Is this getting silly yet?

https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/

Johns Hopkins’ diversity chief labels whites, males and Christians as ‘privileged’

'Whites' now include Asian- and Hispanic-Americans...

The Yanks will be preparing for the next dumb Yankery when they include subcontinental Indian-Americans as 'whites'.

Gordon wrote on Jan 14^th, 2024 at 12:12pm:

Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/

She had the privilege to say what she said

And yes, what she said was silly, so she retracted it, via the privilege of using social media, using her discerning mind, a privilege given to her by Western culture,

I stole $20 off an Aborigine last week.
I felt privileged.

Bias_2012 wrote on Jan 14^th, 2024 at 12:54pm:

Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:12pm: Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/ She had the privilege to say what she said And yes, what she said was silly, so she retracted it, via the privilege of using social media, using her discerning mind, a privilege given to her by Western culture,

Not to mention that she speaks English, is middle aged, able bodied, is hetero/cisgender and is middle or owning class. Privileged indeed.

Setanta wrote on Jan 14^th, 2024 at 6:12pm:

Bias_2012 wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:54pm: Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:12pm: Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/ She had the privilege to say what she said And yes, what she said was silly, so she retracted it, via the privilege of using social media, using her discerning mind, a privilege given to her by Western culture, Not to mention that she speaks English, is middle aged, able bodied, is hetero/cisgender and is middle or owning class. Privileged indeed.

And has a white husband

Gordon wrote on Jan 14^th, 2024 at 6:14pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 6:12pm: Bias_2012 wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:54pm: Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:12pm: Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/ She had the privilege to say what she said And yes, what she said was silly, so she retracted it, via the privilege of using social media, using her discerning mind, a privilege given to her by Western culture, Not to mention that she speaks English, is middle aged, able bodied, is hetero/cisgender and is middle or owning class. Privileged indeed. And has a white husband

She must hate him, he ticks all the boxes! ;D

Setanta wrote on Jan 14^th, 2024 at 6:16pm:

Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 6:14pm: Setanta wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 6:12pm: Bias_2012 wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:54pm: Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:12pm: Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/ She had the privilege to say what she said And yes, what she said was silly, so she retracted it, via the privilege of using social media, using her discerning mind, a privilege given to her by Western culture, Not to mention that she speaks English, is middle aged, able bodied, is hetero/cisgender and is middle or owning class. Privileged indeed. And has a white husband She must hate him, he ticks all the boxes! ;D

I just googled him, he's not white. The only boxes they don't tick are white and possibly Christian.

Setanta wrote on Jan 14^th, 2024 at 6:24pm:

Setanta wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 6:16pm: Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 6:14pm: Setanta wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 6:12pm: Bias_2012 wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:54pm: Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:12pm: Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/ She had the privilege to say what she said And yes, what she said was silly, so she retracted it, via the privilege of using social media, using her discerning mind, a privilege given to her by Western culture, Not to mention that she speaks English, is middle aged, able bodied, is hetero/cisgender and is middle or owning class. Privileged indeed. And has a white husband She must hate him, he ticks all the boxes! ;D I just googled him, he's not white. The only boxes they don't tick are white and possibly Christian.

They work in the same Hospital..... no conflicts of interest?

He's a pediatrician.

Both privileged black people.

She needs to pull her head in.

Making those statements to justify the BS position she holds.

DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion); here's what Musk has to say:

"Writing on X (formerly Twitter), a social-media platform he owns, Musk said, “DEI must DIE. The point was to end discrimination, not replace it with different discrimination. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion" are propaganda words for racism, sexism, and other -isms."

??

1. Racism is in part instinctive among (tribal)  humans, and needs to be consciously avoided by individuals, many of whom aren't even aware of it and don't try to resist it. 
Racist discrimination does exist. eg, the idea that blacks cause their own poverty, which ignores the history of black enslavement and its ongoing pychological effects.

[Why was it that, historically  whites enslaved blacks and not the other way around?]

2. Sexism :"prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." is more complicated, because the genders are indeed different: women bear and suckle children.

'Diversity': a good, no diversity (race sex, religion) would drive you mad. 

Equity: a good (not the same as equality of outcome, the RW lie).

Inclusion: we can't all win, but we can all participate in a prosperous life.

Musk needs to study the systemic discrimation which results in entrenched disadvantage based on  different capacities to compete: "from each according to his ability"....and  no-one should be forced into systemic/ generational poverty.

It would be great if Musk could turn his mind to the insanity of the current global economy, which is likely to churn out the world's first  trilionaire within the next decade  (possibly him, if Tesla and Space-X perform well), while entire nations are sinking into bankruptcy, and millions are on the verge of starvation.    

Imposed diversity, calculated inequity, and exclusion.  IDCIE (Id Sigh)

DEI -  Diversity, equity, and inclusion ?

What was wrong with segregation?
Darkies got their own: swimming pools, restaurants, schools, buses, trains and night clubs -
and the Whities got theirs.
Everyone was happy.


https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/153/476/240/original/0541726b2b373829.jpg

:'(

---

Bobby. wrote on Jan 15^th, 2024 at 2:44pm:

Everyone was happy.

Except they weren't:  MLK "I have a dream...". 

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Jan 15^th, 2024 at 4:15pm:

:'(

Ah...the old "you must tolerate intolerance" trick....in reverse.

DEI - Dead Extremists Institute...

Gordon wrote on Jan 14^th, 2024 at 12:12pm:

Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/

https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/01/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-74729358.jpg?resize=940,1024&quality=75&strip=all

Anyone else see the problematic contradiction with her statement?

Lisa Jones wrote on Jan 16^th, 2024 at 7:09pm:

Gordon wrote on Jan 14th, 2024 at 12:12pm: Is this getting silly yet? https://nypost.com/2024/01/11/news/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-labels-whites-males-and-christians-privileged-in-letter-to-staff/ https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/01/johns-hopkins-hospitals-dei-chief-74729358.jpg?resize=940,1024&quality=75&strip=all Anyone else see the problematic contradiction with her statement?

Didn't have to go past the first mention of 'privilege' ....... still waiting for mine.... I guess it must be unconscious, eh?  Silly me.....

Three broad reasons for what we will dub “DEI Denialism”:

Lack of Familiarity with the Issue

Unable to Digest Arguments

Recognizing Reality, but Not Caring

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1272,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F512ebd87-d5fd-41e4-91dd-2a60c0799748_1080x1338.png


At the end of the day, DEI is just bigotry with better branding. Don't fall for it and reject this horrible ideology.

https://therabbithole84.substack.com/p/dei-denialism

Frank wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 8:48am:

At the end of the day, DEI is just bigotry with better branding. Don't fall for it and reject this horrible ideology.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion......bigotry?

See how the ugly RW turn light into darkness, and right into wrong.

Deplorable.

had never heard the acronym 'dei' until a year ago or so, there's always some gay new term that rebands the same thing every couple of years

DEI is no different to any other militant ideology.

Blessed are the unlucky, for they shall unite to overthrow the status quo and become oppressors in their own right.

JC Denton wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 9:04am:

had never heard the acronym 'dei' until a year ago or so, there's always some gay new term that rebands the same thing every couple of years

And what is the "same thing" in

Diversity

Equity

Inclusion.

?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 10:10am:

DEI is no different to any other militant ideology. Blessed are the unlucky, for they shall unite to overthrow the status quo and become oppressors in their own right.

