How did the Limited Govt party become the Authoritarian party?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

You should read the Tablet article, it’s not too long

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

That’s exactly how I feel about the everywhere all the time focus on DEI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Also, how is it racist not to focus on deaf people? Confusing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

This is, after all, the true university spirit: why bother working on issues that might be relevant to the world, better career move to become the leading expert on the foot fetishism of French soldiers in the War of 1812

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I used to thank god that we weren’t like other countries, that we wouldn’t have a group of jackboots show up and close our stores or universities, or ransack our homes, because of our democracy. But the governor of Florida just replaced everyone on staff and the curriculum with what he wanted. Came in and took it over, wiped everything out, replaced it all, because of his own political agenda.

Decades from now, students are going to be studying this era as a time when our country truly did hang on the precipice of losing our democracy. It really is frightening that so many people are rejoicing in this just because it matches their own personal views. But it doesn’t match half or more of the country’s views, which is why we have free speech in the constitution. This is supposed to be protected. I would feel the same way if it were in reverse and a liberal governor fired all of a college’s staff and completely took over because it was too conservative. It really is frightening what’s happening in parts of our country.

Hilarious. "Losing democracy" is posted by the group that wants to do a whole bunch of things convenient to their brand of "democracy" like:

Get rid of the filibuster when it's no longer convenient to them.
Pack the Supreme Court with more justices to get the decisions they want.
Add more states to overthrow tbe balance of power.
Make whole subjects "settled science" so they can longer be debated:
Change the system thru silicon valley censoring so discussion is killed off.
Abolish the electoral college to tip the scales in favor of population centers (that everyone is fleeing BTW).
Deny the minority party in the house the right to select its own committee members.

Enough with your "democracy" lectures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The GOP is the party of FEAR! They are weak cowards, punching at the weakest people they can find: undocumented immigrants, LGBTQ folk, transgender teens, poor women who can't afford another child, the disabled, the old, the the sick.

Pity them, but give them nothing, least of all respect.

I think of the DNC as using victimhood to gain and consolidate power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

They could just start researching on women’s bodies since that’s pretty much never done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

That’s exactly how I feel about the everywhere all the time focus on DEI

Then the right should stop spending so much time focusing on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I used to thank god that we weren’t like other countries, that we wouldn’t have a group of jackboots show up and close our stores or universities, or ransack our homes, because of our democracy. But the governor of Florida just replaced everyone on staff and the curriculum with what he wanted. Came in and took it over, wiped everything out, replaced it all, because of his own political agenda.

Decades from now, students are going to be studying this era as a time when our country truly did hang on the precipice of losing our democracy. It really is frightening that so many people are rejoicing in this just because it matches their own personal views. But it doesn’t match half or more of the country’s views, which is why we have free speech in the constitution. This is supposed to be protected. I would feel the same way if it were in reverse and a liberal governor fired all of a college’s staff and completely took over because it was too conservative. It really is frightening what’s happening in parts of our country.

Hilarious. "Losing democracy" is posted by the group that wants to do a whole bunch of things convenient to their brand of "democracy" like:

Get rid of the filibuster when it's no longer convenient to them. filibuster was created to give minority status more power in the senate in the Jim Crow era
Pack the Supreme Court with more justices to get the decisions they want.two supreme court seats were effectively stolen by the republicans
Add more states to overthrow tbe balance of power. showing you don't know why there is both a north dakota and a south dakota, for example
Make whole subjects "settled science" so they can longer be debated: there is no such thing as settled science, but there can be a consenus opinion based onfacts unless or until someone disproves a theory
Change the system thru silicon valley censoring so discussion is killed off.silicon valley is not the government, and further, most of the silicon valley titan are right wing nuts. See peter Theil and Mark Zuckerberg to name two
Abolish the electoral college to tip the scales in favor of population centers (that everyone is fleeing BTW).so instead we have sparsely populated state ruling control over the senate and a disparity of one man, one vote because of said disparity. Then lift the cap on the number of house seats so at least the House can be proportionate to the population.
Deny the minority party in the house the right to select its own committee members.I agree with you here, each party should choose their delegates to the committees

Enough with your "democracy" lectures.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

That’s exactly how I feel about the everywhere all the time focus on DEI

Then the right should stop spending so much time focusing on it.

I know you are but what am I
thank you for your contribution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

That’s exactly how I feel about the everywhere all the time focus on DEI

Then the right should stop spending so much time focusing on it.

Indeed they should. It's hilarious to see how the right goes on and on and on and on about this stuff, ad nauseam. They spend far more time and energy on it than anyone I know. Take for example how they go on about the "woke military" - yet just about anyone currently serving could tell you that in the last several years, they maybe only had a grand total of a half hour powerpoint on "DEI" - far less time than the right wingers have spent obsessing over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Remind me which political party wants every institution up to and including the federal government to have offices devoted to promoting a political ideology (DEI), along with all kinds of incoherent regulations and policies regarding same?

And which political party wants everyone to pretend that boys can turn into girls and vice versa? And will try to drum out of office or otherwise publicly shame anyone with who argues otherwise?

What’s that you were saying about authoritarians?

