If DEI was effective, then major league sports would use it. To have the best teams you pick the best players. I'd love to see how major league sports would play out if there was a hiring quota.
@@PretiumLibertatisEstVigilantia If it is an advantage in sports, then are other races good at different things? You should have to qualify for every job and just not the entertainment industry that sport is part.
The main reason people are opposed to DEI is because of "Didn't Earn It." It is racist. It is giving groups privilege based on what another group thinks instead of giving everyone equal opportunity based on merit. You have people saying that everyone is the same and the same people then immediately turn around and divide everyone into groups and treat them differently.
Is that what you think dei does? If so, you are wholly ignorant of it and only listening to media sources about it. Because airlines, for example, are hiring unqualified pilots to fly their f'ing planes, right? And so on! Why don't you actually research dei and why it has been pushed over the last 30 years or so? Damn! White people never want to be bothered to actually study something that benefits others more than it necessarily benefits them.
DEI is about using discrimination today to supposedly redress the discrimination of the past. The problem is obvious: discrimination is wrong, regardless of whether it favors your population group or not. The path to redressing the discrimination of the past is the same one MLK advocated for: equality of opportunities. It may be slower than alternatives like DEI, but it is just and produces lasting change.
Professional blacks have no reason to end racism. Professional blacks = Howard University the most racist, most expensive HBCU that delivers nothing but debt and rich racists
@@peterang6912and that system gives u government jobs and seats in the prestigious universities. Current generations don’t care about it. Don’t use it to pull her down. She might have scored like 100/150 and someone with 25/150 would have gotten her university seat just because of that system.
@@AtulKumar-mb7nh you said " Current generations don’t care about it. " but that is not true if we are talking about India, as i said, it's still going on.. but like the other commenter said, she is in the USA...Later you said "Don’t use it to pull her down.". when did i pull her down.. i only react on the original comment...
@@peterang6912 when she didn’t mention caste, I was also thinking why didn’t she mention that. The class was not about reservations and caste system but DEI and trust me, “equity in diversity” is so ingrained in our psyche that we don’t even think about it. You move 100 miles and the whole culture changes. The way you guys were discussing about it felt like you guys were pulling her down just because she didn’t mention it. And yes, it is going on in 2024 but it’s not as widespread as 75 years ago. Probably more so in the internal villages of India where there are no 21st-century amenities. We have come a long way.
I've been rejected from jobs for being white, and been told to put other things on applications. For instance if I have any native American in my ancestry at all. DEI has discriminated against me for the color of my skin. DEI has had a racist impact on my life. DEI isn't a fix, it's felt more like revenge, and that isn't healthy for any society. Revenge is not the answer!
@@matthewsilva8617Cynically, no amount of current or future racism will change the past, so its essentially a perpetial excuse to keep discriminating against whites.
Great point. If you're having open heart surgery, do you want a very cultural/skin color diverse surgeon team of doctors and nurses? Or do you just want the best surgeons and nurses? I work in Construction and have done so for 25 years. Construction in CA as it currently stands, theres more Mexicans than any other group. I'd say South and East Asians are the smallest group in construction. If people are for DEI, the next home you buy, go find a very diverse group of contractors and see how that turns out.
DEI programs (in the past) has had to lower standards to include individuals, when some might not be qualified! DEI is just Affirmative Action rebranded
Diversity "SHOULD" be more than skin color and "gender" (perceived and actual), but most everyone is only allowed to use narrow thinking. Diversity of thought, perceptions, cultures, abilities, & others are so much more important.
You were right to point out the male tears shirt. Some life experiences and perspectives CAN be mocked. It's ok to demonize, hate, belittle and mock some people if it fits and acceptable narrative. Absolutely gross and disrespectful. Does not belong on the educator side of the class
Would be interesting if quick straw polls (easily found on the net) would be integrated into the class. The professor could compare the class's response compared to the other polls.
I wonder what the reaction would be to a male assistant wearing a blatantly sexist meme on a t-shirt in class? In this case, it's laughed off, and the student feels unbothered by her own misandry. If you'd like to have a conversation regarding privilege, it seems that would be a legitimate discussion.
@@BigDaddyCane777 for the same reason that, generally speaking, people tend to get away with racism against whites. Just as whites typically don't care about race enough to do anything or say anything, men typically don't care enough about sexism to say or do anything. There's likely no consequence that comes with it
"The fundamental and essential mechanism of affirmative action is racism. It requires, at the point of selection, a negative response to this critical question: In the absence of race as a criterion, would this candidate be selected. In recent decades affirmative action has evolved into a cynical ploy, a numbers game, in many institutions, far removed from its original goal of providing employment and educational opportunities to groups that were denied those opportunities for reasons any decent society would hold as morally repugnant. Former UC Berkeley regent Ward Connerly said, that we have used affirmative action to prop up a system of artificial diversity while neglecting the heavy lifting to bring about real equality in our society."
