205
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Diversity initiatives would be defunded or banned from universities and other public institutions under a slate of bills pending in Republican-led legislatures, with some lawmakers counting on the issue resonating with voters in this election year.

Already this year, Republican lawmakers have proposed about 50 bills in 20 states that would restrict initiatives on diversity, equity and inclusion — known as DEI — or require their public disclosure, according to an Associated Press analysis using the bill-tracking software Plural.

This is the second year Republican-led state governments have targeted DEI. This year’s bills, as well as executive orders and internal agency directives, again focus heavily on higher education. But the legislation also would limit DEI in K-12 schools, state government, contracting and pension investments. Some bills would bar financial institutions from discriminating against those who refuse to participate in DEI programs.

Meanwhile, Democrats have filed about two dozen bills in 11 states that would require or promote DEI initiatives. The bills cover a broad spectrum, including measures to reverse Florida’s recent ban on DEI in higher education and measures to require DEI considerations in K-12 school curricula in Washington state.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Keep in mind that there have always been (and still are) people in the hiring process making decisions on biased metrics like "women can't work as hard" or "black people might steal". There is already a thumb on the scale, DEI just rebalances the scale.

[-] testfactor@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

But surely the correct solution is to remove bias altogether rather than replacing non-codified past bias with codified future bias, right?

Like, surely we should be trying to eliminate bias completely?

I'm sympathetic to those arguments that equality is not the same as equity, and that in some cases some form of reparation needs to be made to account for past bias. The issue is that, if that's the line you take here, then you are in fact doing what the Republicans claim, and putting less qualified people into positions that could have major impacts on the lives of other people.

And maybe your stance is that that's fine, and it's not that big a deal to hire less qualified candidates if it helps fix systematic racial issues. But I think then that what the Republicans are claiming is in fact just true, and they are probably right that most Americans will find that unpalatable.

[-] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

You can't remove people's negative bias by passing laws. You can only limit the damage done by these biases.

Part of the argument here is that diversity itself has value, so that all other things equal the diverse choice is superior not just as a reparation but functionally as well.

this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
205 points (99.0% liked)

News

23320 readers
2279 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS