A certain demographic of people just love throwing around ‘DEI = DIDN’T EARN IT’, but that is just wrong. It’s almost horrifying to see how many people are this uneducated and unwilling to do research on a topic before they just spew misinformation.
The true purpose of DEI.
The true meaning of DEI is Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. All it seeks to do is promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, especially groups who are underrepresented. In the context of job opportunity, employers look beyond the usual people they employ, and search for people who are qualified, but not hired because of their ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation.
Key word: QUALIFIED.
The belief that racism does not still exist in modern-day America is simply incorrect, because if that were true, DEI wouldn’t need to be set up in the first place. The system was set up to make sure people are not discriminated on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation. Overall, it favors merit, not hiring inexperienced people based on who they are.
Legacy Admissions, the true ‘Didn’t Earn It’
When I asked someone who genuinely thought DEI was giving people positions based on their ethnicity, gender, or sexual orientation what they thought DEI meant, they replied with, “It means giving unqualified people a bump ahead just because of who they are. No experience, no qualifications. It takes away jobs from qualified people.”
This reminded me of something, Legacy Admissions to colleges. The idea of giving the children of alumni special consideration matches the description of DEI I had the individual describe to me. When I asked the individual, “Do you think Legacy Admissions are something that fits the description of what you just outlined to me?” they replied with, “No.”
The hypocrisy, but to be honest, I’m not surprised. These people truly do not know what DEI means, and it pains me to see people who refuse to educate themselves because they are convinced they know everything.
People who seem to dislike DEI fit a certain criteria: homophobic, racist, and jealous.
I asked a variety of other people what they thought of DEI. For those of which the same wrong definition of DEI kept coming back, they seemed to all have three things in common. Homophobic, racist, and jealous.
These people just seemed to believe that the whole purpose of DEI was to ‘give underqualified people positions of power.’ That is blatantly wrong. To me, this whole definition of DEI is rooted in hate.
Giving unqualified people things over people who are qualified definitely does happen, but not under the true context of DEI. Historically, rich white people were given the upper hand at positions over extremely experienced people who were not white. This still happens today, but under DEI, did not happen as frequently.
I guess this criteria of people are angry they don’t get free bump-ups anymore, and things are fair.
The incorrect claim that LAFD Chief Kristine Crowley was an instance of ‘Didn’t Earn It.’
The California wildfires reignited claims about the LAFD Chief’s ‘inability’ to lead a fire department due to her response to the wildfires in Southern California this January. Most of these claims were attacking Chief Kristine Crowley on the basis of sex and race. But, have the people attacking Crowley switched on their brains for one second during the formation of their arguments? Probably not, as to be a firefighter, you must pass training and academy. To be a fire chief especially, means you must be a top performer of your region.
Another claim was that the LAFD was not able to fight LA wildfires because of DEI employment. The fire chief did use DEI initiatives while searching for recruits, but all this meant was again, looking for people who are not usually hired, but qualified. Representation matters. It is important for young people to see people like them in spaces like this so they know that it is possible.
I hope people crying ‘Didn’t Earn It’ know that firefighters have to go through basic training and academy and if they don’t pass, they’re not hired. So hiring people who are not qualified is basically impossible.
Kamala Harris was not a ‘DEI nomination’ that doesn’t even remotely make sense.
The California wildfires are not the only instance of a certain group of people screaming and crying DEI. Would you believe that people are claiming Kamala Harris, the Democratic Nominee for President and 49th Vice-President of the United States was a ‘DEI nomination’? I couldn’t, but of course, it happened.
Apparently, some people did not know that to get the presidential nomination, you have to get votes from delegates of the party you wish to run under to get approved. So, Harris getting the nomination based on her sex or race is just untrue, she wasn’t appointed, she was elected, by over 4,000 delegates. 4,000 delegates is 99% of the Democratic Party.
Adding on, Kamala Harris factually had more experience than her opponent, Donald Trump. Harris has triple (nearly quadruple) the experience in elected public offices than Donald Trump.
Harris had served in government positions for 21 years before she became the Democratic nominee. She served as the District Attorney of San Francisco, Attorney General of California, Senator of California, and ultimately, the Vice President of the United States. And Trump? Before he became the Republican nominee for the first time in 2016, he had zero years of experience in any elected public office.
That seems pretty, ‘Didn’t Earn It’ to me, doesn’t it? I mean, he had no experience, and somehow, he ended up the Republican nominee for President of the United States. Doesn’t that sound familiar to you? I’m getting reminded of the arguments that pro-Trump people made when defending their choice of Trump for President, especially when attacking Harris for being a ‘DEI candidate.’
Moral of the story, in this day and age, it’s easy to get educated. It’s quite embarrassing to see people who are in total belief of misinformation. Do your research before you end up looking stupid.