So ...you admit to the reality of oppression (eg greed- based, like Bezos refusing to air-condition his warehouses for the benefit of his workers) - that's a good start.

But a good (functional)  economy will work for everyone, not just the most advantaged.

Regardless of "DEI"....

JC Denton wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 9:04am:

had never heard the acronym 'dei' until a year ago or so, there's always some gay new term that rebands the same thing every couple of years

It's a secular Opus DEI - they want to mortify the flesh of the deplorables.

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 11:22am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 10:10am: DEI is no different to any other militant ideology. Blessed are the unlucky, for they shall unite to overthrow the status quo and become oppressors in their own right. So ...you admit to the reality of oppression (eg greed- based, like Bezos refusing to air-condition his warehouses for the benefit of his workers) - that's a good start. But a good (functional)  economy will work for everyone, not just the most advantaged. Regardless of "DEI"....

Nothing works for everyone.

There will always be the unlucky, who will bear the instinctive primal motivating forces of envy and revenge - as we all do.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 11:41am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 11:22am: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 10:10am: DEI is no different to any other militant ideology. Blessed are the unlucky, for they shall unite to overthrow the status quo and become oppressors in their own right. So ...you admit to the reality of oppression (eg greed- based, like Bezos refusing to air-condition his warehouses for the benefit of his workers) - that's a good start. But a good (functional)  economy will work for everyone, not just the most advantaged. Regardless of "DEI".... Nothing works for everyone.

Another excuse, as cover for a 'survival of the fittest' / 'natural individual rights' ideologue.

Of course the state can guarantee housing and jobs for all, learn about the history, nature and deployment of money, in states with a fiat currency (see the recent post in the MMT thread).


Quote:

There will always be the unlucky, who will bear the instinctive primal motivating forces of envy and revenge - as we all do.

There will always be the less competitive, who will nevertheless prosper in a functional economy which  works for all. 
 
As oppsed to a  'survival of the fittest' economy.

Interesting to see a group of billionaires at Davos urging politicians to increase taxes on wealth globally (envious???), to avoid the destructive inequality and economic and ecological collapse on the horizon.

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 12:21pm:

Quote: There will always be the unlucky, who will bear the instinctive primal motivating forces of envy and revenge - as we all do. There will always be the less competitive, who will nevertheless prosper in a functional economy which  works for all.    As oppsed to a  'survival of the fittest' economy. Interesting to see a group of billionaires at Davos urging politicians to increases taxes on wealth globally (envious???), to avoid the destructive inequality and economic and ecological collapse on the horizon.

There will always be those born physically and intellectually unlucky and those born into dysfunctional families.

There will always be those who are triggered by envy and revenge.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 12:25pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 12:21pm: Quote: There will always be the unlucky, who will bear the instinctive primal motivating forces of envy and revenge - as we all do. There will always be the less competitive, who will nevertheless prosper in a functional economy which  works for all.    As opposed to a  'survival of the fittest' economy. Interesting to see a group of billionaires at Davos urging politicians to increases taxes on wealth globally (envious???), to avoid the destructive inequality and economic and ecological collapse on the horizon. There will always be those born physically and intellectually unlucky and those born into dysfunctional families. There will always be those who are triggered by envy and revenge.

Ah..the ugly, closed 'survival of the fittest/ "freedom" RW mind on full display.

Unlucky or disadvantaged -  whatever.

The sense of fairness demands accomodation of this reality.

A sense of fairness is not driven/"triggered" by envy, though it might drive revenge (like the French Revolution's revenge on the greedy/thought-less  advantaged). 

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 12:34pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 12:25pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 12:21pm: Quote: There will always be the unlucky, who will bear the instinctive primal motivating forces of envy and revenge - as we all do. There will always be the less competitive, who will nevertheless prosper in a functional economy which  works for all.    As opposed to a  'survival of the fittest' economy. Interesting to see a group of billionaires at Davos urging politicians to increases taxes on wealth globally (envious???), to avoid the destructive inequality and economic and ecological collapse on the horizon. There will always be those born physically and intellectually unlucky and those born into dysfunctional families. There will always be those who are triggered by envy and revenge. Ah..the ugly, closed 'survival of the fittest/ "freedom" RW mind on full display. Unlucky or disadvantaged -  whatever. The sense of fairness demands accomodation of this reality. A sense of fairness is not driven/"triggered" by envy, though it might drive revenge (like the French Revolution's revenge on the greedy/thought-less  advantaged).

People want what others have - that's true regardless of the political or economic system(s) governing the people.

Have you mixed regularly with people over the years?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 12:45pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 12:34pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 12:25pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 12:21pm: Quote: There will always be the unlucky, who will bear the instinctive primal motivating forces of envy and revenge - as we all do. There will always be the less competitive, who will nevertheless prosper in a functional economy which  works for all.    As opposed to a  'survival of the fittest' economy. Interesting to see a group of billionaires at Davos urging politicians to increases taxes on wealth globally (envious???), to avoid the destructive inequality and economic and ecological collapse on the horizon. There will always be those born physically and intellectually unlucky and those born into dysfunctional families. There will always be those who are triggered by envy and revenge. Ah..the ugly, closed 'survival of the fittest/ "freedom" RW mind on full display. Unlucky or disadvantaged -  whatever. The sense of fairness demands accomodation of this reality. A sense of fairness is not driven/"triggered" by envy, though it might drive revenge (like the French Revolution's revenge on the greedy/thought-less  advantaged).  People want what others have -

(O ..primitive 'survival of the fittest' mind...)

Wrong; I don't care what Musk has, since he can look after himself, I care about my own prosperity, and I loathe systemic poverty.   

Is that too difficult to understand ---even despite your crippled RW brain?


Quote:

that's true regardless of the political or economic system(s) governing the people.

I just proved your premise is wrong.


Quote:

Have you mixed regularly with people over the years?

Yes. And?.....

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 1:09pm:

Quote: that's true regardless of the political or economic system(s) governing the people. I just proved your premise is wrong.

What was your proof?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 1:32pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:09pm: Quote: that's true regardless of the political or economic system(s) governing the people. I just proved your premise is wrong. What was your proof?

Classic crippled-brain blindness, you missed it:

"The universal sense of fairness demands accomodation of (advantage and disadvantage)".

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 1:43pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:32pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:09pm: Quote: that's true regardless of the political or economic system(s) governing the people. I just proved your premise is wrong. What was your proof? Classic crippled-brain blindness, you missed it: "The universal sense of fairness demands accomodation of (advantage and disadvantage)".

The universal sense of fairness, eh... That's your proof??!!

What's it when it's at home? Armchair self-righteousness?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19^th, 2024 at 2:58pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:43pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:32pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:09pm: Quote: that's true regardless of the political or economic system(s) governing the people. I just proved your premise is wrong. What was your proof? Classic crippled-brain blindness, you missed it: "The universal sense of fairness demands accomodation of (advantage and disadvantage)". The universal sense of fairness, eh... That's your proof??!!

Yes, it's why we have government, to "promote the general welfare" , and to avoid chaos between self-interested individuals, (including those who "want what others have", according to you..)


Quote:

What's it when it's at home? Armchair self-righteousness?

No,  see above: it's the basis of the general desire for government to create order out of the chaos of unregulated  individual self-interest and destructive competitive instincts.

But deduded 'natural individiual rights'  minds like yours are making good governance near impossible; wars, ecological collapse, inequality and entrenched poverty around the globe are reaching catastrophic levels.  

