Diversity is a euphemism for not white and/or male. It's how to be racist while being immune to being called a racist. So naturally they use it to call us racists.
Even there, it wasn't the diversity of thought that was the source of benefit, it was there being a correct approach to different situations. One person who had the correct approach to all of those solutions would have been just as effective to, let's say, a crowd of 100 people, each right once in 100 different situations.
You could have a huge crowd of people, all who think in different, diverse ways... and it could be an insane asylum. Or you could have three people all from pretty similar backgrounds of training and schooling, and they constantly come to the same conclusions, and what do you know, these people with a "lack of diversity" are all physicists who every day delve into the mysteries of the universe.
What matters is simply being able to do the task at hand. Different thoughts is as superfluous as different skin colors. Accuracy is all that matters.
Yeah, it's supposed to result in diversity of thought, but how can you tell what someone's thinking by the color of their skin? That's the most racist thing ever. It's the same as a woman clutching her purse closer when she passes a black man on the street. What the diversity promoters really mean is they want someone who thinks the same as they do but looks different.
Oh really? Take a look at the current lineup of Dem candidates. They are everything they've been attacking the GOP for. The irony's on them. They're the real racists. The "switch" never happened. They've been subtle on this, but in the past few years Trump Derangement Syndrome drives them nuts. They're showing their true color.
The problem with that is middle eastern and latino are included in white for all statistics, including those on violence and gun crime. Separate that out into actually just white and the numbers become staggering ...
Even diversity of thought is sort of a garbage concept. For instance if I’m trying to work on a project of course I want people with different skill sets and talents but I want everyone to fundamentally agree as to the purpose of our project. Having a diverse set of opinions on what it is we are trying to accomplish would actually be a negative thing.
The FACT that the Dems/Libs/Progressives try to hide and falsify the results of their ideals, and also try to suppress and malign alternative thought, is EVIDENCE that their beliefs are all failures.
BLAH;BLAH
I know what your are saying and I agree; I would just make one semantic observation. It is not just 'diversity of thought'; it is 'open-participation', 'competitive-valuation', and 'merit-based promotion'.
I am only talking about the difference of 'equality of participation' and 'equality of standards' versus 'equality of outcome'. I believe what you are saying very specifically is 'equal access/participation' in the arena of ideals: meaning that no one is forcibly suppressed or prevented from expressing their opinion; combined with a 'competitive process' and a 'equal/fair standard of evaluation': meaning that they don't just all sit out their with equal coverage, but are compared, evaluated and judged.
For instance, I have no issue with Communism as an ideal being allowed to be presented by someone dumb enough to believe in it; but, it does not deserve and should not receive "equal" visibility, support, or whatever as Capitalism (which actually works).
I only make this distinction because of all the dumb-asses graduating with the belief that "equality" means everyone sharing the consequences of success or failure, and "freedom" only applies narrowly to the public sector not the private sector.
If a process limits the choices/options and/or obscures the results/consequences, the process and the outcome by it's nature are "unfair" and unJust.
The FACT that the Dems/Libs/Progressives try to hide and falsify the results of their ideals, and also try to suppress and malign alternative thought, is EVIDENCE that their beliefs are all failures.
The statement is an accurate statement. The problem is how they apply its meaning. Diversity is our strength because in order to accomplish the greatest man can offer, you need a diversity of knowledge that typically is unattainable for one individual. So you'd need several people with expertise in diverse subjects to really pull it all together. It doesn't mean you need an Arab, an Asian, an Hispanic and so on. It means you need a mathematician , an engineer, a chemist and so on...
And you need a black female police officers wearing exotic nail art and complex two foot tall cornrow structures atop their heads to bring a unique perspective to community policing and reduce homicides in Philadelphia.
Not hiring the best guy for the job because he's black or because he's a Republican is dumb. You just passed on the best guy. Having a variety of opinions, experiences, and philosophies at your disposal will help being a healthy organization. Some of the conflict, compromise, and discussion can lead to stronger solutions.
However, forced diversity is as stupid as racism. Hiring someone because of the color of his skin is just as stupid as refusing to hire someone because of the color of their skin.
It is also worth noting some philosophies are toxic and should be avoided because they will destroy your organization.
Unfortunately, diversity has become more of a buzzword and a political movement.
Diversity of thought, the one thing the far left lacks, is the real ‘diversity is our strength’
Diversity is a euphemism for not white and/or male. It's how to be racist while being immune to being called a racist. So naturally they use it to call us racists.
They've actually done studies on diversity to show the benefits.
But that was all diversity of thought so they just shorten that to "diversity" to confuse people.
Yeah, just one of the many ways the media uses propaganda on us.
Even there, it wasn't the diversity of thought that was the source of benefit, it was there being a correct approach to different situations. One person who had the correct approach to all of those solutions would have been just as effective to, let's say, a crowd of 100 people, each right once in 100 different situations.