Neither of what you are describing is authoritarianism. It is a shame you don't understand what compassion and understanding are.

When university professors can’t get hired without signing statements affirming their ideological commitment to anti-racism in, you know, astrophysics or something - is that authoritarian yet, or still no?

When science projects can’t get funding unless they bend the knee to the same amorphous political principles - still not authoritarian?

how is agreeing not to be a racist "political"?

How would it be if all of said professors were of color, would it be ok for them to not hire asian or white colleagues because of their biases?

Those statements are absolutely not about “agreeing not to be a racist” - nice Motte & Bailey though!

Had you lived in East Germany, maybe you’d be scolding dissidents for complaining about loyalty oaths and whatnot - I mean, Communism’s just about equality! Why won’t you just say the words?

Anyway, when speech is compelled, it’s political

Agreeing not to be racist is not the same as pledging fealty to the state. Please provide an example of what you are referring to, because what you are suggesting is not the same as authoritarianism.

Funny you mention that, because I think it's actually illegal in the US to force people to pledge fealty to the state

However, it's legal to do this sort of thing: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/higher-ed-new-woke-loyalty-oaths-dei

And before you say harrumph, it's from Tablet, they're..... [conservative]! Yes, I tried to find coverage on the left, but man, it's hard! Anyway, there are lots of in-text citations.

A couple disquisitions on "authoritarianism": https://www.britannica.com/topic/authoritarianism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarianism

Seems to fit the definition quite nicely - rejection of pluralism and individual agency, "Political legitimacy is based upon appeals to emotion and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency" - and on an on.

You want to get the job, you want to get the promotion, well, bend the knee! And you better use the words our grifter consultants taught us so we know you're not faking! Doesn't matter if your work actually has anything to do with DEI, or if, God forbid, you think it's not the most important thing in the universe. If you want to feed your family, you better act like you do.

Does that sound like.... freedom? Or diversity?

People can get a different job or different employer. No one is forcing you to take that particular job. Boostraps and free country.

Tell that to liberal arts PhDs! World’s already got enough bartenders.

In the context of this thread, why would this statement even apply? The complaint was about physicists who were alleged to have to sign fealty to DEI or something something

Well, them too! Let's be inclusive.

Anyway, on that note, I will see your situational ethics and raise you.

Don't you worry that university DEI pledges might be sort of a back door for anti-Asian hate?

We have a lot of talented profs and researchers in the US who are of Chinese descent, and Chinese culture is racist as shit.

Shouldn't we exempt them from these pledges so we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater?

I don't want our country falling any further behind in the sciences than it already has.

Then you should be mad at the GOP who erodes public education and encourages companies to increase executive salaries and bonuses rather than invest in R&D

Sure, they suck too. What do you think of my idea about the DEI pledges?

It’s not a “DEI pledge”. It’s “how will you develop these things we want a prof to do. How will build your research team? How will you build your cohort of funders? How will you excel at teaching? How will you expand the outreach of your field so that we have more people wanting to be physicists (or whatever)? How will you fit into the universities strategic plan of increasing the number of kids coming to us from community college?” Or whatever. This is how professors are evaluated. Why wouldn’t they be? Not all of these factors will be strong in each candidate. Which is to be expected.

This is

+1
Research has been so grossly centered on the white, able-bodied, hearing, cis-gendered male for so long we don't even know how to treat heart attacks in women and the maternal death rate among black women is horrifically and embarrassingly high in this country. To name just a few. THAT's what they mean. Be INCLUSIVE. No, your research that's only focused on the white able bodied hearing cis gendered male won't be allowed here, because it's inherently racist. This isn't a difficult concept.

Shouldn’t nearly all research everywhere be centered on cis gendered people? Since they’re like 99%+ of the world?

Why keep researching the same crap that everyone else already researched to death?

That’s exactly how I feel about the everywhere all the time focus on DEI

Then the right should stop spending so much time focusing on it.

Indeed they should. It's hilarious to see how the right goes on and on and on and on about this stuff, ad nauseam. They spend far more time and energy on it than anyone I know. Take for example how they go on about the "woke military" - yet just about anyone currently serving could tell you that in the last several years, they maybe only had a grand total of a half hour powerpoint on "DEI" - far less time than the right wingers have spent obsessing over it.

Kind of like you go on about race, Trump and January 6th.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It really does boggle the mind. How did the party that strived for limited government for decades suddenly swing so far to being an authoritarian party that strives to impose its morale and political opinions onto everyone, across a spectrum of issues? And the blatant hypocrisy of demanding government stay out of their decisions and away from their bodies when it comes to their own personal beliefs, such as with vaccines, but demanding government interfere with people’s decisions and bodies when it comes to what they believe is right?

I used to be a moderate swing voter, and voted for Republicans just as much as Democrats over the years. But I just can’t vote Republican now, even though I may want their conservancy on some issues. I don’t trust them anymore not to suddenly take away rights just because that’s their own opinion, the hell with what anyone else thinks or what is democratic.

They were always authoritarian to some degree. People just excused it because society was more paternalistic and so it just seemed normal.

[Anonymous]