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20^th, 2024 at 1:12pm:

But deduded 'natural individiual rights'  minds like yours are making good governance near impossible; wars, ecological collapse, inequality and entrenched poverty around the globe are reaching catastrophic levels.

Modern political systems where individual rights are not recognised are collapsing.

Why is that?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 20^th, 2024 at 1:36pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:12pm: But deduded 'natural individiual rights'  minds like yours are making good governance near impossible; wars, ecological collapse, inequality and entrenched poverty around the globe are reaching catastrophic levels.   Modern political systems where individual rights are not recognised are collapsing. Why is that?

1. you need to differentiate  global emergencies (eg ecological, war),  from national social breakdown.

2. China is demonstrably more internally stable than the US (where serious commentators are concerned about the possibility of civil war); but even so, a sense of fairness for all - not just for the most advantaged -  is needed to create good government engendering  universal prosperity,  in ALL nations.

https://youtu.be/aVDJlIRlZFE?si=fusuASmkWUIFyQIx

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20^th, 2024 at 1:12pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 2:58pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:43pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:32pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 19th, 2024 at 1:09pm: Quote: that's true regardless of the political or economic system(s) governing the people. I just proved your premise is wrong. What was your proof? Classic crippled-brain blindness, you missed it: "The universal sense of fairness demands accomodation of (advantage and disadvantage)". The universal sense of fairness, eh... That's your proof??!! Yes, it's why we have government, to "promote the general welfare" , and to avoid chaos between self-interested individuals, (including those who "want what others have", according to you..) [quote]What's it when it's at home? Armchair self-righteousness?

No,  see above: it's the basis of the general desire for government to create order out of the chaos of unregulated  individual self-interest and destructive competitive instincts


[/highlight].

But deduded 'natural individiual rights'  minds like yours are making good governance near impossible; wars, ecological collapse, inequality and entrenched poverty around the globe are reaching catastrophic levels.  

[/quote]

destructive  competitive instincts ?

these are the most wonderful things

every thing wonderful is produced by the private sector and nothing by government

samsung and apple compete and we get the reward
toyota and honda compete and we get the reward
i compete with my fellow farmers to breed the best cows
rio and bhp compete and we all get rich
tradesmen compete and you can get a plimber at midnight


you are off your rocker

everything that works is thanks to the private sector

everything that doesnt...health care, schools, criminal justice, welfare is thanks to big government not having to compete and public servants gossiping at the water fountain  ;D ;D ;D ;D

Now the D.E.I.'s got a chopper in the air
Wake up screaming like I'm back over there
Learned a thing or two from Charlie don't you know
You better stay away from Copperhead Road

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20^th, 2024 at 1:56pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:36pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:12pm: But deduded 'natural individiual rights'  minds like yours are making good governance near impossible; wars, ecological collapse, inequality and entrenched poverty around the globe are reaching catastrophic levels.   Modern political systems where individual rights are not recognised are collapsing. Why is that? 1. you need to differentiate  global emergencies (eg ecological, war),  from national social breakdown. 2. China is demonstrably more internally stable than the US (where serious commentators are concerned about the possibility of civil war); but even so, a sense of fairness for all - not just for the most advantaged -  is needed to create good government engendering  universal prosperity,  in ALL nations.

National social breakdown works toward the generation of wars for the simple reason that 'others' (non-inclusive/not included Mk I) will perceive wrongly that their time has come to strike down the unbeliever using their personal sovereign choices in the matter.  Ecologically the ideology has stumbled along now for several decades without a single result.

China IS demonstrably more stable - if you misbehave it's a bullet to the back of the head with the bill sent to your family, and your body parts harvested for organ donation.  Ah - the benefits of surrendering your personal choices and personal sovereignty and rights to government - Hitler and Stalin etc would have been proud. Just think of the possibilities had my cardio gone ahead with heart transplant.... he thought I was worth it..... using my personal sovereignty I said it should, if necessary, go to someone younger and more deserving - IF it came to that.... but that's just me....

So you would be content with a sense of fairness?  Easy .... we can give you a sense of fairness any time .... now for genuine fairness we need to exclude Inclusion™ etc... but you don't need to know about that while we mushroom you ....

:D :D :D

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 17^th, 2024 at 7:20pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:56pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:36pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:12pm: But deduded 'natural individiual rights'  minds like yours are making good governance near impossible; wars, ecological collapse, inequality and entrenched poverty around the globe are reaching catastrophic levels.   Modern political systems where individual rights are not recognised are collapsing. Why is that? 1. you need to differentiate  global emergencies (eg ecological, war),  from national social breakdown. 2. China is demonstrably more internally stable than the US (where serious commentators are concerned about the possibility of civil war); but even so, a sense of fairness for all - not just for the most advantaged -  is needed to create good government engendering  universal prosperity,  in ALL nations. National social breakdown works toward the generation of wars

??

WW1 was caused by a breakdown of diplomacy between nations competing for empire, with stable social conditions at home.



Quote:

for the simple reason...

It wasn't simple, the geopolitical forces were complex...


Quote:

...that 'others' (non-inclusive/not included Mk I) will perceive wrongly that their time has come to strike down the unbeliever using their personal sovereign choices in the matter.

"Clash of civilizations"?  (The Iranians hated the US when the US gave sanctuary to the despised deposed Shah).


Quote:

Ecologically the ideology has stumbled along now for several decades without a single result.

I have ecological breakdown caused by economics as usual in mind (and if the climate scientists are correct....).


Quote:

China IS demonstrably more stable - if you misbehave it's a bullet to the back of the head with the bill sent to your family, and your body parts harvested for organ donation.

"Misbehave" ....by calling for the overthrow of the nation's government?

You could choose to get a life, and prosper under the one-party 'socialist' government, rather than emulate the deluded "freedom" ideologues in the US, rioting in the nation's Capitol trying to overturn the election results. 


Quote:

Ah - the benefits of surrendering your personal choices and personal sovereignty and rights to government

Yes they are considerable as outlined above, so long as the government sees engendering common prosperity as its task.



Quote:

Hitler and Stalin etc would have been proud. Just think of the possibilities had my cardio gone ahead with heart transplant.... he thought I was worth it..... using my personal sovereignty I said it should, if necessary, go to someone younger and more deserving - IF it came to that.... but that's just me....

H and S had international domination in mind; the CCP isn't interested in exporting China's  system of government.


Quote:

So you would be content with a sense of fairness?

I certainly call for the  eradication of poverty and war....fair?


Quote:

Easy .... we can give you a sense of fairness any time .... now for genuine fairness we need to exclude Inclusion™ etc... but you don't need to know about that while we mushroom you ....

You are one confused bunny: inclusion means establishing universal above-poverty participation (whether trannies can get special acknowledgement on their birth certificates or not).

A hospital has admitted to cutting six people’s limbs off by mistake in the past three years.

York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust confirmed six patients had limbs amputated due to medical mistakes over a three year period.

This is the highest number of any NHS trust across the UK.

Four amputations were performed in 2020 and another two were carried out in 2021 at the Yorkshire hospital.

https://metro.co.uk/2024/03/05/yorkshire-hospital-cuts-off-six-peoples-limbs-mistake-20403344/

A hospital has admitted to cutting six people’s limbs off by mistake in the past three years.

