Trump's plan to dismantle DEI on day one is a "colorblind" path to Jim Crow 2.0 Stephen Miller makes clear the subtext behind Trump’s call to ban DEI

T. A. Gardner said:
It is YOU that doesn't know how DIE works in reality.

When DIE says it is "inclusive" that equates to quotas based on race and gender rather than hiring on the basis of ability and qualifications.

When DIE says "historically--a horribly abused word lately--underrepresented or subject to discrimination" it does so on the basis of arbitrary and subjective qualifications and uses what amounts to affirmative action.

Instead of allowing everyone access to a level playing field where your personal abilities and qualifications are what determines your success or failure, DIE puts its thumb on the scale and shackles the most able, qualified, and successful to allow the least capable and unsuccessful to the front of the line. In a word, it creates an Idiocracy.

Worse, it judges everyone on long past wrongs those it is judging had nothing to do with and penalizes those it deems had some tenuous ancestorial past linking them to those events to punish them for what they had no part in. The crimes of your ancestors are judged by us to be your crimes and you will pay for them.

That's the reality of DIE.
Click to expand...

Nailed it.
 
Diesel said:
The problem with most white Americans is they have never been on the receiving end of discrimination in any meaningful manner. They are generally constricted geographically, culturally ignorant, and *desperate* to keep privilege they never earned because it makes them feel slightly superior to niggers, spics, and faggots. Terry won't use those words, but you and I can both see how he's jealously protective of his privilege.

Then they elect Donald Trump, the least qualified president we have ever known. Trump proceeds to nominate the least qualified cock suckers that we have ever seen to prominent and powerful positions. And the MAGAs have their hair on fire about trans people and Black college professors. Never have I ever imagined that such a stupid mass of humans could exist in modern society.
Click to expand...
Look sperm burper. Stop trying to make things all about "race" when in really all comes down to one thing. Gay people are useless, trannies are useless. In other words, you are useless. Makes you feel like a real democrat using the N word though....right??? Fucking loser.
 
Phantasmal said:
There’s a reason they call him Stephen “Goebbels” Miller on social media.
Click to expand...
R.b5a35405e2bd9bf34c08a44e8be5391b
 
T. A. Gardner said:
R.b5a35405e2bd9bf34c08a44e8be5391b
Click to expand...
Ruh roh. Troof make you big mad? Stephen Miller is a card carrying Nazi. Be better.

www.splcenter.org

Stephen Miller’s Affinity for White Nationalism Revealed in Leaked Emails

In the run-up to the 2016 election, White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller promoted white nationalist literature, pushed racist immigration stories and obsessed over the loss of Confederate symbols after Dylann Roof’s murderous rampage, according to leaked emails reviewed by Hatewatch.
www.splcenter.org www.splcenter.org


www.gq.com

There's Nothing Controversial About Calling Stephen Miller What He Is

Ilhan Omar was right in calling the far-right White House senior policy adviser a "white nationalist."
www.gq.com www.gq.com
 

Stephen Miller Is an Immigration Hypocrite. I Know Because I’m His Uncle.​

If my nephew’s ideas on immigration had been in force a century ago, our family would have been wiped out.


It begins at the turn of the 20th century, in a dirt-floor shack in the village of Antopol, a shtetl of subsistence farmers in what is now Belarus. Beset by violent anti-Jewish pogroms and forced childhood conscription in the Czar’s army, the patriarch of the shack, Wolf-Leib Glosser, fled a village where his forebears had lived for centuries and took his chances in America.


He set foot on Ellis Island on January 7, 1903, with $8 to his name. Though fluent in Polish, Russian and Yiddish, he understood no English. An elder son, Nathan, soon followed. By street corner peddling and sweatshop toil, Wolf-Leib and Nathan sent enough money home to pay off debts and buy the immediate family’s passage to America in 1906. That group included young Sam Glosser, who with his family settled in the western Pennsylvania city of Johnstown, a booming coal and steel town that was a magnet for other hardworking immigrants. The Glosser family quickly progressed from selling goods from a horse and wagon to owning a haberdashery in Johnstown run by Nathan and Wolf-Leib to a chain of supermarkets and discount department stores run by my grandfather, Sam, and the next generation of Glossers, including my dad, Izzy. It was big enough to be listed on the AMEX stock exchange and employed thousands of people over time. In the span of some 80 years and five decades, this family emerged from poverty in a hostile country to become a prosperous, educated clan of merchants, scholars, professionals, and, most important, American citizens.

What does this classically American tale have to do with Stephen Miller? Well, Izzy Glosser is his maternal grandfather, and Stephen’s mother, Miriam, is my sister.

I have watched with dismay and increasing horror as my nephew, an educated man who is well aware of his heritage, has become the architect of immigration policies that repudiate the very foundation of our family’s life in this country.