Thomas Sowell has made the observation that we don't really have US universities; we have international universities housed on US soil. Even at private schools there is a lot of government money, so US taxpayers are paying to educate other countries' children. Maybe we want to do that, maybe we don't, but we shouldn't fool ourselves that that is what we are doing.
I'm not against diversity. But as a Hispanic I think DEI is mostly bologna bull $hit. It's toxic sympathy sometimes used to parade a moral "high ground" socially, but leads to a new type of discrimination against those that truly earned it. Also it lowers the standards, quality, and skills, sort of like what the airlines are pushing due to DEI, it's not about qualifying pilots but "diversity." Well, I want a qualified pilot no matter the race.
This discussion needs to be several more classes. Although momentarily discussed, the real question is whether polarizing groups to make up for unproven discriminatory practices should be acquiesced to. With women and with Black people, it is beyond clear that both groups have had demonstrable trouble being treated unequally to men and white people, respectively, so the affirmative action there made a lot of sense. But this globalized "DEI for all minority populations" is not righting wrongs (like with women and Black people**) but instead just looking to have representation of all groups in every sphere of life, which is a debatable plan and worth discussing further. **feel free to add other proven discriminated groups here, but no supposition that any non-majority group is "marginalized"
Blacks and women tend to be privileged with jobs. Straights, Whites, and males have been oppressed for a long time. United Airlines, Best Buy, Apple, etc. discriminated against them.
DEI is no more than telling someone you cannot succeed on your own merits, but you need to denegrate someone else to succeed, and it's not based on merit.
Any DEI measure that purports to solve an issue caused by past discrimination should have explicitly defined goals which, when reached, will cause the repeal of the measure. So if a measure seeks to put more women in science, say, it should come with the proviso that it will be abolished when 48-52% of all people in science are women. Otherwise, we end up with runaway discrimination. This is precisely what has happened in American higher ed, where some 2/3 of all graduates are women.
However, that methodology often reaches it goals, not by raised one to the percentage of another, but rather blocking those already achieving to create the desired outcome. As have been shown by many studies, some people prefer certain things (i.e. Males and math / science fields).
Ok, lets say you want to start a Basketball team. How important to you will it be to have a diverse team? Have equal amounts of Male-Female, Black-White-Asian, Tall-Short, Skinny-Fat, Young-Old, Fast-Slow, etc...? And if you did have a diverse team do you think you could actually win a game, ever? Sometimes having a Diverse team of anything will rarely make you a winning team, because what you want is the best team you can get depending on the end goal objective and that may mean you have to overlook the members that can't make you the best you can be, even if it hurts someone's feeling. I believe in equality of opportunity but not equality in outcome.
Every individual has a unique perspective _regardless_ of race, gender, sexuality, etc. I think it's unfair to impose the assumption that a gay person's dominate perspective is whatever comes from the vantage point of being gay, etc. Imagine a work meeting where the boss says "Steve, what's the gay perspective on this issue? Jamil, how would a black solve this problem? Lucy, I know you have a graduate degree in physics but I want you to set that aside and give your opinion _as a woman_, because we all know women do physics differently than men." Why am I not given special treatment for my hair color, my eye color, the diseases I have suffered in life, number of sexual partners, hours of sleep I get at night, etc. We pick out just a handful of attributes and say "You are all defined by these attributes, now go to your corners and _act your identity_." It's repulsive and goes against my personal values.
My guide for over a decade, "Any virtue taken to an extreme becomes a fault." It's not that the program is a problem. It's the extreme cases that those in favor don't want to acknowledge that is the problem. It is the notion that more is better, and we have never reached the imaginary goal line that is the problem. It is that we are told with insistence that it is simple, the most simple and just ask, and we are wrong to push back or question, when we see it is complicated. Ignore what you see in favor of what we tell you, sit down and shut up or your vile, therein lies the souring on DEI.
The teacher preachs against meritocracy... thats a flawled class... Just incredible, nothing was learned the entire class, just an aimless chat among clueless students and a teacher that seems to negate the process of asserting grades to verify knowledge
Watch more of his videos: he is practicing the socratic method and is trying to instill questions in their minds for them to take the habit to question their beliefs. I don't like DEI but I'm able to hear arguments defending it, that's what critical thinking is about.
@@mary-gael7633 I follow this channel for a long time... theres always one good video among dozens that are just bad. One thing is to teach how to think, another is to just let brainrot flow without saying nothing. Theres some classes that the students are just wrong and he does nothing about it... "Are you sure this is right?" - "YES" - "Ok then".
you should go over MIT's admissions since the DEI ban. would be an interesting discussion Black and Latino enrollment at MIT has dropped precipitously in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in the cases filed by Students for Fair Admissions against Harvard University and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Whereas the combined percentage of Black, Latino and Native American and Pacific Islander students had in recent years accounted for a quarter of MIT’s entering classes, the percentage dropped to 16 percent for the Class of 2028. The percentage of Black students in the entering class dropped from 15 percent to 5 percent, and Latino students from 16 percent to 11 percent. The percentage of Asian American students increased from 40 percent to 47 percent, while the percentage of white students remained steady (37 percent compared with 38 percent a year ago).