York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust confirmed six patients had limbs amputated due to medical mistakes over a three year period.

This is the highest number of any NHS trust across the UK.

Four amputations were performed in 2020 and another two were carried out in 2021 at the Yorkshire hospital.

https://metro.co.uk/2024/03/05/yorkshire-hospital-cuts-off-six-peoples-limbs-mistake-20403344/

The great divide said “ Why was it that, historically  whites enslaved blacks and not the other way around?]”

Actually they did and sold them for export to whites,
Slavers in modern times were Arabs and native Africans, as black as the people they were selling.

Frank wrote on Mar 8^th, 2024 at 2:47pm:

A hospital has admitted to cutting six people’s limbs off by mistake in the past three years. York and Scarborough Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust confirmed six patients had limbs amputated due to medical mistakes over a three year period. This is the highest number of any NHS trust across the UK. Four amputations were performed in 2020 and another two were carried out in 2021 at the Yorkshire hospital. https://metro.co.uk/2024/03/05/yorkshire-hospital-cuts-off-six-peoples-limbs-mistake-20403344/

Were they be identifying as pirates?

Doctor to short-sighted, hard-of hearing nurse:-

"No, NO, nurse - I said 'Slip off his SPECTACLES!"

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 18^th, 2024 at 12:02pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 17th, 2024 at 7:20pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:56pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:36pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jan 20th, 2024 at 1:12pm: But deduded 'natural individiual rights'  minds like yours are making good governance near impossible; wars, ecological collapse, inequality and entrenched poverty around the globe are reaching catastrophic levels.   Modern political systems where individual rights are not recognised are collapsing. Why is that? 1. you need to differentiate  global emergencies (eg ecological, war),  from national social breakdown. 2. China is demonstrably more internally stable than the US (where serious commentators are concerned about the possibility of civil war); but even so, a sense of fairness for all - not just for the most advantaged -  is needed to create good government engendering  universal prosperity,  in ALL nations. National social breakdown works toward the generation of wars ?? WW1 was caused by a breakdown of diplomacy between nations competing for empire, with stable social conditions at home. Quote: for the simple reason... It wasn't simple, the geopolitical forces were complex... [quote]...that 'others' (non-inclusive/not included Mk I) will perceive wrongly that their time has come to strike down the unbeliever using their personal sovereign choices in the matter.

"Clash of civilizations"?  (The Iranians hated the US when the US gave sanctuary to the despised deposed Shah).


Quote:

Ecologically the ideology has stumbled along now for several decades without a single result.

I have ecological breakdown caused by economics as usual in mind (and if the climate scientists are correct....).


Quote:

China IS demonstrably more stable - if you misbehave it's a bullet to the back of the head with the bill sent to your family, and your body parts harvested for organ donation.

"Misbehave" ....by calling for the overthrow of the nation's government?

You could choose to get a life, and prosper under the one-party 'socialist' government, rather than emulate the deluded "freedom" ideologues in the US, rioting in the nation's Capitol trying to overturn the election results. 


Quote:

Ah - the benefits of surrendering your personal choices and personal sovereignty and rights to government

Yes they are considerable as outlined above, so long as the government sees engendering common prosperity as its task.



Quote:

Hitler and Stalin etc would have been proud. Just think of the possibilities had my cardio gone ahead with heart transplant.... he thought I was worth it..... using my personal sovereignty I said it should, if necessary, go to someone younger and more deserving - IF it came to that.... but that's just me....

H and S had international domination in mind; the CCP isn't interested in exporting China's  system of government.


Quote:

So you would be content with a sense of fairness?

I certainly call for the  eradication of poverty and war....fair?


Quote:

Easy .... we can give you a sense of fairness any time .... now for genuine fairness we need to exclude Inclusion™ etc... but you don't need to know about that while we mushroom you ....

You are one confused bunny: inclusion means establishing universal above-poverty participation (whether trannies can get special acknowledgement on their birth certificates or not).

[/quote]

Simplistic..... if only it were that simple ... back to school son - you need a year's remedial at Ardknox.

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Mar 9^th, 2024 at 11:54pm:

Simplistic..... if only it were that simple ... back to school son - you need a year's remedial at Ardknox

It is simple; I'll repeat it here:

"the currency-issuing government can create money out of thin air to fund government services, provided the necessary resources are available for purchase (by the government), to avoid inflation".

Note: national treasuries should be taking stock of the nation's resources and productive capacity, not wasting time on 'bean-counting' (money) exercises, including balancing budgets. 

But it's certainly 'hard knocks' getting through to the mainstream.

Stephanie Kelton didn't get a chance to  expose Joe Astin's misunderstanding about the causes of post- covid inflation, on Q&A last night....

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 12^th, 2024 at 4:30pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Mar 9th, 2024 at 11:54pm: Simplistic..... if only it were that simple ... back to school son - you need a year's remedial at Ardknox It is simple; I'll repeat it here: "the currency-issuing government can create money out of thin air to fund government services, provided the necessary resources are available for purchase (by the government), to avoid inflation". Note: national treasuries should be taking stock of the nation's resources and productive capacity, not wasting time on 'bean-counting' (money) exercises, including balancing budgets.  But it's certainly 'hard knocks' getting through to the mainstream. Stephanie Kelton didn't get a chance to  expose Joe Astin's misunderstanding about the causes of post- covid inflation, on Q&A last night....

Governments do not issue money.
Central banks do.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 12^th, 2024 at 4:30pm:

"the currency-issuing government can create money out of thin air to fund government services, provided the necessary resources are available for purchase (by the government), to avoid inflation".

Only totalitarian/authoritarian governments are currency-issuing governments - where independence of their respective central bank is either not granted or not respected.

And they typically do not restrain themselves from printing money out of thin air by the necessary resources being available for purchase (by the government), to avoid inflation.

Frank wrote on Mar 12^th, 2024 at 9:22pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 12th, 2024 at 4:30pm: Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Mar 9th, 2024 at 11:54pm: Simplistic..... if only it were that simple ... back to school son - you need a year's remedial at Ardknox It is simple; I'll repeat it here: "the currency-issuing government can create money out of thin air to fund government services, provided the necessary resources are available for purchase (by the government), to avoid inflation". Note: national treasuries should be taking stock of the nation's resources and productive capacity, not wasting time on 'bean-counting' (money) exercises, including balancing budgets.  But it's certainly 'hard knocks' getting through to the mainstream. Stephanie Kelton didn't get a chance to  expose Joe Astin's misunderstanding about the causes of post- covid inflation, on Q&A last night.... Governments do not issue money. Central banks do.

Er...governments possess a treasury and central bank, the latter can be authorized to create money out of thin air to fund government spending (observing the resource constraint noted above), just as private banks create money out of thin air when they write loans for credit worthy customers.

“Scholarly researchers have rarely found that increased diversity leads to improved financial outcomes,” Robin Elyn, a professor at business administration at Harvard Business School, and David Thomas, president of Morehouse College, a historically black college, wrote in an article for Harvard Business Review.

Now, it appears that many companies may have figured out that DEI does not necessarily drive better performance.  Mentions of DEI or diversity, equity, and inclusion appears to have dropped dramatically since its peak in 2021, according to Axios.

Johnny Taylor, the president of the Society for Human Resource Management, said in a January interview, “The backlash is real. And I mean, in ways that I’ve actually never seen it before. CEOs are literally putting the brakes on this DE&I work that was running strong,” since the death of George Floyd.