I shudder at the thought of what would have become of the Glossers had the same policies Stephen so coolly espouses— the travel ban, the radical decrease in refugees, the separation of children from their parents, and even talk of limiting citizenship for legal immigrants — been in effect when Wolf-Leib made his desperate bid for freedom. The Glossers came to the U.S. just a few years before the fear and prejudice of the “America first” nativists of the day closed U.S. borders to Jewish refugees. Had Wolf-Leib waited, his family likely would have been murdered by the Nazis along with all but seven of the 2,000 Jews who remained in Antopol. I would encourage Stephen to ask himself if the chanting, torch-bearing Nazis of Charlottesville, whose support his boss seems to court so cavalierly, do not envision a similar fate for him.


 
NakedHunterBiden said:

Trump's plan to dismantle DEI on day one is a "colorblind" path to Jim Crow 2.0​

Stephen Miller makes clear the subtext behind Trump’s call to ban DEI​


www.salon.com

Trump's plan to dismantle DEI on day one is a "colorblind" path to Jim Crow 2.0

Stephen Miller makes clear the subtext behind Trump’s call to ban DEI
www.salon.com www.salon.com

The claim that DEI initiatives unfairly disadvantage white Americans is not only false but dangerously misleading. U.S. institutions—from housing to education—have systematically excluded Black Americans and other people of color for generations, creating barriers that persist today. Programs like the GI Bill, celebrated as America’s first “color-blind” policy, ostensibly extended benefits to all veterans. Yet in practice, Black veterans were excluded from the housing loan benefits that white veterans used to build generational wealth. This exclusion laid the foundation for the racial wealth gap that still endures: Black Americans, on average, hold a fraction of the wealth of white Americans.

Today, DEI initiatives aim to address these inequities, but Trump and his allies, including Christopher Rufo, the architect of the “critical race theory” panic, frame these programs as preferential treatment. They claim DEI promotes “unqualified” Black professionals and other people of color, while advocating for a so-called “color blind” meritocracy. This narrative mirrors historical efforts to disguise exclusion as neutrality and is built on a lie.

According to a McKinsey & Company study, Black Americans are currently one to three centuries away from achieving employment and economic parity with their white counterparts without targeted interventions. Is the goal to extend that gap by a millennium? Far from privileging people of color, DEI initiatives and policies like affirmative action have barely pried open a crack in the doors of opportunity. These programs are not about elevating the “unqualified” but about dismantling the structural barriers that perpetuate inequality.

Miller has gone from theory to action in his role with America First Legal, amplifying the myth of reverse discrimination. He has targeted institutions like Northwestern University and NASCAR with lawsuits and complaints, alleging that DEI initiatives marginalize white men. But the data tells a starkly different story. According to an article in USA Today, about the EEOC complaint Miller brought against NASCAR, Miller alleged that NASCAR, one of the least diverse sports, was discriminating against white men because it had a program to increase the diversity of the pit crew. According to the article, NASCAR has just one Black driver in its premier Cup Series and five Black pit crew members out of more than 300. So, would fairness be zero? Miller’s narrative is a deliberate attempt to weaponize “colorblindness” and allegations of reverse discrimination to dismantle programs fostering equity.

Related

What Donald Trump's revenge agenda is hiding
Trump’s agenda doesn’t just aim to dismantle DEI—it seeks to, like the Plessy Court and the Roberts Court, delegitimize the very idea that systemic racism exists. This tactic is part of a long historical pattern. In 1866, President Andrew Johnson vetoed the Civil Rights Act, arguing it unfairly advantaged Black Americans over whites and articulated what could be called the first reverse discrimination argument. Trump’s strategy follows the same playbook, updated for today’s political landscape. Today systemic racism often operates through policies and practices designed by what I call the “hidden hand” to appear race-neutral or by obscuring the role race has played, such as in the racial wealth gap, to reframe the narrative while maintaining white dominance. Nicholas Confessore’s investigative reporting in The New York Times exposed a coordinated effort by the “hidden hand” to dismantle DEI initiatives under the pretext of combating “anti-white bigotry.”

For Black professionals, the stakes could not be higher. DEI and anti-discrimination policies provide critical frameworks for addressing microaggressions, bias, and systemic inequities in the workplace. Highly qualified Black professionals with skills, education and ability still find themselves un and underemployed. Without these programs, workplaces risk reverting to environments where equity is not even an afterthought. The consequences extend beyond individuals. Dismantling DEI stifles innovation, alienates diverse consumer bases, and undermines the ability of organizations to compete in an increasingly global and diverse economy.

The fight against this “color-blind” agenda requires collective action. Corporations have both the responsibility and the tools to resist. Businesses have the right to require workplace education and hiring practices that support competitiveness in the market. Government overreach into these areas, if properly framed, could be challenged in court, with lower courts and the Supreme Court potentially drawing the line on infringement of corporate autonomy.

By doubling down on DEI efforts, challenging systemic inequities, and advocating for policies that advance inclusion, companies can push back against the erosion of civil rights and lay the foundation for a more equitable future. Trump’s attack on DEI is not just a rollback of policy, it is a test of our national commitment to equity and justice. The stakes could not be higher.
Click to expand...
Tough shit,...you lost. Elections have consequences,.......CRY HARDER!

:pussyhat: :yayaseesathreadban::magagrin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top