this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
1873 points (96.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

6458 readers
2520 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 day ago (5 children)

If you're opposed to DOGE, does that mean you're opposed to efficiency in government?

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 day ago

Government should not be efficient, at least not in what the business class calls "efficiency".

Government is the entity that performs those tasks that need to be done, but nobody wants to do. If those essential tasks can be done "efficiently", everyone is going to want to get paid for doing them.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago

Yes. Emphatically so.

The more efficient government is, the easier it is to usurp power.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 83 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Same thing as when old people said they were against Antifa or antifa was causing violence. Anti Fascist. You don't support the Anti Fascists. Are you ok with the Fascists then? Shuts the boomers up because they remember daddy fought the Fascists even if their lead addled brains can't remember what that is

[–] [email protected] 29 points 2 days ago

It's not civil rights, it's woke

It's not anti intellectualism, it's anti woke.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Can also use "Elon" for the E.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

As someone outside of the US, all I can see is people fighting over who has a right to a job and who doesn't, while the rich hoard wealth. DEI wouldn't be an issue if there was a safety net, maybe with UBI based on the minimum liveable wage, public housing, public education, public healthcare and government grants to start small business ventures.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 day ago (15 children)

This post attempts to frame opposition to DEI as opposition to the literal meanings of the words rather than the policies built around them. That’s a false dilemma. One can oppose DEI initiatives that sacrifice meritocracy and individual achievement without rejecting the values of diversity, equity, and inclusion in their purest forms. A system that prioritizes individual ability, effort, and competence over group identity is the foundation of real progress and innovation.

We need to be fighting nepotism, not implementing DEI policies that replace one form of favoritism with another. Nepotism undermines meritocracy by prioritizing personal connections over competence, but DEI hiring, when based on demographic factors rather than qualifications, does the same by shifting the bias to identity. The goal should be a system that rewards individual ability, effort, and achievement—ensuring opportunities are earned, not granted based on who you know or what group you belong to. True fairness comes from eliminating favoritism altogether, not redistributing it.

It seems we are forgetting the folly of the greater good.

That being said, everything I’ve read about companies that implement DEI—aside from some questionable journalism in the gaming industry—suggests that they are actually about 27% to 30% more profitable than those that don’t.

I just don’t like this post in general; it seems like one large logical fallacy.

[–] Ulvain 45 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

"We need to be fighting nepotism, not implementing DEI policies that replace one form of favoritism with another"

Sure, except no DEI policy worth its salt ever does that. Day 1 on the job in actual DEI, the difference between tokenism and inclusion is taught, and a policy or practice where unqualified people are put in positions solely because of their identity are not DEI policies.

It's about giving equal access and opportunity to equally qualified diverse candidates that, because of systemic biases and obstacles, they wouldn't have had access to.

Saying "we need a guy on a wheelchair in the legal team, to look good, so hire this guy without a law degree" is dumb tokenism.

Saying "hey now that we don't do 'jog-and-talk' interviews on the 14th floor of a building without an elevator, we were able to interview and hire Joe, a great lawyer in a wheelchair" is implementing a basic DEI change.

Decently done DEI is about making it easier to select the most qualified talent from a qualified, talented and diverse slate of candidates.

NOTE: I don't think you seemed to disagree with the above, it was just funny to me that you started highlighting the false dilemma, then articulated another one :)

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's just like the anti work stuff, being against antifa, etc. They are openly signaling their intention and the fact they won't just say they are fascists is childish.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Reminds me of the "Lets Go Brandon" crap.

Like, if you really dislike Biden, just say "Fuck Joe Biden.". I have zero issue saying "Fuck Trump," because, fuck trump.

Locally in Illinois there were also these signs everywhere that said "Pritzker Sucks" in huge letters, then at the bottom in tiny print "the life out of small business."

Like seriously, I am less disgusted by your stance, than I am about your pussy ass lack of conviction.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (13 children)

Has someone actually been on an interview panel, where you decide to hire someone because they're black?

(I definitely haven't. Although, I haven't been in a position that was in charge of mass hiring.)

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›