The bubble of another scam bursts.

When they came with affirmative action for the sheilas
I said nothing
When they came with affirmative action for the poofs
I said nothing
When they cam with affirmative action for the ethnos
I said nothing
When they came with affirmative action for the Ghosts In the Darkness
I said nothing
When they came with pots of gold for the dopey schoolgirls who had it off with a teacher
I said nothing
When they came with pots of gold for the rape claimants
I said nothing
When they came with pots of gold for long-suffering Party hacks who'd already had a good run
I said nothing

By the time they came to me with a pot of gold for years of loyalty, integrity, selflessness and hard work
There was nothing left in it...................

Somewhere in that list you'll find yourself.... or lose yourself and your very soul.... of course - a few pots of gold heal all soul injuries.....   8-)

Now the DEI's
Got its choppers in your arse...
They'd better stay away
From Tent City Pass....

Beyond a bias towards employing women over men into high-salaried/high-status positions, in the Anglosphere DEI is often a euphemism for employing unassimilated, unsocialised or poorly socialised people from a non-European ethnicity.

The result of the latter can be, (and easily intuited), disastrous for a company's/government agency's operations.

Whenever merit is subordinated to ethnicity, economic circumstances or anything else, the outcome will necessarily be worse than the reverse.

This is official policy. The Secret Service openly boasts that it “prioritizes recruiting women candidates” and has formulated an “affirmative action” plan to increase the number of women, LGBT, Native Americans, and other identity groups.

Cheatle herself told CBS News that her goal was to reach 30 percent female recruits by 2030: “I’m very conscious, as I sit in this chair now, of making sure that we need to attract diverse candidates and ensure that we are developing and giving opportunities to everybody in our workforce, and particularly women.” The agency is well on its way. In 2021, for the first time, the special agent training class graduated more women than men.

To say it plainly: there is no need for women in a president’s security detail. The Secret Service is an elite institution that can funnel down a large number of candidates to select the few who will protect the president. The best candidates—the strongest and fastest, the best marksmen—will be men. That’s just reality.

It’s a reality that the Secret Service is determined to circumvent. The agency itself has published its fitness standards in two parts: one for men, and a separate, less rigorous one for women.

These biological facts should be obvious. Every nightclub owner knows that physicality matters. A bouncer who is six-foot-five, 200 pounds, will provide better security than a smaller woman. Part of it is signal—size and strength act as a deterrent—and part of it is substance. When a fight breaks out, the nightclub owner learns quickly who is capable of maintaining order and who is not. If he makes the wrong hiring decision, he loses money. It is, in its own way, an honest business.

Why has the Secret Service lost sight of such a basic principle? Because large bureaucracies are insulated from consequences. Directors of large corporations and especially government agencies can afford to engage in vanity projects and pay the DEI tax.

Someone like Kimberly Cheatle, who did a stint at PepsiCo before accepting the directorship of the Secret Service, understands how to pursue success in the current environment: tell the story of “diversity” to advance in a career, degrade the quality of personnel by hiring ideologically, and hope that the remaining capable men who still represent the core of the service can make up the difference.
https://christopherrufo.com/p/a-compromised-secret-service


Bonus
https://x.com/LangmanVince/status/1814609179652370848

(Raw Story)

GOP leaders warn members to lay off ‘DEI’ attacks against Kamala Harris: report

Republican leadership warned party members to stop attacking Kamala Harris with identity and raced-based insults — and instead focus on policy, Politico reported Tuesday evening.

GOP congressional members met behind closed doors Tuesday in an attempt to redirect attacks away from Harris’ identity, people in attendance told Politico.

In the wake of Joe Biden exiting the presidential race, Republicans haven’t held back on criticizing Harris as a “DEI hire” for rapidly gaining the backing of the Democratic party.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) told Politico he wants to shift the conversation to Harris’ record as Biden’s vice president.

“This should not be about personalities. It should be about policy. And we have a record to compare,” Johnson told the outlet after the meeting. “This has nothing to do with race. It has to do with the competence of the person running for president, the relative strength of the two candidates and what ideas they have on how to solve America’s problems.”

For some lawmakers, attacks on Harris have turned public discourse from focusing on Democrats' weakness to Republican conduct, which isn’t the conversation they want to be having, according to the outlet.

Signs of rationality in the GOP.

Now even art, literature and aesthetic merit is subordinate to racial and gender quatas:

The New York Times’ “Best Books of the Century” List Was an Unforgivable Erasure of African Literature

Ainehi Edoro-Glines on the Inherent Racism of Reproducing the Euro-American View of Literature

https://lithub.com/the-new-york-times-best-books-of-the-century-list-was-an-unforgivable-erasure-of-african-literature/


An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE!

Frank wrote on Jul 27^th, 2024 at 1:38pm:

An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE!

Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities.

thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27^th, 2024 at 5:19pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities.

To unthinking idiots like you, sure.

You really are an unhappy bloke, aren't you, Soren?  Tsk, tsk, tsk...   ::) ::)

Frank wrote on Jul 27^th, 2024 at 8:13pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 5:19pm: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities. To unthinking idiots like you, sure.

What is the alternative?

What are you actually advocating for?

We live in a multicultural society. There is no unringing that bell.

What do you want? Gated communities where people come in to service you?

Mass incarceration and deportation?

What do you actually want?

mothra wrote on Jul 28^th, 2024 at 5:01am:

Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 8:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 5:19pm: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities. To unthinking idiots like you, sure. What is the alternative? What are you actually advocating for? We live in a multicultural society. There is no unringing that bell. What do you want? Gated communities where people come in to service you? Mass incarceration and deportation? What do you actually want?

Come on, Frank, don't run away.

All reasonable questions from Mothra.

As to you comment to me: if diversity, equity, and inclusion are admirable qualities - only for 'unthinking idiots' like myself - then I suppose you think DEI are NOT admirable qualities.

Please explain....

mothra wrote on Jul 28^th, 2024 at 5:01am:

Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 8:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 5:19pm: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities. To unthinking idiots like you, sure. What is the alternative? What are you actually advocating for? We live in a multicultural society. There is no unringing that bell. What do you want? Gated communities where people come in to service you? Mass incarceration and deportation? What do you actually want?

Frank?

Cat got your tongue?

DEI, like all ideals, does not survive close scrutiny unscathed or unqualified.

'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' - so how is ability and need measured? Who determines ability and need?

Diversity, equity and inclusion - Before skill, ability and merit?

Who determines who is worthy of DEI consideration?

Another fatal flaw with ideals like DEI is boundaries.

Where does it start and stop and who determines those boundaries?

Should workplaces be required to check that it is not exclusively hiring psycho-normative personnel?

Should they be required to hire persons with full-blown diagnosed antisocial/ psychopathic/ schizotypal/ borderline personality disorder persons commensurate with their occurrence in the general population?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 10:21am:

DEI, like all ideals, does not survive close scrutiny unscathed or unqualified. 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' - so how is ability and need measured? Who determines ability and need?

Ability: measured by educators  during the education process, from early years to tertiary entrance exams.   

Need: defined by poverty-levels applicable in a given society.

There you are: 'equity' survives unscathed. 


Quote:

Diversity, equity and inclusion - Before skill, ability and merit?

No - rather,  addressing equity, AS WELL AS skill, ability and merit.


Quote:

Who determines who is worthy of DEI consideration?