@@4850937 I disagree because you can't fix discrimination with more discrimination. I'd also argue that people would disagree on how long "temporary" should be. If the government gets involved their policies aren't temporary either. An example of that would be how the irs and income tax were supposed to be temporary until I think WW2 ended and we see how that went.
DEI = Four students on the stage, one is right. The class learns 75% the 'wrong' opinion. The students were selected because of gender and race, not qualification or grades.
When Sam Richards showed the statistic that 28%, a quarter of people, whom of which are black, are not satisfied by how much their employers use the DEI system. I think the answer he was looking for was that media portrays an exaggerated image of black prejudice. this means that 72% of black people were absolutely satisfied with the use of DEI by their employer, yet the media portrays it as if 72% of black people AREN'T satisfied with the use of DEI by their employer. I think the students had a fairly reasonable argument that it is not as simple as that, and I get it because it is a sensetive topic also, but if you take this statistic at face value you will find that at the end of the day the statistic of blacks unhappy with DEI is lower than the amount all the students EXCEPT the BLACK guy initially assumed.
It's quite telling how we see diversity based on immutable characteristics- skin color. People are individuals and individuals have diverse opinions, religious beliefs, musical taste etc etc. Yes, it is human nature to stereotype. It's a deeply embedded survival instinct. In a country where we were taught to "judge" a person by the content of their character and NOT skin color, we instinctively make assumptions based on race, hair style, the way we dress etc. The whole DEI narrative is basically directing us to focus.......FOCUS on the immutable characteristics thus placing the individual into a broad category. I think DEI is toxic to actually bringing people together in our "melting pot".
Its like saying Im only going to hire redheads. Sure there are qualified redheads but you just statistically cancelled out 90% of potential. Talent potential
People should be hired on qualifications or whomever would be best for a job. Should have absolutely have nothing to do with race or sex. Life should be just like a track meet. The fastest person wins the prize. Personally I work in the oilfield so as far as I know that is not implemented out in the field. It might be in the offices.
what does DEI mean? It means that my workplace has set a goal of half of management being 'diverse' = not a white or Asian men. Given that about 75% of our management is older 'non diverse' people, this means that there is very little opportunity for upcoming recently hired white and Asian men to get promotions or move into higher positions.
There is a lot of diversity just in the white race. You have white people with blonde hair, brown hair, black hair, red hair, blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes, hazel eyes, some are short some are tall some are skinny, some are fat. So, in the white race, there is a lot of diversity in themselves.
Equity is the problem as it has come to mean representation of identity groups (by race or gender), in schools or jobs, proportionate to representation in our population, often at the expense of aptitude or competence. It is applied selectively, not to the NBA, not to lobster fishermen, etc. Diversity IS happening. More important are equal opportunity and equality under the law. Vast strides have occurred in the past 50-60 years. Yes, there's room for improvement. I don't feel hateful as many critics seem to. I think it's misguided and quite possibly harmful.
While this isn't an issue in my country so I have no experience with it, the practice itself sounds horribly implemented. Let's say you're hiring school teachers and instead of hiring the 100 most qualified for the job, you have to hire a quota of a certain ethnicity. Well assume that there aren't even enough qualified individuals of an ethnicity you're supposed to hire. Do you lower the requirements further to let them in? Will ethnicity "A" need a master's degree to teach but you'll let ethnicity "B" teach with a high school diploma because it's the only way to fill the quota? Especially in the case of teachers that I used as an example, this has a trickle down effect of likely leading to a worse educated next generation as well as you don't have the most competent teachers you could have had. If you absolutely need more of ethnicity "B" to be teachers, attack the problem at the root and attempt to incentivize more of them to pursue an education that would qualify them to become teachers. Don't lower the standards for the teaching positions.
Diversity is ok in Big countries but in small countries like denmark and norway we are like small tribes and to keep it homogenes we need to be The majority
The problem is not the concept but the time the is spent on the training. Highlighting or focusing on differences rather than our similarities. Over 30 years ago I worked at a small business with gay, straight, black, white, married, single, varied religious beliefs and a transgender. We worked well together because we treated each other with respect and kindness.
im so surprised by this comment section. The unanimous opinion is one that is against dei. I dont know whether these users are from psu or just viewers but im really surprised to see this attitude towards dei. Personally I think diversity is a good thing. People think that companies that hire with diversity goals do so in way that less competent people are hired over the competent. That is not how it works and is not the intention of dei; It is supposed to affect scenarios where a less competent white guy is hired over a more competent person belonging to a minority group. In a perfect world some of the commenters in here espouse, there should'nt be hiring based on some minority trait; But prejudice still happens to black folk today, some 60 years after the civil rights movement. An example being resume discrimination, where studies show that employers are less likely to move forward with a "black" sounding names on resumes. And so diversity programs aim to remove some of these barriers of entry for minority groups. Another side note: A lot of people get duped by corporations and companies virtue signaling their diversity programs. A corporation doesnt give a rats ass about dei, its all public image and societal pressures to conform. No company is actually hiring less competent people for the sake of diversity if it means their bottom line will be hit. Another thing is that minority groups are just that: minority groups; And so the chances of a diversity hire affecting you personally is very small. In conclusion, Dei helps a lot of people overcome the hurdles of being in a minority at no cost to you.
