Do not submit to DEI and other imposed nonsense. DEI means Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. However, we shall see this is deceitful, and indeed it is rooted specifically in the word Equity rather than Equality. There is a major difference and demonstrates how this is worded in such a way to be intentionally misleading:
Equality means treating everyone the same, irrespective of their status or identity.
Equity means treating people differently based on specific presumed needs.
When properly comprehending this fact, one finds that discrimination is baked into the wording, and indeed, "equity" can be used in a variety of ways that makes it that much more manipulative. For example, it can be applied instead to mean "financing or property values." It is also used in reference to various shares and investments wherein people are merely a "resource" used to gain a specific financial bottom line (not unlike treating people as properties or commodities themselves).
DEI and any other non-profit organization, that utilizes such status to push political agendas are actually in volition of the laws around such non-profits registered with the IRS. The rule, introduced by former President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1954 when he was serving as the Senate Majority Leader, bans all tax-exempt organizations like churches and charities from “directly or indirectly” participating in politics, specifically in endorsement or opposition of candidates. It has become known as the Johnson Amendment. The Restrictions are cited HERE.
Hire based on ability, not on checking boxes. Hire based on skills, not on identity politics. Hire based on the content of character, not on complexion.
From the start, DEI is more biased and frankly illegal for many reasons. It imposes policy in place of law and promotes more discrimination than it prevents.
It is claimed that DEI promotes fairness and inclusivity and operates within the bounds of existing laws aimed at preventing discrimination. In practice, it is a foolish construct and nothing more than a fraudulent pitch.
Unfortunately, you cannot legislate away discrimination.
The mention of 'existing laws' demonstrates the lack of necessity and the absurdity of DEI and related claims. Since the Civil Rights movement in the 1970s, we have had anti-discrimination laws that are enforced. When reported, individuals, parties, or businesses face fines, and people lose their jobs; as indeed they should.
Here are some specific anti-discrimination laws in hiring that further demonstrates how useless DEI truly is:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA): Protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA): Protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): Prohibits employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Prohibits discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government.
Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA): Prohibits employment discrimination based on genetic information about an applicant, employee, or former employee.
Civil Rights Act of 1991: Provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination.
These laws are enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which also provides oversight and coordination of all federal equal employment opportunity regulations, practices, and policies.
DEI practices have violated several existing anti-discrimination laws, including:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. DEI practices that prioritize hiring based on these characteristics rather than merit are by default, when choosing to prefer one over another, automatically becomes discriminatory.
Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA): Protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination. DEI practices that result in unequal pay based on gender can violate this law by failure to recognize male or female persons as realities.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA): Protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older from employment discrimination. DEI practices often favor unskilled younger employees over skilled older ones which is discriminatory.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): Prohibits employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities. DEI practices do not properly accommodate individuals with disabilities and put others at risk by not considering the particular disabilities in relation to the type of employment where such disabilities pose a health and safety risk to disabled and non-disabled persons.
Civil Rights Act of 1991: Provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination. DEI practices that result in intentional discrimination can be subject to penalties under this law; however, DEI programs often seek to circumvent this by claiming "reverse discrimination" failing to see the only reverse of discrimination is non-discrimination.
These laws are enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which ensures that employment practices comply with federal anti-discrimination laws.
DEI is about checking boxes, not checking credentials. That's the problem. Because of this, we have seen companies and businesses across the board suffer due to DEI hiring practices, rather than actual job qualifications.
Additionally, DEI programs often lead to tokenism, where individuals are hired or promoted to meet diversity quotas rather than based on their qualifications. This can result in resentment among employees and undermine team cohesion and morale.
Furthermore, DEI initiatives have created a paranoid culture of fear, where employees are afraid to speak out against perceived injustices or biases for fear of being labeled as discriminatory or prejudiced.
DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives can sometimes have unintended negative impacts on work safety and contribute to hostile work environments. Here are some ways this can happen:
Compromised Safety Standards: When hiring and promotion decisions prioritize diversity over qualifications and experience, it can lead to the placement of less qualified individuals in critical safety roles. This can compromise overall workplace safety and efficiency.
Hostile Work Environment: DEI programs can sometimes create a hostile work environment for employees who feel they are being unfairly treated or discriminated against due to these initiatives. For example, some employees may feel that DEI programs promote anti-White bias or other forms of discrimination, leading to legal claims and workplace tension.
Tokenism and Resentment: DEI initiatives that focus on meeting diversity quotas rather than hiring based on merit can lead to tokenism. This can result in resentment among employees who feel that their colleagues were hired or promoted based on their identity rather than their skills and qualifications. Such resentment can undermine team cohesion and morale.