We are ALL worthy of DEI, including above poverty particpation in the economy.

See UNUDHR Article 23.

Interesting that I have exposed you as a survival of the fittest ideologue - "let them eat cake".....

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 12:05pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 10:21am: DEI, like all ideals, does not survive close scrutiny unscathed or unqualified. 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' - so how is ability and need measured? Who determines ability and need? Ability: measured by educators  during the education process, from early years to tertiary entrance exams.    Need: defined by poverty-levels applicable in a given society. There you are: 'equity' survives unscathed.  Quote: Diversity, equity and inclusion - Before skill, ability and merit? No - rather,  addressing equity, AS WELL AS skill, ability and merit. [quote]Who determines who is worthy of DEI consideration?

We are ALL worthy of DEI, including above poverty particpation in the economy.

See UNUDHR Article 23.

Interesting that I have exposed you as a survival of the fittest ideologue - "let them eat cake".....

[/quote]
An excellent example of the simplistic thinking that the blanket application of idealism evokes.

For those of us who've had kids or even lived among humans, know that academic ability often does not result in practical ability or the ability to apply what has been taught and learned.

What you're passing for ability is perceived potential based on presumptions... i.e. not ability.

There are plenty of deadbeats who received high-quality education, then bummed out due to many possible causes.

The 'low hanging fruit' of: if you're starving in a ditch, like an Irishman during the potato famine, then your needs are obvious - you have 'need'.

If 'need' only referred to food, clothing and shelter, the ideal would be easily met.

DEI is measured quantitatively in only a precious few categories: the number of women employed - by far the most common category. (in Australia) how many overtly apparent Muslims are employed - the 2nd largest category, the third being 'gender-diverse'.

Currently, DEI is crudely applied and accounted for if you've got breasts and/or wear a headcloth and/or are overtly 'gender-diverse'.

mothra wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 9:42am:

mothra wrote on Jul 28th, 2024 at 5:01am: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 8:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 5:19pm: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities. To unthinking idiots like you, sure. What is the alternative? What are you actually advocating for? We live in a multicultural society. There is no unringing that bell. What do you want? Gated communities where people come in to service you? Mass incarceration and deportation? What do you actually want? Frank? Cat got your tongue?

Oh look, Frank's gone!

mothra wrote on Jul 28^th, 2024 at 5:01am:

Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 8:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 5:19pm: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities. To unthinking idiots like you, sure. What is the alternative? What are you actually advocating for? We live in a multicultural society. There is no unringing that bell. What do you want? Gated communities where people come in to service you? Mass incarceration and deportation? What do you actually want?

While you're online, Frank ....

mothra wrote on Jul 28^th, 2024 at 5:01am:

Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 8:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 5:19pm: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities. To unthinking idiots like you, sure. What is the alternative? What are you actually advocating for? We live in a multicultural society. There is no unringing that bell. What do you want? Gated communities where people come in to service you? Mass incarceration and deportation? What do you actually want?

Assimilation.

Multiculti diversity is Newspeak of division and fracturing and social disunity.

Frank wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 2:39pm:

mothra wrote on Jul 28th, 2024 at 5:01am: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 8:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 5:19pm: Frank wrote on Jul 27th, 2024 at 1:38pm: An unforgivable erasure of ancient African philosophers, Aboriginal Dreamtime playwrights, Aztec heart surgeons, Eskimo lion tamers. Inherent racism is EVERYWHERE! Yes; but diversity, equity and inclusion remain admirable qualities. To unthinking idiots like you, sure. What is the alternative? What are you actually advocating for? We live in a multicultural society. There is no unringing that bell. What do you want? Gated communities where people come in to service you? Mass incarceration and deportation? What do you actually want? Assimilation.

So, everyone should be just like you?

We tried that. People like you still pointed out the differences.

So now we embrace difference. And it has enriched up monumentally.

The fact that you're miserable is gravy.

mothra wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 2:42pm:

So now we embrace difference. And it has enriched up monumentally.

You embrace differences only when they're the result of cluster C oddballery.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 2:49pm:

mothra wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 2:42pm: So now we embrace difference. And it has enriched up monumentally. You embrace differences only when they're the result of cluster C oddballery.

If that made any sense to me, i might know how to respond.

mothra wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 2:50pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 2:49pm: mothra wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 2:42pm: So now we embrace difference. And it has enriched up monumentally. You embrace differences only when they're the result of cluster C oddballery. If that made any sense to me, i might know how to respond.

Cluster C - the so-called SAD personality disorders.

mothra wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 2:42pm:

So, everyone should be just like you? We tried that. People like you still pointed out the differences. So now we embrace difference. And it has enriched up monumentally. The fact that you're miserable is gravy.

Don't try to appear even stupider than you are, it is a wasted effort.


Properly understood, assimilation benefits both natives and newcomers. By taking in or being absorbed into the cultural tradition of the native population, newcomers are better able to communicate and integrate into society and workplaces, as well as make better use of public services. For example, learning the language of a host community enables immigrants to form personal and professional relationships that will help them and their families live happier and more prosperous lives. Natives benefit from these new friendships and associations, too. They may be more open and helpful to immigrants who show an interest in assimilation, and everyone in the country may be better off with the increased economic activity and positive social and civic relationships.

In part, immigration is a hotly contested political issue because Americans now disagree over whether immigrants should assimilate—and what that process even means.

Some progressives consider any expectation that newcomers assimilate as anti-immigrant and provincial. By contrast, some conservatives view too much difference as a source of disunity. They view assimilation as a prerequisite to new immigration and a goal of public policy.

https://manhattan.institute/article/accelerating-americanization-a-study-of-immigration-assimilation

.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 2:55pm:

mothra wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 2:50pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 2:49pm: mothra wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 2:42pm: So now we embrace difference. And it has enriched up monumentally. You embrace differences only when they're the result of cluster C oddballery. If that made any sense to me, i might know how to respond. Cluster C - the so-called SAD personality disorders.

After the hiring of women and Muslims, The HR Gestapo has become fixated on eccentrics and the fearful and anxiety-prone - particularly women. Their 'special needs' must be met - such as needing to work from home up to 5 days a week, isolation from other staff, and other special needs as requested...

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6^th, 2024 at 1:17pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 12:05pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 10:21am: DEI, like all ideals, does not survive close scrutiny unscathed or unqualified. 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' - so how is ability and need measured? Who determines ability and need? Ability: measured by educators  during the education process, from early years to tertiary entrance exams.    Need: defined by poverty-levels applicable in a given society. There you are: 'equity' survives unscathed.  Quote: Diversity, equity and inclusion - Before skill, ability and merit? No - rather,  addressing equity, AS WELL AS skill, ability and merit. [quote]Who determines who is worthy of DEI consideration? We are ALL worthy of DEI, including above poverty particpation in the economy. See UNUDHR Article 23. Interesting that I have exposed you as a survival of the fittest ideologue - "let them eat cake".....

An excellent example of the simplistic thinking that the blanket application of idealism evokes.[/quote]

Well, yes: "from each according to ability" IS simple. You make it complicated by insisting on competition in neoliberal free-markets as the basis of human relations.


Quote:

For those of us who've had kids or even lived among humans, know that academic ability often does not result in practical ability or the ability to apply what has been taught and learned.

A diversion: all are worthy of, and need to participate in the economy, above poverty level. In a world of plenty, the obstacles are political, not economic.


