15
Trump admin ends protected status for Somalis amid Minneapolis crackdown
(www.politico.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2026
15 points (100.0% liked)
politics
28210 readers
794 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If you think the cream rises to the top by itself, despite any obstacles, then you would also think that it would be impossible for someone to get a job based on being a minority. If cream naturally rises to the top regardless, like a force of nature, then making people not hire folks based on race would be a non-issue.
So why get mad about it?
So you're saying hiring based on race instead of qualification isn't a problem?
Yeah, I'm saying it is.
What I'm also saying is that the government and mainstream media have lied to you about people trying to fix it.
All that affirmative action, DEI stuff? If you actually look at it, and look how it's been used and the effects it's had, it's not been what they say it is.
It's not letting some unqualified person get a job, it's making sure the qualified person gets the job without the old bigotry getting in the way of a college application or a new job, for any race, even white people.
But there's people who do everything they can to talk shit about the law, because they benefit from talking shit about it and people benefit from being able to discriminate.
They get the clicks, the views, and the donations just by saying "oooo that DEI is bad, gonna put a black lesbian in charge of a surgery" because there's people who are racist assholes who love to hate stuff like that and could never imagine a black lesbian actually being a qualified surgeon, and then there's not racist people who just want everyone to get a fair chance at competition and think that it's getting in the way of that.
And then some Democrats lump the two together, pushing the more reasonable people in with the bigots, to the point that if anyone has any concerns with affirmative action gets yelled at.
You're free to believe that, but that's not what actually happens IRL. How it really works is that someone will look at the race and gender makeup of the team and if there aren't enough women or POC, they'll focus hiring a black lesbian, or a transgender Asian, or whatever else they can find, even if their qualifications don't quite hit the mark.
The point of DEI is to increase "diversity, equity, and inclusion", it's literally right there in the name. Do you see competence, excellence, or qualification in there anywhere? Me neither. And that's because that isn't what DEI is about.
Sorry man, you've been lied to. Those are the things bigots say to make white people scared and it's just not a thing that happens. Even if it did, you believe cream naturally rises and it's inevitable for it to do so, so why worry about it?
I don't think you have a problem with diversity, equity and inclusion, because you just described a problem DEI policies solve. If someone is passing over someone else because they aren't a minority, that's not DEI. DEI is for people who are in a majority, too, it's just bringing more voices to the table. So yeah, competence, excellence and qualifications aren't part of that acronym, because that's assumed and baked into the cake.
So you care about people being qualified for their job. What do you think people should do about things like, hiring unqualified white people over qualified black people, for example?
I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. You get more of what you measure, so if you measure diversity, you get more diversity. Any increase in quality will at best be accidental. In fact, it might very well get worse due cultural differences creating additional friction.
Simply hire the best qualified candidate, regardless of skin color. No DEI needed.
My friend, I think you have a disconnect with how you think the world should work, and how it actually operates. People are flawed, and sometimes people will hire folks that aren't the best candidate, because of stupid things like skin color. You even said this happens yourself a while ago.
In a perfect and sensible world, we wouldn't need DEI, but we don't live there.
So we have rules to try to fix that. Make everyone's starting line a little more equal so the cream rises without being hindered.