How is it that the West has lead the way culturally and other aspects without a lot of diversity (until the past 100 years or so). Just looking at the long history of the West….
1:15:41 sure, its fun and interesting to talk about - in a sociology class! That's not a pro in a workplace, where the objective is to build products that generate revenue from customers. Like, bro i'm tryna untangle this code, go have that interesting conversation about your niche identity grievances elsewhere. Your personal BS has nothing to do with work. Talk about it with your friends at lunch, talk about it with your therapist, you don't need to involve me
So I'm an hour into this video, and so far, all he's done is ask students for their opinions. No instruction or teaching has occurred yet. Time to move on. 👎
Then, a private business should also have the option to not implement or to go ahead. But ESG steps in and cancels their credit line for not playing the game as someone else dictates, which shows no inclusion for those that want to be in the excluded group. It is DEI's way or the highway. Authoritatian rule in that instance.
@@CazualIntellekt-qv5vh Good point but see my post under @brianburnside5949 We don't have laws against nepotism, or legacy admissions or other kinds of bias. There is no law which states companies should only hire based on a strictly defined notion of merit. It's quite tricky
It's racist and sexist. It's based on the idea that we can have this ideal mixture of skin colors in a building. And that we have either too few or too many of certain skin colors. In that sense, it is incredibly evil. And it is reviving racism throughout our countries. And if you think for a second that it doesn't mean racism then look up Bloomberg top 100 S&P.
If DEI was effective, then major league sports would use it. To have the best teams you pick the best players. I'd love to see how major league sports would play out if there was a hiring quota.
We need more diversity in NBA.
@@vekkisblacks don't want more Larry Byrd
@vekkis No we don't. You have to qualify. And race may be an advantage.
@@PretiumLibertatisEstVigilantia If it is an advantage in sports, then are other races good at different things? You should have to qualify for every job and just not the entertainment industry that sport is part.
DEI does not work. If representation is to be complied with, NBA should have 15% of players with some sort of disabilities!
The main reason people are opposed to DEI is because of "Didn't Earn It." It is racist. It is giving groups privilege based on what another group thinks instead of giving everyone equal opportunity based on merit. You have people saying that everyone is the same and the same people then immediately turn around and divide everyone into groups and treat them differently.
Is that what you think dei does? If so, you are wholly ignorant of it and only listening to media sources about it. Because airlines, for example, are hiring unqualified pilots to fly their f'ing planes, right? And so on!
Why don't you actually research dei and why it has been pushed over the last 30 years or so? Damn! White people never want to be bothered to actually study something that benefits others more than it necessarily benefits them.
Straights, Whites, and males are often oppressed. United Airlines, Best Buy, Apple, etc. discriminated against them for jobs.
@@4850937 doesn’t count, white people cannot be discriminated against 🙄
@@4850937 Now aren't white men DEI now? You claim to be oppressed, so that means you are diversity hires now?
DEI is about using discrimination today to supposedly redress the discrimination of the past. The problem is obvious: discrimination is wrong, regardless of whether it favors your population group or not. The path to redressing the discrimination of the past is the same one MLK advocated for: equality of opportunities. It may be slower than alternatives like DEI, but it is just and produces lasting change.
"If your business is racism, you have no desire to end racism"
Professional blacks have no reason to end racism.
Professional blacks = Howard University the most racist, most expensive HBCU that delivers nothing but debt and rich racists
Indian girl forgot to mention the official caste system from her country.
And that the system is still going on in 2024....
@@Dubinski2382 but she is here so.....
@@peterang6912and that system gives u government jobs and seats in the prestigious universities. Current generations don’t care about it. Don’t use it to pull her down. She might have scored like 100/150 and someone with 25/150 would have gotten her university seat just because of that system.
@@AtulKumar-mb7nh you said " Current generations don’t care about it. " but that is not true if we are talking about India, as i said, it's still going on.. but like the other commenter said, she is in the USA...Later you said "Don’t use it to pull her down.". when did i pull her down.. i only react on the original comment...
@@peterang6912 when she didn’t mention caste, I was also thinking why didn’t she mention that. The class was not about reservations and caste system but DEI and trust me, “equity in diversity” is so ingrained in our psyche that we don’t even think about it. You move 100 miles and the whole culture changes.
The way you guys were discussing about it felt like you guys were pulling her down just because she didn’t mention it. And yes, it is going on in 2024 but it’s not as widespread as 75 years ago. Probably more so in the internal villages of India where there are no 21st-century amenities. We have come a long way.
