bias is not always prejudice.
Sam epic, I love the worm example. You made it real.
When do you become an American?
Never. Nobody is American, that's why the country was wide open. I bet there are still more people going in than out
American is an idea, an ethos. One can be American without even physically occupying "American" space.
When do you become an Amercan? When you choose to live, support, and behave like one.
@ You kind of need citizenship too
And since you always like to know, I am a white, male, age 63 from California
I also easily got social work jobs probably because I was a male... so it works in all sorts of ways.....I had basic credentials but I probably wasn't the most qualified.
Nope, men were the ones that gave women the right to vote and go to college, and wear pants. This teacher has a tendency to randomly make up his own rendition of history.
Did you ever heard of feminists actions, papers and demonstrations leading to the right to vote and other rights ?
@@Horus-III what are you talking about. Men do not own women. You didn't "let" women do anything.
This is correct. Most women didn’t want to vote. It took generations after suffrage for the majority of women to vote.
@@deguilhemcorinne418 exactly the feminists wrote some papers and did some demonstrations, then the group that could vote, for argument's sake we can call them "men" voted to allow the group that could not vote, again for argument's sake we can call them "women" to be allowed to vote, the group that could not vote were not allowed to vote in that voting process or else there would have been nothing to vote on, Thus, painfully obviously Men are by definition the ones that allowed women to vote...
We address this comment in Office Hours #5. Go to the channel and find the live stream from January 29 :) Should be towards the end of the live stream.
Where is York from ?he don't claim his ancestors!
I do believe Sam asks him a few minutes afterwards. Someone on the live stream chat mentioned the same thing. York is a county in Southern Central Pennsylvania between Lancaster, Harrisburg and Gettysburg near the Pennsylvania/Maryland state line.
CRAZY AMOUNT OF AD’s❕ Omg there’s like ads every (3) minutes… can’t do this.
Hmm... UA-cam auto places them. I will check it out and reduce the number to something more meaningful! Our apologies.
If hee mom wasmt getting the same or more pay than her male counterparts, she could sue so SPARE ME!
27:02 maybe a lot of women don’t apply to that role that your mom has. Maybe it’s not something that a lot of women like to do.
China has solved this DEI problem already long time back. It's by providing a standardized test. Rich would have an advantage but poor people can now compete and has a chance to win. And that's all that you can do. If you want to remove generational wealth you should ban parents helping their kid. All parents will try their best to give their kids the best chance in expense of everyone. That's just human nature and there is no point arguing against it.
Standardizing test and establishing competence and merit is the best choice for everyone. There are no perfect solution.
Look at what Coke did with DEI training. Slippery slopes
I'll leave it there
That was nasty
People pay to go to the University for this???
They generally are paying to attend for a degree of a specific major. Our class is a "general education" course which includes hundreds of classes students can take to become more well-rounded individuals. No student is required to take the class, it's an elective.
I think you have missed two major samples in this experiment 1. White women 2. Black women. It would have made a difference
Why does he need to 'bro' and 'dude' everyone all the time? It reminds me of the 'cool' uncle trying way too hard to be cool with the kids, ending up just being awkward.
Eating worms is like DEI?? Whaaat???
According to this teacher the 1965 Civil Rights Act was forcing unwanted change on people. Making discrimination on grounds of race, sex, gender etc etc is the same. Ending redlining in housing sales is also forcing unwanted change on people. Ending slavery by a Civil War was forcing unwanted change on people. Ending segregated schooling was forcing unwanted change. So, according to this teacher, all that was bad because it was forced. So, according to him, ALL change to make life better and fairer for people deliberately left out of society's benefits is BAD?? What kind of far right conservative Trumpist MAGA elitist is this guy?
Also, the opposite of the Irish-American student is the Nigerian-American student. He and his family are actually appropriating benefits that should go to the native African-Americans because he's considered "black". His ancestors were never enslaved and never suffered. This is also a huge problem and a tragedy!