You could have a huge crowd of people, all who think in different, diverse ways... and it could be an insane asylum. Or you could have three people all from pretty similar backgrounds of training and schooling, and they constantly come to the same conclusions, and what do you know, these people with a "lack of diversity" are all physicists who every day delve into the mysteries of the universe.
What matters is simply being able to do the task at hand. Different thoughts is as superfluous as different skin colors. Accuracy is all that matters.
Yeah, it's supposed to result in diversity of thought, but how can you tell what someone's thinking by the color of their skin? That's the most racist thing ever. It's the same as a woman clutching her purse closer when she passes a black man on the street. What the diversity promoters really mean is they want someone who thinks the same as they do but looks different.
Diversity = Straight White Males Not Welcome
Oh really? Take a look at the current lineup of Dem candidates. They are everything they've been attacking the GOP for. The irony's on them. They're the real racists. The "switch" never happened. They've been subtle on this, but in the past few years Trump Derangement Syndrome drives them nuts. They're showing their true color.
The problem with that is middle eastern and latino are included in white for all statistics, including those on violence and gun crime. Separate that out into actually just white and the numbers become staggering ...
Even diversity of thought is sort of a garbage concept. For instance if I’m trying to work on a project of course I want people with different skill sets and talents but I want everyone to fundamentally agree as to the purpose of our project. Having a diverse set of opinions on what it is we are trying to accomplish would actually be a negative thing.
Astute.
TL;DR
The FACT that the Dems/Libs/Progressives try to hide and falsify the results of their ideals, and also try to suppress and malign alternative thought, is EVIDENCE that their beliefs are all failures.
BLAH;BLAH
I know what your are saying and I agree; I would just make one semantic observation. It is not just 'diversity of thought'; it is 'open-participation', 'competitive-valuation', and 'merit-based promotion'.
I am only talking about the difference of 'equality of participation' and 'equality of standards' versus 'equality of outcome'. I believe what you are saying very specifically is 'equal access/participation' in the arena of ideals: meaning that no one is forcibly suppressed or prevented from expressing their opinion; combined with a 'competitive process' and a 'equal/fair standard of evaluation': meaning that they don't just all sit out their with equal coverage, but are compared, evaluated and judged.
For instance, I have no issue with Communism as an ideal being allowed to be presented by someone dumb enough to believe in it; but, it does not deserve and should not receive "equal" visibility, support, or whatever as Capitalism (which actually works).
I only make this distinction because of all the dumb-asses graduating with the belief that "equality" means everyone sharing the consequences of success or failure, and "freedom" only applies narrowly to the public sector not the private sector.
If a process limits the choices/options and/or obscures the results/consequences, the process and the outcome by it's nature are "unfair" and unJust.
The FACT that the Dems/Libs/Progressives try to hide and falsify the results of their ideals, and also try to suppress and malign alternative thought, is EVIDENCE that their beliefs are all failures.
The "believe in science" party does not believe in science - which is why I walked TF away from those assholes.
It's a platitude proclaimed by simple people that think the words sound good together. No thought goes into defining it.
war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.
Those people are parroting the term from globalist politicians that push this form of Marxism
It's how the cucked virtue signal to other cucks.
The statement is an accurate statement. The problem is how they apply its meaning. Diversity is our strength because in order to accomplish the greatest man can offer, you need a diversity of knowledge that typically is unattainable for one individual. So you'd need several people with expertise in diverse subjects to really pull it all together. It doesn't mean you need an Arab, an Asian, an Hispanic and so on. It means you need a mathematician , an engineer, a chemist and so on...
Diversity of thought is not allowed comrade.
And you need a black female police officers wearing exotic nail art and complex two foot tall cornrow structures atop their heads to bring a unique perspective to community policing and reduce homicides in Philadelphia.
Ooooof!!! Nice ???
It's one of those things like "Tariffs don't work" that just gets said forcefully as if saying it that way makes it true. Over and over.
"Muh wage gap"
“Diversity is our strength” I asked “why?”.
The only "answer" I ever got to that question is "You must be a Racist!"
Not hiring the best guy for the job because he's black or because he's a Republican is dumb. You just passed on the best guy. Having a variety of opinions, experiences, and philosophies at your disposal will help being a healthy organization. Some of the conflict, compromise, and discussion can lead to stronger solutions.
However, forced diversity is as stupid as racism. Hiring someone because of the color of his skin is just as stupid as refusing to hire someone because of the color of their skin.
It is also worth noting some philosophies are toxic and should be avoided because they will destroy your organization.
Unfortunately, diversity has become more of a buzzword and a political movement.
I think that it is so funny when leftists get pissed when you ask them "why?". They always seem offended that they have to explain themselves to you.
When you live by Might-Makes-Right a question like "Why" is seen as an attack.
Except they don't have might, and they certainly don't have right.