I've been rejected from jobs for being white, and been told to put other things on applications. For instance if I have any native American in my ancestry at all. DEI has discriminated against me for the color of my skin. DEI has had a racist impact on my life. DEI isn't a fix, it's felt more like revenge, and that isn't healthy for any society. Revenge is not the answer!
a white male will be last to be hired/accepted to a school; white males are a legislated minority now
Revenge is a great description of dei
“The only solution to past discrimination is current discrimination” -Ibram X Kendi
@@matthewsilva8617Cynically, no amount of current or future racism will change the past, so its essentially a perpetial excuse to keep discriminating against whites.
Common sense has been removed! DEI is not moving forward but instead backwards.
Equality and equity are not the same thing. Equality is fairly achievable, equity is not.
I think crossing over the definitions and execution of equality vs equity would clarify alot in this conversation.
DEI is a bad thing in a hospital operating room.
what about pilot?
Consider 50% of the 2024 USC Medical school grads can not pass Boards to practice as student doctors.
Great point. If you're having open heart surgery, do you want a very cultural/skin color diverse surgeon team of doctors and nurses?
Or do you just want the best surgeons and nurses?
I work in Construction and have done so for 25 years. Construction in CA as it currently stands, theres more Mexicans than any other group. I'd say South and East Asians are the smallest group in construction.
If people are for DEI, the next home you buy, go find a very diverse group of contractors and see how that turns out.
In one simple answer. Yes. I just wished youtube would let the convo. Happen instead of widespread censorship
DEI programs (in the past) has had to lower standards to include individuals, when some might not be qualified!
DEI is just Affirmative Action rebranded
Diversity "SHOULD" be more than skin color and "gender" (perceived and actual), but most everyone is only allowed to use narrow thinking.
Diversity of thought, perceptions, cultures, abilities, & others are so much more important.
And the downfall of societies. Once the identity is fractured, the strength dissolves.
You were right to point out the male tears shirt. Some life experiences and perspectives CAN be mocked. It's ok to demonize, hate, belittle and mock some people if it fits and acceptable narrative. Absolutely gross and disrespectful. Does not belong on the educator side of the class
image any other immutable characteristic and this shirt "black tears" or something like that. Its odd that it's perfectly OK to hate some groups.
Would be interesting if quick straw polls (easily found on the net) would be integrated into the class. The professor could compare the class's response compared to the other polls.
I wonder what the reaction would be to a male assistant wearing a blatantly sexist meme on a t-shirt in class? In this case, it's laughed off, and the student feels unbothered by her own misandry. If you'd like to have a conversation regarding privilege, it seems that would be a legitimate discussion.
@@BigDaddyCane777 for the same reason that, generally speaking, people tend to get away with racism against whites. Just as whites typically don't care about race enough to do anything or say anything, men typically don't care enough about sexism to say or do anything. There's likely no consequence that comes with it
"The fundamental and essential mechanism of affirmative action is racism. It requires, at the point of selection, a negative response to this critical question: In the absence of race as a criterion, would this candidate be selected. In recent decades affirmative action has evolved into a cynical ploy, a numbers game, in many institutions, far removed from its original goal of providing employment and educational opportunities to groups that were denied those opportunities for reasons any decent society would hold as morally repugnant. Former UC Berkeley regent Ward Connerly said, that we have used affirmative action to prop up a system of artificial diversity while neglecting the heavy lifting to bring about real equality in our society."
DEI extends only to race and gender. It doesn't extend to age. If you're beyond 40, there is no diversity in hiring.
It also extends to sex, ability, mental illness, sexual orientation....pretty muc any imaginable intersectionality
@@rey_nemaattoriMental illness? That's wild. 😮
People should get jobs based on their merit and knowledge of the job, not just because of their skin color!
Thomas Sowell has made the observation that we don't really have US universities; we have international universities housed on US soil. Even at private schools there is a lot of government money, so US taxpayers are paying to educate other countries' children. Maybe we want to do that, maybe we don't, but we shouldn't fool ourselves that that is what we are doing.
Is stealing from Jack to give it to Jen evil? To Jack, yes. To Jen, no lol
Jen is Jill's younger hotter sister
Too many times DEI doesn't put the best person for the job in the job. Didn't Earn It has become the co-worker acronym for the DEI hires.
Based on what?
Proof
I'm not against diversity. But as a Hispanic I think DEI is mostly bologna bull $hit. It's toxic sympathy sometimes used to parade a moral "high ground" socially, but leads to a new type of discrimination against those that truly earned it. Also it lowers the standards, quality, and skills, sort of like what the airlines are pushing due to DEI, it's not about qualifying pilots but "diversity." Well, I want a qualified pilot no matter the race.