Quote:

What you're passing for ability is perceived potential based on presumptions... i.e. not ability.

See above; your ignorance of the foundations of economic systems is crippling YOUR ability to analyze the problem. 


Quote:

There are plenty of deadbeats who received high-quality education, then bummed out due to many possible causes.

Correct: many possible causes, not all due to 'personal responsibility'. 


Quote:

The 'low hanging fruit' of: if you're starving in a ditch, like an Irishman during the potato famine, then your needs are obvious - you have 'need'.

 

Your error: we ALL obviously need to eat, preferably NOT relying on destructive welfare. 


Quote:

If 'need' only referred to food, clothing and shelter, the ideal would be easily met.

1. Access to food, clothing and shelter is NOT an"ideal", it's a necessity.

2. the current cost of living crisis badly affecting half the population (while the other half are laughing all the way to the bank) is not easily solved, otherwise governments would have solved it.

3. Indeed, "need" also involves above-poverty, social  participation in the community, not achievable through welfare dependency.


Quote:

DEI is measured quantitatively in only a precious few categories: the number of women employed - by far the most common category. (in Australia) how many overtly apparent Muslims are employed - the 2nd largest category, the third being 'gender-diverse'.

Your error: we ALL need to participate:

DEI is a misdirected  attempt to deal with the egregious outcomes of a dysfunctional economic system;  DEI attempts to treat the symptons rather than the cause (ie, dysfunctional neoliberal markets).


Quote:

Currently, DEI is crudely applied and accounted for if you've got breasts and/or wear a headcloth and/or are overtly 'gender-diverse'.

How's it feel to be agreeing with Frank?

DEI is crudely applied in that manner BECAUSE the current survival of the fittest, welfare dependency 'safety net', which is the necessary outcome of wholly competitive,  neoliberal freemarkets,  forces some people (often because of race, gender, religion) onto the unemployment (or low pay) scrap heap.

The solution is to fix the economic system, not the individuals - via DEI notions - who want to participate. 

The core problem with translating ideals into practical realities is the blind faith that the ideal's propositions can be objectively quantified, are good in the absolute, and are all-encompassing.

And, because they do not survive close scrutiny, they need to be perniciously defended.

DEI - calibrated to impose minority- gender bias, ethnic bias, religious bias, 'gender-diversity' bias and limited psycho-non-normative bias - all of which are not, in themselves, reprehensible except when at the cost of worth and merit.

I'd bet no parent would be forgiving of a DEI-hire healthcare professional who, through inexperience, harmed the health of their child.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 8^th, 2024 at 6:14am:

The core problem with translating ideals into practical realities is the blind faith that the ideal's propositions can be objectively quantified, are good in the absolute, and are all-encompassing.

Stop waffling.

We want above-poverty participation for all, in a world of plenty.

Your low IQ, or vicious 'survival of the fittest' ideology, is the reason you are waffling about "absolutes". 


Quote:

And, because they do not survive close scrutiny, they need to be perniciously defended.

Perhaps showing your IQ is ok,  given your cleverly devious crap about "pernciously defending" (DEI); it's just crippled by your vicuous, blind, survival of the fittest  ideology. 


Quote:

DEI - calibrated to impose minority- gender bias, ethnic bias, religious bias, 'gender-diversity' bias and limited psycho-non-normative bias - all of which are not, in themselves, reprehensible except when at the cost of worth and merit.

At the cost of worth and merit?

So the common man must accept what vicious flat-earth economists say the economy can afford, in a world of plenty? 

(I take it back: your low IQ, AND vicious ideology are both confirmed).


Quote:

I'd bet no parent would be forgiving of a DEI-hire healthcare professional who, through inexperience, harmed the health of their child.

Low IQ: people should participate at the level of their competence, certainly,  but no-one  should be disadvantaged by that reality; no employment type should result in social exclusion and/or disadvantage.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 8^th, 2024 at 6:14am:

The core problem with translating ideals into practical realities is the blind faith that the ideal's propositions can be objectively quantified, are good in the absolute, and are all-encompassing. And, because they do not survive close scrutiny, they need to be perniciously defended. DEI - calibrated to impose minority- gender bias, ethnic bias, religious bias, 'gender-diversity' bias and limited psycho-non-normative bias - all of which are not, in themselves, reprehensible except when at the cost of worth and merit. I'd bet no parent would be forgiving of a DEI-hire healthcare professional who, through inexperience, harmed the health of their child.

One of the most pernicious aspects of DEI hiring is its necessarily covert nature.

It'll never be stamped on an employee's HR file.

And no employer is likely to add to any desirable criteria:
- Must be a hijab-wearing Muslim woman
or
- must demonstrate gender diversity by being overtly fruity.

It's done via a covert nod and a wink from HR.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 8^th, 2024 at 1:20pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 8th, 2024 at 6:14am: The core problem with translating ideals into practical realities is the blind faith that the ideal's propositions can be objectively quantified, are good in the absolute, and are all-encompassing. And, because they do not survive close scrutiny, they need to be perniciously defended. DEI - calibrated to impose minority- gender bias, ethnic bias, religious bias, 'gender-diversity' bias and limited psycho-non-normative bias - all of which are not, in themselves, reprehensible except when at the cost of worth and merit. I'd bet no parent would be forgiving of a DEI-hire healthcare professional who, through inexperience, harmed the health of their child. Your idea of debate: ignore the refutation, and just repeat your errors. Anyway let's have a look at your new 'survival of the fittest' rhetoric.... [quote]One of the most pernicious aspects of DEI hiring is its necessarily covert nature. It'll never be stamped on an employee's HR file. And no employer is likely to add to any desirable criteria: - Must be a hijab-wearing Muslim woman or - must demonstrate gender diversity by being overtly fruity. It's done via a covert nod and a wink from HR.

You ignored my explanation: employers are being asked to implement "pernicious" DEI policies BECAUSE of the dysfunctional 'scarcity' economics currently ruling the world - which relegates the less competitive (often minorities)  to low paid service jobs, or the unemployment scrap heap.   

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 7^th, 2024 at 12:46pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 1:17pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 12:05pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 10:21am: DEI, like all ideals, does not survive close scrutiny unscathed or unqualified. 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' - so how is ability and need measured? Who determines ability and need? Ability: measured by educators  during the education process, from early years to tertiary entrance exams.    Need: defined by poverty-levels applicable in a given society. There you are: 'equity' survives unscathed.  Quote: Diversity, equity and inclusion - Before skill, ability and merit? No - rather,  addressing equity, AS WELL AS skill, ability and merit. [quote]Who determines who is worthy of DEI consideration? We are ALL worthy of DEI, including above poverty particpation in the economy. See UNUDHR Article 23. Interesting that I have exposed you as a survival of the fittest ideologue - "let them eat cake"..... An excellent example of the simplistic thinking that the blanket application of idealism evokes.

Well, yes: "from each according to ability" IS simple. You make it complicated by insisting on competition in neoliberal free-markets as the basis of human relations.


Quote:

For those of us who've had kids or even lived among humans, know that academic ability often does not result in practical ability or the ability to apply what has been taught and learned.

A diversion: all are worthy of, and need to participate in the economy, above poverty level. In a world of plenty, the obstacles are political, not economic.


Quote:

What you're passing for ability is perceived potential based on presumptions... i.e. not ability.

See above; your ignorance of the foundations of economic systems is crippling YOUR ability to analyze the problem. 