Fear of Speaking Out: Employees may be afraid to speak out against perceived injustices or biases within DEI programs for fear of being labeled as discriminatory or prejudiced. This can create a culture of fear and silence, where legitimate concerns about workplace practices are not addressed.
Legal Challenges: DEI programs can lead to legal challenges if they are perceived as discriminatory. For example, there have been cases where employees have filed lawsuits claiming that DEI initiatives created a hostile work environment or led to unfair treatment based on race or other protected characteristics4.
DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives can potentially violate the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution in several ways:
First Amendment: DEI programs can infringe on free speech by creating an environment where employees feel pressured to conform to specific viewpoints or risk being labeled as discriminatory. This can stifle open dialogue and critical thinking, which are essential for a healthy and productive work environment.
Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment: DEI initiatives that prioritize hiring based on race, gender, or other identity factors rather than merit can be seen as discriminatory. The Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard emphasized that government entities cannot use race as a stereotype, aligning with previous rulings that racial stereotyping undermines individual dignity and societal progress.
Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments: DEI practices that result in unfair treatment or discrimination against individuals based on their identity can violate the due process rights of those individuals. This includes situations where employees are denied opportunities or face adverse actions due to DEI policies.
These constitutional concerns highlight the need for careful the discontinuation of DEI programs or similar policies to ensure they promote the already inclusive and diverse culture of the United States of America and protect all born and raised as well as naturalized citizens without violating individual rights.
How DEI programs align with Marxism, communism and socialism and why these are incompatible with American values and the constitution.
DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs can be seen as aligning with Marxist, communist, and socialist ideologies in several ways:
Marxist Roots: DEI initiatives often emphasize the redistribution of opportunities and resources to achieve equity, which aligns with the Marxist principle of redistributing wealth and power to create a classless society. This focus on equity over equality can be seen as a contemporary and managerial repackaging of socialism1.
Communist Ideals: DEI programs aim to dismantle existing power structures and promote a more inclusive and equitable society. This aligns with communist ideals of creating a society where everyone has equal access to resources and opportunities, regardless of their background.
Socialist Principles: DEI initiatives often involve government intervention and regulation to ensure that marginalized groups are given equal opportunities. This aligns with socialist principles of using state power to achieve social and economic equality.
However, these ideologies can be seen as incompatible with American values and the Constitution for several reasons:
Individual Merit and Hard Work: American values emphasize individual merit, hard work, and personal responsibility. DEI programs that prioritize identity over merit can undermine these values by promoting a culture of entitlement rather than one of achievement.
Equal Protection Under the Law: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that all individuals are treated equally under the law. DEI programs that prioritize certain groups over others based on identity can be seen as violating this principle.
Freedom of Speech: The First Amendment protects the freedom of speech, including the right to express dissenting opinions. DEI programs that create an environment where employees feel pressured to conform to specific viewpoints can infringe on this right.
Due Process: The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee due process rights, ensuring that individuals are treated fairly and justly. DEI practices that result in unfair treatment or discrimination based on identity can violate these rights.
DEI programs aim to promote alignments with Marxist, communist, and socialist ideologies can be seen as incompatible with American values of individual merit, equal protection under the law, freedom of speech, and due process. We can also consider the specific problems with Marxism, Communism and Socialism which also demonstrates this ideology being DEI and other programs designed to undermine and rot America from within.
Marxism:
Lack of Revolution: Marx predicted a proletarian revolution that would overthrow capitalism, but this has not occurred as he envisioned.
Economic Inefficiency: Marxism can lead to economic inefficiency due to the lack of incentives for innovation and productivity.
Class Struggle: The emphasis on class struggle can create social unrest and division.
Centralized Control: Centralized control of resources can lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies and corruption.
Communism:
Individual Rights are Restricted: Communism often restricts individual freedoms and rights in favor of collective goals.
Economic Stagnation: The lack of competition and incentives can lead to economic stagnation and inefficiency.
Authoritarianism: Communist regimes often become authoritarian, suppressing dissent and controlling many aspects of life.
Resource Allocation: Centralized control of resources can lead to misallocation and shortages.
Socialism:
Reduced Incentives: Socialism can reduce incentives for individuals to work hard and innovate, leading to economic inefficiency.
Bureaucratic Inefficiency: The extensive government control and regulation can lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies.
Tax Burden: High taxes required to fund social programs can be a burden on individuals and businesses.
Limited Personal Freedom: Socialism can limit personal freedom by imposing government control over many aspects of life.
Capitalism:
Capitalism, unlike DEI based imposed ideologies derived from Marxism, Communism and Socialism, supports a stable Democratic Republic in several ways:
Economic Freedom: Capitalism promotes economic freedom, allowing individuals to make their own choices about what to produce, buy, and sell. This economic freedom is closely linked to political freedom, as it empowers individuals to pursue their own interests and reduces the power of the state over their lives.
