[knighthack]

Somehow an anti-DEI push is "ridiculous", but the prior pro-DEI push isn't?

There are those who were successful without merit, achieved renown/success only because they were DEI tokens.

Therefore if they didn't deserve their 'achievements' by the merits in the first place, there's nothing wrong with taking their stories down once the political climates have changed (especially a climate that encourages truth and merits over the political advantage that got those DEI tokens in in the first place).

[filoeleven]

> There are those who were successful without merit, achieved renown/success only because they were DEI tokens

Can you cite some examples?

[_mlbt]

Kamala Harris

[John23832]

I don't think that you're genuine in your response.

> Therefore if they didn't deserve their 'achievements' by the merits in the first place, there's nothing wrong with taking their stories down once the political climates have changed (especially a climate that encourages truth and merits over the political advantage that got those DEI tokens in in the first place).

Who hasn't earned what? You tell me.

The majority of the current administration are people who were put into positions of power with no merit. I can say pretty much all of the Trump administration cabinet nominees have no experience in the positions they are in. They're receiving sycophantic rewards.

I'm arguing to reward merit genuinely and that undoing work is regressive. You respond with "what about" (and no evidence).

[TylerLives]

I don't think years of experience is a good measure of merit. If you believe they're worse at their jobs, you should demonstrate that in some other way.

[John23832]

> I don't think years of experience is a good measure of merit.

I didn't point out years, you did. Any relevant experience. Though, merit is effectively a function of years of experience baring extreme circumstances.

> If you believe they're worse at their jobs, you should demonstrate that in some other way.

While I do think that they are effectively worse at their jobs, you're asserting that I said something that I didn't. I said they in the positions without merit. Which they all are. Linda McMahon has no education experience. RFK has no health experience. Kash Patel has no law enforcement experience. Hegseth has no DOD experience.

You can't say meritless those guys (dei) bad, but meritless our guys (Maga) good with any sort of consistency. And that's assuming that all of the dei guys are meritless. I can point to many who were of merit, but not sychopants, thus removed.

[_mlbt]

> Hegseth has no DOD experience.

He was an Army officer that served in combat missions during the Global War on Terror, how is that not DOD experience?

[John23832]

He was a commissioned officer, he has no experience with the bureaucracy of DoD. There is a big difference.

[_mlbt]

Some would call that a strength if the goal is institutional reform from a very different viewpoint.

[lee_ars]

Hesgeth has plenty of experience being Drunk on Duty, yep.

[TylerLives]

>Any relevant experience

I think it comes down to how well you think the government functioned prior to Trump. If you believe that it was terrible, then having experience in the old system can be seen as a negative. Btw I don't think you're entirely wrong in your concerns. I dislike both DEI and RFK's ideas. Unfortunately the question still remains, how can we find the best people for the job? I think the medical industry is incredibly corrupt and at the same time don't believe Joe Rogan will find a solution to this problem. Imo, the only solution is to fix the existing institutions, but I'm not sure how that can be done.

[filoeleven]

> If you believe they're worse at their jobs, you should demonstrate that in some other way.

Signalgate. The initial occurrence, the lying after, the demonizing of the reporter, the dismissal of its importance.

[rbanffy]

Hegseth’s nepotism is another interesting example. Or that episode when he was drunk, standing on top of a table chanting “kill all Arabs”.

The list goes on and on. There was no single nomination that didn’t have a lot of reasons not to go through, but they went anyway.

[AnimalMuppet]

In my view, the lying, demonization, and dismissal of importance were pretty typical for a government scandal. They all play out that way, as the guilty parties try for damage control.

The initial occurrence was spectacularly incompetent in a way that seems to me to be worse than normal.

[yokoprime]

Please provide sources