This discussion needs to be several more classes. Although momentarily discussed, the real question is whether polarizing groups to make up for unproven discriminatory practices should be acquiesced to. With women and with Black people, it is beyond clear that both groups have had demonstrable trouble being treated unequally to men and white people, respectively, so the affirmative action there made a lot of sense. But this globalized "DEI for all minority populations" is not righting wrongs (like with women and Black people**) but instead just looking to have representation of all groups in every sphere of life, which is a debatable plan and worth discussing further.
**feel free to add other proven discriminated groups here, but no supposition that any non-majority group is "marginalized"
Blacks and women tend to be privileged with jobs. Straights, Whites, and males have been oppressed for a long time. United Airlines, Best Buy, Apple, etc. discriminated against them.
I disagree. My reply was censored.
@@4850937 what got censored?
DEI is no more than telling someone you cannot succeed on your own merits, but you need to denegrate someone else to succeed, and it's not based on merit.
Any DEI measure that purports to solve an issue caused by past discrimination should have explicitly defined goals which, when reached, will cause the repeal of the measure. So if a measure seeks to put more women in science, say, it should come with the proviso that it will be abolished when 48-52% of all people in science are women. Otherwise, we end up with runaway discrimination. This is precisely what has happened in American higher ed, where some 2/3 of all graduates are women.
However, that methodology often reaches it goals, not by raised one to the percentage of another, but rather blocking those already achieving to create the desired outcome. As have been shown by many studies, some people prefer certain things (i.e. Males and math / science fields).
Ok, lets say you want to start a Basketball team. How important to you will it be to have a diverse team? Have equal amounts of Male-Female, Black-White-Asian, Tall-Short, Skinny-Fat, Young-Old, Fast-Slow, etc...? And if you did have a diverse team do you think you could actually win a game, ever? Sometimes having a Diverse team of anything will rarely make you a winning team, because what you want is the best team you can get depending on the end goal objective and that may mean you have to overlook the members that can't make you the best you can be, even if it hurts someone's feeling. I believe in equality of opportunity but not equality in outcome.
Resistance DEI isn't mandatory DEI training, it's failure in selecting the most qualified applicants, rather giving preference to race or gender.
"Equal Treatment" and "Equity" are two different things...
It's weird, gross and stupid how some people try to monopolize misery
Every individual has a unique perspective _regardless_ of race, gender, sexuality, etc. I think it's unfair to impose the assumption that a gay person's dominate perspective is whatever comes from the vantage point of being gay, etc. Imagine a work meeting where the boss says "Steve, what's the gay perspective on this issue? Jamil, how would a black solve this problem? Lucy, I know you have a graduate degree in physics but I want you to set that aside and give your opinion _as a woman_, because we all know women do physics differently than men." Why am I not given special treatment for my hair color, my eye color, the diseases I have suffered in life, number of sexual partners, hours of sleep I get at night, etc. We pick out just a handful of attributes and say "You are all defined by these attributes, now go to your corners and _act your identity_." It's repulsive and goes against my personal values.
Why can't we just say, Treat each other like you would like to be treated? Be human to one another
If only those both after the civil war and after civil rights accepted that, we wouldn’t be in this situation today.
Because not everybody wants to be treated the same way.
@@rey_nemaattori humans are obviously not robotic
My guide for over a decade, "Any virtue taken to an extreme becomes a fault." It's not that the program is a problem. It's the extreme cases that those in favor don't want to acknowledge that is the problem. It is the notion that more is better, and we have never reached the imaginary goal line that is the problem. It is that we are told with insistence that it is simple, the most simple and just ask, and we are wrong to push back or question, when we see it is complicated. Ignore what you see in favor of what we tell you, sit down and shut up or your vile, therein lies the souring on DEI.
The teacher preachs against meritocracy... thats a flawled class... Just incredible, nothing was learned the entire class, just an aimless chat among clueless students and a teacher that seems to negate the process of asserting grades to verify knowledge
Bah! This is probably the first time these students have actually _thought_ about anything critically. The professor here is phenomenal!
I saw no preaching at all. He is teaching them to think
Watch more of his videos: he is practicing the socratic method and is trying to instill questions in their minds for them to take the habit to question their beliefs. I don't like DEI but I'm able to hear arguments defending it, that's what critical thinking is about.
@@mary-gael7633 I follow this channel for a long time... theres always one good video among dozens that are just bad. One thing is to teach how to think, another is to just let brainrot flow without saying nothing. Theres some classes that the students are just wrong and he does nothing about it... "Are you sure this is right?" - "YES" - "Ok then".
you should go over MIT's admissions since the DEI ban. would be an interesting discussion
Black and Latino enrollment at MIT has dropped precipitously in the wake of the Supreme Court decision in the cases filed by Students for Fair Admissions against Harvard University and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Whereas the combined percentage of Black, Latino and Native American and Pacific Islander students had in recent years accounted for a quarter of MIT’s entering classes, the percentage dropped to 16 percent for the Class of 2028. The percentage of Black students in the entering class dropped from 15 percent to 5 percent, and Latino students from 16 percent to 11 percent. The percentage of Asian American students increased from 40 percent to 47 percent, while the percentage of white students remained steady (37 percent compared with 38 percent a year ago).
more important is how many of those percent get their diploma and get a job after going to MIT...