Incentives for Innovation: Capitalism provides strong incentives for innovation and entrepreneurship. This leads to economic growth and prosperity, which in turn supports a stable and thriving democratic society.
Decentralized Power: In a capitalist system, economic power is decentralized among many individuals and businesses rather than concentrated in the hands of the state. This decentralization of power helps to prevent the rise of authoritarianism and supports the principles of a democratic republic.
Protection of Property Rights: Capitalism is based on the protection of private property rights, which are essential for individual freedom and economic stability. These rights are enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and are fundamental to the functioning of a democratic republic.
In contrast, Marxism, Communism, and Socialism can undermine a stable democratic republic in several ways:
Centralized Control: These ideologies often involve centralized control of the economy and resources by the state. This concentration of power can lead to authoritarianism and the erosion of individual freedoms.
Suppression of Dissent: Marxist, communist, and socialist regimes often suppress dissent and limit freedom of speech to maintain control. This undermines the democratic principles of open dialogue and free expression.
Economic Inefficiency: The lack of competition and incentives in these systems can lead to economic inefficiency and stagnation. This can result in economic instability and social unrest, which are detrimental to a stable democratic republic.
Erosion of Property Rights: These ideologies often involve the redistribution of wealth and resources, which can undermine property rights and lead to economic uncertainty. This erosion of property rights is incompatible with the principles of a democratic republic.
By promoting economic freedom, innovation, decentralized power, and the protection of property rights, capitalism supports the stability and prosperity of a democratic republic. In contrast, the centralization of power, suppression of dissent, economic inefficiency, and erosion of property rights associated with Marxism, Communism, and Socialism can undermine these principles and threaten the stability of a democratic society.
DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) programs can be seen as incompatible with Capitalism and a Democratic Republic for several reasons:
Economic Efficiency: Capitalism thrives on competition and merit-based hiring, which drive innovation and productivity. DEI programs that prioritize identity over qualifications can undermine this efficiency by placing less qualified individuals in critical roles, leading to economic inefficiency and reduced competitiveness.
Individual Merit and Hard Work: American values emphasize individual merit, hard work, and personal responsibility. DEI programs that prioritize identity over merit can undermine these values by promoting a culture of entitlement rather than one of achievement.
Decentralized Power: In a capitalist system, economic power is decentralized among many individuals and businesses rather than concentrated in the hands of the state. DEI programs that impose centralized control over hiring and promotion decisions can undermine this decentralization of power.
Protection of Property Rights: Capitalism is based on the protection of private property rights, which are essential for individual freedom and economic stability. DEI programs that involve the redistribution of opportunities based on identity rather than merit can undermine these property rights.
Freedom of Speech: The First Amendment protects the freedom of speech, including the right to express dissenting opinions. DEI programs that create an environment where employees feel pressured to conform to specific viewpoints can infringe on this right.
Equal Protection Under the Law: The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that all individuals are treated equally under the law. DEI programs that prioritize certain groups over others based on identity can be seen as violating this principle.
Due Process: The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee due process rights, ensuring that individuals are treated fairly and justly. DEI practices that result in unfair treatment or discrimination based on identity can violate these rights.
By promoting economic freedom, innovation, decentralized power, and the protection of property rights, capitalism supports the stability and prosperity of a democratic republic. In contrast, the centralization of power, suppression of dissent, economic inefficiency, and erosion of property rights associated with DEI programs can undermine these principles and threaten the stability of a democratic society.
DEI ideology is rooted in its own culture of bigotry. The fact that those pushing DEI continue to silence logical, rational, factual, and demonstrable problems with DEI shows that it is far removed from anything truly democratic and unbiased.
DEI ideology can indeed be seen as fostering its own form of bigotry. By prioritizing diversity quotas over merit, it can create an environment where individuals are judged based on their identity rather than their abilities. This can lead to resentment and division within the workplace, undermining team cohesion and morale.
Moreover, DEI initiatives can sometimes silence dissenting voices, labeling them as discriminatory or prejudiced. These stifle open dialogue and critical thinking, which are essential for a healthy and productive work environment. Instead of promoting true inclusivity, DEI programs can inadvertently create a culture of fear and conformity.
It's crucial to focus on merit and ability, ensuring that hiring and promotion decisions are based on qualifications and performance rather than superficial characteristics. This approach fosters a more equitable and effective workplace, where everyone has the opportunity to succeed based on their skills and contributions.
Return to a culture of merit and ability, not a culture of superficial nonsense, imposed dictatorships, and tyrannical socialist or communist rhetoric. Only then can we show true humanitarianism, compassion, and a grassroots effort to improve the economy."