[benjiro]

The problem is that people are horrible narrators about their own issues/past. They like to leave out critical information.

The idea of a company in the 80's going around that they are promoting Asians to positions over white people, sounds as far fetched as finding oil in my backyard. The reverse is way more likely in that time periode.

More then likely, he was not qualified for the job. But people often have a hard time accepting this, and feel entitled for position. Often by virtue of working somewhere longer. When passed over for promotion, then they create narratives its not themselves who is the issue, but it must be somebody else their fault.

So when you 20, 30, 40 years later tell the story, are you going to say "well, i was not qualified" or are you going to double down that you got passed over for a promotion, because "somebody had it out for me", or as "DEI hire" as that was the trending topic in conservative circles. What is a little lie to make yourself feel better, and have the world perceive you as the victim of horrible DEI hiring practices ... in the 80s!!!

If people think racism is rampaging today, they really did not live in the 80's... So yea, if it smell funny, you know there is bull.... involved.

[Amezarak]

There are many well-documented cases of this sort of thing happening in the 1980s and even earlier.

https://ia800108.us.archive.org/view_archive.php?archive=/24...

Note that here, Philip Morris explicitly said they used race-norming to hire minorities at the expense of people who performed better, but belong to the wrong race.

In some cases, it was court ordered: https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-04-07-mn-22054-...

In this case, a test acknowledged as meritocratic caused too many minorities to be excluded, as nearly all the top performers were white. The fire department was sued, and ordered by a judge to hire at least 40% minorities -well above the applicant rate. They hired 55% minorities. Eventually SCOTUS ruled there was nothing wrong with the test - meaning for years, white applicants were discriminated against.

Here's another example, which obviously not only shows political and legal pressure to promote minorities specifically (even mentioning specific quotas!), but documents specific instances of policies that succeeded in doing so anti-meritocratically: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-GGD-95-85/pdf...

[sanity]

If you assume Adams is lying, that’s your call. But if the question is what he believes happened, the obvious evidence is his own account. I’ve listened to him for years and find it credible. Also, for a long time there was a strong taboo against white men complaining about discrimination, which makes it easy to imagine it never happened—regardless of whether it did.

[sdenton4]

Adams was insanely narcissistic. Inventing reverse racism to avoid confronting his own short comings is completely on brand.

[kunley]

> Adams was insanely narcissistic.

A claim based on what?

[sdenton4]

That time he showed up on metafilter with a sock puppet and talked about himself in the third person.

https://www.metafilter.com/102472/How-to-Get-a-Real-Educatio...

"As far as Adams' ego goes, maybe you don't understand what a writer does for a living. No one writes unless he believes that what he writes will be interesting to someone. Everyone on this page is talking about him, researching him, and obsessing about him. His job is to be interesting, not loved. As someone mentioned, he has a certified genius I.Q., and that's hard to hide." - Scott Adams, as plannedchaos

[sanity]

Using a sockpuppet account is hardly the crime of the century. If that's your worst criticism of him then he's doing very well.

[benjiro]

> If you assume Adams is lying, that’s your call. But if the question is what he believes happened, the obvious evidence is his own account.

You can believe something with all your heart and that believe can be a lie. People are not machines.

The idea that a manager will go "hey, we are DEI hiring Asians" in the 80s in the bank sector... No offense but that is mixing modern 2020's politics and trying to transplant it to the 80's.

Fact is, you only have one source of this "truth", and have historical data that disproves this idea of DEI hires in the 80s (unless your white and male, then yes, there was a LOT of DEI hires and promotions that bypassed women and/or people of color).

And this is still happening today. But nobody wants to talk about that too much because that is considered the traditional family and god given right to the white male ;)

I am betting your a white male, that lissen to a lot of conservative podcast/twitter etc. You can prove me wrong but we both know the truth ;)

[sanity]

> The idea that a manager will go ‘hey, we are DEI hiring Asians’ in the 80s

No one used the term DEI in the 1980s. The language then was affirmative action or EEO, and it was very much present in corporate America, including regulated industries like banking. The terminology has changed; the existence of compliance-driven hiring and promotion pressures has not.

> You only have one source of this ‘truth’.

When the question is what someone believes happened to them, their own account is inevitably the primary source. You can argue he was mistaken or self-serving, but dismissing the account outright because it doesn’t fit your expectations isn’t evidence.

> I am betting you’re a white male

And that assumption rather neatly illustrates why, for a long time, it was socially risky for white men to even claim discrimination without having their motives or identity used to invalidate the argument.

[defrost]

> No one used the term DEI in the 1980s. The language then was affirmative action or EEO, and it was very much present in corporate America, including regulated industries like banking.

This is true.

What is false is a blanket "We're not hiring or promoting white men" as a result during that time period.

That was an era when lip service was given to affirmative action and literal token hires were made as window dressing .. but the fundementals scarcely changed and extremely rarely at board room and actual upper management levels for jobs that included keys to levers of power.

[philipallstar]

No one has claimed a blanket anything.

> That was an era when lip srvice was given to affirmative action and literal token hires were made as window dressing .. but the fundementals scarcely changed and extremely rarely at board room and actual upper management levels for jobs that included keys to levers of power.

This is a pipeline fact. But that doesn't mean individuals didn't try to redress the balance themselves. Just as some schoolteachers will give kids of colour higher marks to make up for the bad things that they were told happened to all of them.

[defrost]

> No one has claimed a blanket anything.

Scroll up:

> He was told explicitly by his boss that they weren't promoting white men.

@sanity https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46607980 3 hours ago

While he may have been told that (or more likely "remembered" things that way), it simply wasn't something that was commonplace in the 1980s.

Where exactly was he working that had a "no white men at the top" policy in the 1980s?

Death Row Records was founded in 1991, Bad Boy Records was founded 1993(?) and in that industry sub domain it should have been intuitively obvious to the meanest intellect that no white men would reach the top well before they (if any) joined as lowly office clerks.