For victims of DEI, we should have a small amount of temporary affirmative action to help them.
@@4850937 I disagree because you can't fix discrimination with more discrimination. I'd also argue that people would disagree on how long "temporary" should be. If the government gets involved their policies aren't temporary either. An example of that would be how the irs and income tax were supposed to be temporary until I think WW2 ended and we see how that went.
Is there a space where we can talk about these things openly?
DEI = Four students on the stage, one is right. The class learns 75% the 'wrong' opinion. The students were selected because of gender and race, not qualification or grades.
FYI: Discussion starts at 19:00
When Sam Richards showed the statistic that 28%, a quarter of people, whom of which are black, are not satisfied by how much their employers use the DEI system. I think the answer he was looking for was that media portrays an exaggerated image of black prejudice. this means that 72% of black people were absolutely satisfied with the use of DEI by their employer, yet the media portrays it as if 72% of black people AREN'T satisfied with the use of DEI by their employer. I think the students had a fairly reasonable argument that it is not as simple as that, and I get it because it is a sensetive topic also, but if you take this statistic at face value you will find that at the end of the day the statistic of blacks unhappy with DEI is lower than the amount all the students EXCEPT the BLACK guy initially assumed.
It's quite telling how we see diversity based on immutable characteristics- skin color. People are individuals and individuals have diverse opinions, religious beliefs, musical taste etc etc. Yes, it is human nature to stereotype. It's a deeply embedded survival instinct. In a country where we were taught to "judge" a person by the content of their character and NOT skin color, we instinctively make assumptions based on race, hair style, the way we dress etc. The whole DEI narrative is basically directing us to focus.......FOCUS on the immutable characteristics thus placing the individual into a broad category. I think DEI is toxic to actually bringing people together in our "melting pot".
Dei (Latin) = god, supreme being
We need more of G on these talks
What does G refer to? Girls?
@@chrisschene8301 the dude he asked to comment on one of his qeustions, the editor dude
Its like saying Im only going to hire redheads. Sure there are qualified redheads but you just statistically cancelled out 90% of potential. Talent potential
Also, intentional diversity is bad. Listen to some Thomas Sowell. In the 2024 Olympics, the runners seem to be 1 race. The divers were 2 other races.
It’s definitely not bad. Every wrong done to other races has been intentional, the only way to address that is to have the same intention to fix it
Eliminating merit is usually a bad solution.
Wrong. Sometimes Asians tend to be better at math.
@@4850937 It doesn’t eliminate merit. You appear to be a white man, wouldn’t you say your merit is now more considered than it was 100 years ago?
@@4850937 It simply. If your photo is an accurate description of you, would you say your merit is more considered now than it was 100 years ago
DEI forces diversity to the point that some groups (straight white people, specifically men) are under represented in terms of overall population
Diversity and inclusion are good. Tipping the scales to ensure equity is not.
People should be hired on qualifications or whomever would be best for a job. Should have absolutely have nothing to do with race or sex. Life should be just like a track meet. The fastest person wins the prize. Personally I work in the oilfield so as far as I know that is not implemented out in the field. It might be in the offices.
what does DEI mean? It means that my workplace has set a goal of half of management being 'diverse' = not a white or Asian men. Given that about 75% of our management is older 'non diverse' people, this means that there is very little opportunity for upcoming recently hired white and Asian men to get promotions or move into higher positions.
10:47 Some actual DEI before the class starts.
There is a lot of diversity just in the white race. You have white people with blonde hair, brown hair, black hair, red hair, blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes, hazel eyes, some are short some are tall some are skinny, some are fat. So, in the white race, there is a lot of diversity in themselves.
Lecture starts at 17 min
Forward
Equity is the problem as it has come to mean representation of identity groups (by race or gender), in schools or jobs, proportionate to representation in our population, often at the expense of aptitude or competence. It is applied selectively, not to the NBA, not to lobster fishermen, etc. Diversity IS happening. More important are equal opportunity and equality under the law. Vast strides have occurred in the past 50-60 years. Yes, there's room for improvement. I don't feel hateful as many critics seem to. I think it's misguided and quite possibly harmful.
For the one out of four question. Because you will never make everyone happy.
While this isn't an issue in my country so I have no experience with it, the practice itself sounds horribly implemented.
Let's say you're hiring school teachers and instead of hiring the 100 most qualified for the job, you have to hire a quota of a certain ethnicity. Well assume that there aren't even enough qualified individuals of an ethnicity you're supposed to hire. Do you lower the requirements further to let them in?
Will ethnicity "A" need a master's degree to teach but you'll let ethnicity "B" teach with a high school diploma because it's the only way to fill the quota?
Especially in the case of teachers that I used as an example, this has a trickle down effect of likely leading to a worse educated next generation as well as you don't have the most competent teachers you could have had.