Quote:

There are plenty of deadbeats who received high-quality education, then bummed out due to many possible causes.

Correct: many possible causes, not all due to 'personal responsibility'. 


Quote:

The 'low hanging fruit' of: if you're starving in a ditch, like an Irishman during the potato famine, then your needs are obvious - you have 'need'.

 

Your error: we ALL obviously need to eat, preferably NOT relying on destructive welfare. 


Quote:

If 'need' only referred to food, clothing and shelter, the ideal would be easily met.

1. Access to food, clothing and shelter is NOT an"ideal", it's a necessity.

2. the current cost of living crisis badly affecting half the population (while the other half are laughing all the way to the bank) is not easily solved, otherwise governments would have solved it.

3. Indeed, "need" also involves above-poverty, social  participation in the community, not achievable through welfare dependency.


Quote:

DEI is measured quantitatively in only a precious few categories: the number of women employed - by far the most common category. (in Australia) how many overtly apparent Muslims are employed - the 2nd largest category, the third being 'gender-diverse'.

Your error: we ALL need to participate:

DEI is a misdirected  attempt to deal with the egregious outcomes of a dysfunctional economic system;  DEI attempts to treat the symptons rather than the cause (ie, dysfunctional neoliberal markets).


Quote:

Currently, DEI is crudely applied and accounted for if you've got breasts and/or wear a headcloth and/or are overtly 'gender-diverse'.

How's it feel to be agreeing with Frank?

DEI is crudely applied in that manner BECAUSE the current survival of the fittest, welfare dependency 'safety net', which is the necessary outcome of wholly competitive,  neoliberal freemarkets,  forces some people (often because of race, gender, religion) onto the unemployment (or low pay) scrap heap.

The solution is to fix the economic system, not the individuals - via DEI notions - who want to participate. 
[/quote]
Ah, the Chinese predisposition towards projection!

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 9^th, 2024 at 12:48pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 7th, 2024 at 12:46pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 1:17pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 12:05pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 6th, 2024 at 10:21am: DEI, like all ideals, does not survive close scrutiny unscathed or unqualified. 'From each according to their ability, to each according to their need' - so how is ability and need measured? Who determines ability and need? Ability: measured by educators  during the education process, from early years to tertiary entrance exams.    Need: defined by poverty-levels applicable in a given society. There you are: 'equity' survives unscathed.  Quote: Diversity, equity and inclusion - Before skill, ability and merit? No - rather,  addressing equity, AS WELL AS skill, ability and merit. [quote]Who determines who is worthy of DEI consideration? We are ALL worthy of DEI, including above poverty particpation in the economy. See UNUDHR Article 23. Interesting that I have exposed you as a survival of the fittest ideologue - "let them eat cake"..... An excellent example of the simplistic thinking that the blanket application of idealism evokes. Well, yes: "from each according to ability" IS simple. You make it complicated by insisting on competition in neoliberal free-markets as the basis of human relations. [quote]For those of us who've had kids or even lived among humans, know that academic ability often does not result in practical ability or the ability to apply what has been taught and learned.

A diversion: all are worthy of, and need to participate in the economy, above poverty level. In a world of plenty, the obstacles are political, not economic.


Quote:

What you're passing for ability is perceived potential based on presumptions... i.e. not ability.

See above; your ignorance of the foundations of economic systems is crippling YOUR ability to analyze the problem. 


Quote:

There are plenty of deadbeats who received high-quality education, then bummed out due to many possible causes.

Correct: many possible causes, not all due to 'personal responsibility'. 


Quote:

The 'low hanging fruit' of: if you're starving in a ditch, like an Irishman during the potato famine, then your needs are obvious - you have 'need'.

 

Your error: we ALL obviously need to eat, preferably NOT relying on destructive welfare. 


Quote:

If 'need' only referred to food, clothing and shelter, the ideal would be easily met.

1. Access to food, clothing and shelter is NOT an"ideal", it's a necessity.

2. the current cost of living crisis badly affecting half the population (while the other half are laughing all the way to the bank) is not easily solved, otherwise governments would have solved it.

3. Indeed, "need" also involves above-poverty, social  participation in the community, not achievable through welfare dependency.


Quote:

DEI is measured quantitatively in only a precious few categories: the number of women employed - by far the most common category. (in Australia) how many overtly apparent Muslims are employed - the 2nd largest category, the third being 'gender-diverse'.

Your error: we ALL need to participate:

DEI is a misdirected  attempt to deal with the egregious outcomes of a dysfunctional economic system;  DEI attempts to treat the symptons rather than the cause (ie, dysfunctional neoliberal markets).


Quote:

Currently, DEI is crudely applied and accounted for if you've got breasts and/or wear a headcloth and/or are overtly 'gender-diverse'.

How's it feel to be agreeing with Frank?


Quote:

DEI is crudely applied in that manner BECAUSE the current survival of the fittest, welfare dependency 'safety net', which is the necessary outcome of wholly competitive,  neoliberal freemarkets,  forces some people (often because of race, gender, religion) onto the unemployment (or low pay) scrap heap.

The solution is to fix the economic system, not the individuals - via DEI notions - who want to participate. 


Quote:

Ah, the Chinese predisposition towards projection!

Again - your pathetic excuse for analysis of the problem: blame the Chinese, who ARE at least searching for the polices needed for common prosperity, while the paranoid West is throwing every spanner in the works to hinder Chinese growth.  .

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 10^th, 2024 at 5:42pm:

Again - your pathetic excuse for analysis of the problem: blame the Chinese, who ARE at least searching for the polices needed for common prosperity, while the paranoid West is throwing every spanner in the works to hinder Chinese growth.  .

Han Chinese projection.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 11^th, 2024 at 6:06am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Aug 10th, 2024 at 5:42pm: Again - your pathetic excuse for analysis of the problem: blame the Chinese, who ARE at least searching for the polices needed for common prosperity, while the paranoid West is throwing every spanner in the works to hinder Chinese growth.  . Han Chinese projection.

Projection is (unconsciously) seeing your own failures in others.

You refuse even to debate YOUR failures, ie mainstream neoliberal 'scarcity' economics, as revealed in Prof. Keen's post today (MMT thread):

Why don’t they study the accounting and correct this mistake? Because they don’t want to know! The belief that money is “neutral”—that it doesn’t affect real economic activity—is so ingrained into them, that acknowledging the real situation would undermine their entire paradigm.

This is why I’ve taken to describing the mainstream as not “Neoclassical Economists”, but “Ptolemaic Economists” (with apologies to Ptolemaic Astronomers, whose models of the Solar System were far more capable of predicting the future location of planets than Neoclassical economists are capable of predicting the future of the economy). They have a persuasive but structurally totally false model of the economy, and, just as Galileo found with Ptolemaic astronomers and his telescope, Neoclassical economists refuse to look down “the accounting telescope” to see what the actual structure of the economy is. As is so typical of humans, they would almost (?) rather die than change their beliefs.

Or blame the CCP for your  own failings.

Deplorable.

What DEI will ultimately deliver will be a rise in incompetence and plaigarism scandals.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Aug 11^th, 2024 at 1:26pm:

What DEI will ultimately deliver will be a rise in incompetence and plaigarism scandals.

Probably, until "Ptolemaic economists" - whom you follow - are relegated to the dustbin of history where they belong.

Then DEI will be a legitimate goal based on ability.