← Back to context

Comment by handoflixue

2 months ago

You're asking the wrong person there. "Both" concedes that it was "DEI"

But to actually answer the question: while it can absolutely be both, you need to provide proof of the additional claim. "People cheated for DEI reasons" and "People cheated for cronyism reasons" are two separate claims. The article provides plenty of evidence for the former and not much for the latter.

What do you consider cronyism except ‘members of this organization share cheats and get each other in’?

  • "Cronyism (noun, derogatory): the appointment of friends and associates to positions of authority, without proper regard to their qualifications."

    Cronyism is advancing the interests of your personal connections. Friends and family. If you want an explicit cutoff, the Dunbar Number suggests this group should have 100, maybe 150 people in it.

    Conversely, there's 40 million black people in the US, and I really doubt anyone is even associated with all of them, much less calling them one of their friends.

    You can change who you're friends with a lot easier than you can change your skin color, so the two result in different problems. They're both bad, of course. Similar to how "wage theft" and "shoplifting" are different crimes, even though both of them involve taking money from someone else.

    • Associates. You know like people who literally belong (aka associate) to the same organization?

      Only hiring people who belong to the same fraternity is also cronyism, and is the same problem.

      In this case, a criteria for joining this ‘fraternity’ is the color of their skin.

      Hence double applicable with DEI.

      Why do you keep insisting on ignoring half of what you are pasting?

      3 replies →