Well it is a little bit sad, they are still human beings. They have no control over where they were born and they are in a system that effectively makes it impossible for them to rebel while at the same time making it impossible for any one else to free them. It’s all around sad.
Puertorican here. You should know that Dominicans are not necessarily well liked here, so people don’t care as much as you’d think.
I use pages and keynotes actually, I just really really don’t like numbers. I used it for a while and I really couldn’t get used to it.
I did not know this. Will give it a try. Are formulas the same as in Excel? I really can’t be bothered to learn new formulas again and I need it to be 100% compatible with people working with office.
The UI, LibreOffice looks like it’s stuck in 2007, OnlyOffice has basically the same UI as Microsoft Office. I know that’s a negative for a lot of people but it’s what I’m used to already.
I’ve dropped Microsoft Office for OnlyOffice and so far I have no regrets. The one issues it has, on MacOS only, is that it does not support multiple windows. There is a workaround using the command line I believe. Otherwise it is very good and the formulas are basically 1:1 with Excel.
Well when I say you I do not mean you specifically I’m talking about anyone. I’m talking about the indefinite “you” as it were. I can see now how it would be misunderstood, my bad.
But I would argue that in your case that your belief that you are free from false beliefs in all your beliefs because you do not trust your feelings is proof of my assertion. I don’t think it’s possible for any person can make that claim unless they thoroughly dissected every single feeling they feel through the day every day. Sounds exhausting and impossible.
I’m not projecting anything. And I think your analogy is apt and does not really refute what I said. Someone could well believe with all their might that there’s a bridge and fall to their death. But the fact that they believed it so much that they tried to cross it against all reason means that to them the bridge was real. This is why I said “at the individual level”. Your truth is not the Truth, but it is still the truth for you until you somehow discover that your belief was wrong. Some never find out, others find out too late to reverse course and fall to their death.
I think you misread me. I meant that they do that because they are shitty corporations that act only in the interest of their profit and share price, therefore they would not have any qualms about dropping DEI if it was adverse to that goal. The fact that they keep these programs should be evidence enough that they believe it is either an asset or at worst as not having any effect either positive or negative. But given the overt hostility that the new administration is showing towards companies that keep DEI, I interpret the act of keeping the program as validation that they see it as an asset, enough that in their calculus it is worth more than potential threats to their profits like lawsuits or investigations or more openly violent attacks like targeted tariffs.
Well at the individual level, what you feel is your entire reality and none of us are free of that bias. Some politicians or leaders are better than others of taking this feeling and coalescing it into a narrative that drives you to action. The current wave of discontent can be very much be woven into a liberal or left wing (I really don’t like the terms right or left, they are mostly meaningless in current year) narrative that inspires action but instead liberals have become the agents of stagnation in a way and the people saw that, and being low information voters that they are, they chose the only alternative that was at least promising to change things in a big way. They (like always) just didn’t pay enough attention to the fine print to see what the big changes actually entailed.
If I applaud one thing about Trump is that more or less he’s delivering what he promised, albeit with total disregard for public order, safety or legality.
I wish you would better articulate what part of this you would like me to address because I believe the link I shared addressed this. Use words, or highlight the specific statement you’d like me to clarify.
Maybe I didn’t understand. For which comment do you want source on?
People downvote you but this is what I was talking about. It doesn’t really matter whether your situation was caused by DEI or not, what matters is that you feel that it happened partially because of DEI, which you wouldn’t if officially there was no DEI program. This is where he backlash is coming from, and people don’t see it because they are too focused on what it is on paper or how it is supposed to work.
Apple, Microsoft, Costco, and I don’t know if they are mentioned there but JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs too.
That sounds like a good and well thought out DEI program. But there are also DEI programs that were just quotas. I’m not saying they are the majority or even common but just one lends credence to the “it’s racism” narrative.
Yes, but I think this a bias reinforced by the same point I made above about education. All schools should be as equally good as possible, or at the very least they should be equally funded and have the same program etc. And then we should aim that schools are as diverse as possible.
It will not completely solve the issues, rural areas by their very nature will probably remain very white and very entrenched. But it would alleviate it a lot.
That brings me to another point, that I think no one has made to rural Americans. If they are being left behind and there’s a housing crisis, why the fuck are their politicians not running campaigns on using government money to fund industry and development in the huge amount of literally empty space there is in this country? We could build the European walkable cities dems dream so much about in the heart of America, and make it affordable too, at least at the beginning. I’ve thought about a lot and I think a plan to develop the economy of the heartland of America would be a good platform for a democratic candidate to run on and it could fit within all the trappings of a The “Golden Age” of America that people want. And it would be a national project, something we sorely need to unite us again.
Yes, but most things that are badly implemented in a work place don’t lead to people feeling resented and angry at society.
The backlash against DEI is at the individual level imo. How people feel is the reality, see the economy (which is also an attribute of using the wrong metrics to measure performance as it relates to the consumer but that is a different topic).
Let’s see if I can explain it: So let’s say you’re an average white guy, and you know your company has a DEI program. You feel like you work very hard, or at least as hard as everyone else in your workplace, but you see that your minority coworkers get promotions or that the new hire for a better paid position than yours is a minority you start to feel as though you’re getting passed over because of your identity. This could be because it is a diverse workplace and so the best people for the promotion may just happen to be of other races or women. It could also be actual racism which I’m sure happens but it’s probably very very rare. But that doesn’t matter, what matters is that you see people who are different from you getting promoted, and you don’t particularly feel they are better than you.
Then you maybe look a little bit into what the theory behind DEI is and you learn that it’s proponents argue that there is systemic favoritism towards white straight males which is why if you have two equally capable candidates but one is white and the other is a minority, you should choose the minority. As a straight white male you won’t feel (and frankly should not, I’m sorry) that you are responsible for your advantage in society, so what you’ll feel is that now you’re the disadvantage one and that DEI is just racism against white straight males. It isn’t but that doesn’t change how the individual feels.
My personal opinion is that DEI is more of a bandaid than a solution and some of the backlash is warranted. The real solution is for people to have equal opportunity at the lowest level, meaning education. There’s no reason for some schools to be better than others, and less for that difference to arise from the value of the houses in the schools district. Of course Trump and co will not fix it either because they campaigned on destroying the education system because they seemingly want a slave caste or something. But if everyone had equal access to good schools and colleges, I don’t think DEI as it is implemented in most orgs would be needed.
Edit: this was supposed to be a reply to @danc4498@lemmy.world
I commented this earlier but quite a few corps that tend to beat the market in returns have not abandoned DEI initiatives. These are corporations that will not bat an eye to plunge thousands into poverty or worse to save .007 cents on manufacturing costs. This tells you that they believe that DEI has some tangible value on their performance whether it’s through marketing opportunity or because their workforce is actually better.
But I think abandoning DEI for many companies is the right choice, as bad DEI is magnitudes worse than no DEI.
Yes, I’d just hate that people kind of forget that any war is inherently a human tragedy often not perpetuated by those fighting it.