I probably am, sorry.
I wouldn’t know.
If by “we” you mean people struggling with addiction, then I agree. I believe most people can overcome it. I also believe it is good to devote resources to this pursuit, but I don’t believe it is good to do so at the expense of public safety and prosperity.
If by “we” you mean the broader progressive movement that still clings to DEI ideology and various other ill-conceived social experiments, I have to disagree. They can and will win elections, but I don’t believe good outcomes for most people will follow. The day will not be won in any sense that matters to normal people. The day is now and always will be won when individuals go out and win it.
Winning the day might be finishing college for someone and it might be not shooting up for someone else. In either case the win still matters.
Mental illness and hard drug addiction strike me as accompanying each other, so it doesn’t particularly matter to me what term you use. Neither condition excuses destructive behavior.
Solving the personal problems of people wrapped up in a life of crime has never been the main point of having laws or enforcing them. The main point of having laws and enforcing them is to protect everyone else from the behavior of the person who is wrapped up in a life of crime.
Incarceration, for all of its flaws, has been shown to be very effective in sequestering violent and predatory people from those who are not. It has been shown to lead to increased safety and prosperity. NYC in the 1980’s is a great example. The secondary goal of incarceration is rehabilitation. That’s still an important goal, but in Maine at least we have lost the plot on this and put rehabilitation first, public safety and prosperity second.
DEI and affirmative action are another case of well-intentioned people losing the plot. Was the goal to congratulate ourselves on enacting and then preserving progressive social policies of the last 60 years? Or is the goal to continue the positive socioeconomic trends experienced by black Americans in the first 2/3’s of the 20th century?
If the latter remains the goal, we should punt the ball and run a different play that’s not drawn up by the DEI crowd.
1 Like
The University of Texas is joining MIT. An unofficial “Ivy” school, and in Austin no less. A veritable Portlandia island in Texas.
The article frames the issue as a negative as it’s an Austin publication and skewed, but I’m only posting for the DEI reversal, not the journalists commentary.
SB 17 mentioned in the article is a state wide bill banning DEI initiatives in Texas public universities. So we are moving from individual university policy to legal framework. It will be interesting to follow as challenges will be expected.
1 Like
As a UT Austin alum, I am extremely happy to see this but also really disappointed…WTF has the world come to with all this DEI nonsense you know? Who decided that accepting college kids based upon SAT/ACT scores, GPA were bad things? How and who does it help to have a doctor who took an easier final exam or didn’t meet the standard med school admission criteria, but instead he was still accepted based upon his physical appearance…or because he was the “oppressed” _____-American nationality?
This lowered standards for some based upon physical appearance is the beginning of the rapid decline of the American way of life. The very reasons that admissions criteria were established, or final exam scores were important, etc. was to ensure that all persons possessing those qualifications/credentials in his/her profession would be fully capable of carrying out their duties as a : surgeon, welder, architect, engineer, etc. I don’t think anybody would ever, ever say “well, my doctor who is going to replace my heart valve was allowed to take the revised final med school exam due to them being part of xyz racial group, culture, sexuality, but I have full faith and confidence in their ability…lets get to cutting me open!”
Liberal rejects ruin everything they touch
It’ll create the need for more regulation, like all of America’s good intentions laws “for” minorities. It helps the government/ultra-rich gain power. Also…keeps minorities on the plantation.
4 Likes
MIT made no DEI progress for years.
Auburn says they received more applications after their DEI program, but didn’t mention any hires.
Has a single institution come forward saying that their DEI program “worked”?
That is so horrible…and racist! Now how do they ever expect any minorities to be able to attend Auburn University?
Are they supposed to be granted admission solely on the basis of their standardized test scores, their class rank/GPA, and extracurriculars/sports? THAT is racist! How are all of those university students attending school now supposed to get all the numerous “benefits” from diversity? And what are all of those “DEI professionals” supposed to do now that their “skills” are no longer needed? How will they be able to get another job?
This is truly a sad, dark day. These poor university students are the ones who are going to truly suffer from now only having equally intelligent [or more intelligent] people surrounding them. But they will really have their development hindered by not experiencing the rich, high-achieving Kulture around them anymore. I expect the quality of students graduating from this fine university will be irreparably harmed.
1 Like
I think the important part is these DEI admin hires are still employed in other roles. I wonder if they will have new job titles but continue doing what they were originally hired to do. How does someone hired for a specific role suddenly become qualified for a different one? The other thing is, were these new positions they have slid into vacant or did they simply increase the number of people working those positions? Regardless, it does nothing to reduce admin bloat at the university.
Unis are little more than shitlib leftoid indoctrination factories anyway. These rejects have rude awakening coming in the real world
1 Like
I go to the University of Alabama, which has similarly eliminated its DEI department after the state made them illegal in public institutions.
In a public statement, the school said:
“Our mission has not wavered, and we remain committed to our institutional goals to welcome all, serve all and see all thrive and succeed. To that end, Dr. Christine Taylor [appointed in 2017 as Vice President and Associate Provost for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion] will lead the new Division of Opportunities, Connections and Success, an organization charged with promoting success for everyone in the UA community …
Opportunities – increasing access to higher education through heightened academic support and services to Alabama students and families with lower college attendance rates.
Connections – fostering campuswide initiatives on free speech and civil discourse.
Success – preparing students for the global workforce by enhancing skills and competencies sought by employers and by helping students and employees understand and effectively work with individuals from varying backgrounds.”
So yeah, it seems that they just changed the department’s name and became slightly less overt with buzzwords. In effect, very little will change.
Some. I left my state university more right-leaning then when I entered.
1 Like
And A Football National Championship?
I thought they would be doing that anyways, as an institution of higher learning, but I’m not much of an academic. 
so what do I know?
What was your recent experience like at college?
He beat, pepper sprayed, tazed and arrested some students.
3 Likes
With extreme prejudice.
I am seriously interested in how that happened lol.
When I went to college, eons ago, I played foosball with guys that thought Reagan getting elected meant the end of civilization. One guy had it whispered, behind his back, that his mom was (wiki says) -
“an American attorney, conservative activist, and anti-feminist who was nationally prominent in conservatism”. I remember being puzzled because he seemed like such a nice guy, and his best bud was Asian lol.
I’m curious what capacity they’re employed in. I would think most of them serve low level, administrative roles. If I remember right, MIT said DEI has not worked and they would be dissolving initiatives due to failure.