If you absolutely need more of ethnicity "B" to be teachers, attack the problem at the root and attempt to incentivize more of them to pursue an education that would qualify them to become teachers. Don't lower the standards for the teaching positions.
Dei isn't a "quota".
A quota is certain amounts of something.
Dei is eliminating a certain thing.
Two completely different things.
It's worrisome that this generation needs an explanation and justification of not being able to speak endlessly.
Wow. Packed house😮
I am a victim of oppression.
50% of all professions that require degrees graduated in the bottom and the top of their class
@@billk454 Not necessarily. Many of the people that finish at the bottom of their class do not go on to careers in their field of study.
Now ask poor people that don’t go to university
Of course 50% graduate in the bottom half… lol… that’s the way 50% of any group works…
Diversity is ok in Big countries but in small countries like denmark and norway we are like small tribes and to keep it homogenes we need to be The majority
Diversity means no whites(or Asians, possibly).
The problem is not the concept but the time the is spent on the training. Highlighting or focusing on differences rather than our similarities. Over 30 years ago I worked at a small business with gay, straight, black, white, married, single, varied religious beliefs and a transgender. We worked well together because we treated each other with respect and kindness.
you didnt follow up the intentional question lol
"Am I Racist?"
im so surprised by this comment section. The unanimous opinion is one that is against dei. I dont know whether these users are from psu or just viewers but im really surprised to see this attitude towards dei. Personally I think diversity is a good thing. People think that companies that hire with diversity goals do so in way that less competent people are hired over the competent. That is not how it works and is not the intention of dei; It is supposed to affect scenarios where a less competent white guy is hired over a more competent person belonging to a minority group. In a perfect world some of the commenters in here espouse, there should'nt be hiring based on some minority trait; But prejudice still happens to black folk today, some 60 years after the civil rights movement. An example being resume discrimination, where studies show that employers are less likely to move forward with a "black" sounding names on resumes. And so diversity programs aim to remove some of these barriers of entry for minority groups.
Another side note:
A lot of people get duped by corporations and companies virtue signaling their diversity programs. A corporation doesnt give a rats ass about dei, its all public image and societal pressures to conform. No company is actually hiring less competent people for the sake of diversity if it means their bottom line will be hit. Another thing is that minority groups are just that: minority groups; And so the chances of a diversity hire affecting you personally is very small.
In conclusion,
Dei helps a lot of people overcome the hurdles of being in a minority at no cost to you.
The guy from Panama is 100% going to fail out of aerospace engineering and waste a lot of money and time
How is it that the West has lead the way culturally and other aspects without a lot of diversity (until the past 100 years or so). Just looking at the long history of the West….
1:15:41 sure, its fun and interesting to talk about - in a sociology class! That's not a pro in a workplace, where the objective is to build products that generate revenue from customers. Like, bro i'm tryna untangle this code, go have that interesting conversation about your niche identity grievances elsewhere. Your personal BS has nothing to do with work. Talk about it with your friends at lunch, talk about it with your therapist, you don't need to involve me
DEI is how it should be, however, in practise it's discriminatory towards white men
An effort must be made to be rude to 'them' Disgusting Equity Insolence
So I'm an hour into this video, and so far, all he's done is ask students for their opinions. No instruction or teaching has occurred yet. Time to move on. 👎
Useless class. Didn't explore the topic with any level of depth.
The concept of DEI is fine. The issue is the weaponization of DEI.
Bot.
The concept is inherently discriminatory and wholly immoral.
why dont you like sosialism? isnt it good that everyone has everything?
No such thing as 100% Chinese.
Koreans, Japanese, and Chinese are all mixed with other Asian groups, and some even have some African ancestry.
False, the "out of Africa" theory was debunked
My son is in Shanghai now with his girlfriend who's 100 💯 percent Chinese. Doy
Too many "tell me what I'm thinking" questions.
I don’t understand the problem people have with DEI that is practiced by private businesses.
Then, a private business should also have the option to not implement or to go ahead. But ESG steps in and cancels their credit line for not playing the game as someone else dictates, which shows no inclusion for those that want to be in the excluded group. It is DEI's way or the highway. Authoritatian rule in that instance.
@@AtomkeySinclair back door to central planning. That's really what it is. Making private companies more administrable tools of the government.
@@CazualIntellekt-qv5vh Good point but see my post under
@brianburnside5949
We don't have laws against nepotism, or legacy admissions or other kinds of bias. There is no law which states companies should only hire based on a strictly defined notion of merit. It's quite tricky
It's racist and sexist. It's based on the idea that we can have this ideal mixture of skin colors in a building. And that we have either too few or too many of certain skin colors. In that sense, it is incredibly evil. And it is reviving racism throughout our countries.
And if you think for a second that it doesn't mean racism then look up Bloomberg top 100 S&P.
To see my comment you have to click newest instead of top comments. Curious what you think.
29:35 No. India is a caste system. Why lie?
51:08 smokeshow