US politics: general and DEI hopelessness

[mtbc]

I had been thinking about all the Democratic campaigning efforts before the last election, including all the people busy on the ground, talking to voters, etc., and how little difference it seems to have made. So often, there are many good people giving so selflessly and hopefully, yet the world seems consistently to be full of ignorance and xenophobia. I like to think that if more people were curious enough to find out more about others, if they had the empathy and compassion to appreciate others' situation, and the critical reasoning skills to sort truth from lies, they would vote for a more progressive agenda. But, they clearly haven't, repeatedly, and it all felt rather hopeless.

Thinking about countries that I do find more politically agreeable, in terms of both means and ends, I note that those are democracies full of humans too, somehow they do rather better. Is there perhaps some path from here to there?

Given the Trump administration, I moved on to thinking about DEI efforts. At a previous employer, where I had some power in HR spheres, I tried but failed. For instance, I was in charge of tech hiring and would reach out to HBCUs about vacancies. The only good resumes we received were from typical white men.

I wonder how many more good candidates we might have learned of were we sufficiently resourced to provide training and mentorship: perhaps there were plenty of basically smart people who just never got the opportunity to solidify their ability into something more concrete. But then, I wonder, whose job is it to provide those trainee opportunities? One employer I worked for who was willing to have people learn on the job had high staff turnover, I think partly because, once the employees had some marketable experience under their belt, they could get a better-paying job elsewhere. However, somehow I doubt that we want to return to a world of indentured apprentices.

Comments

[thewayne]

Obama was good at getting out the vote, pretty much all other Dem campaign has been pretty lousy at it. I don't know if they're resting on what they think of as their laurels, or what.

[mtbc]

After a certain point, I've wondered if campaign donations should go toward ground game rather than even more television advertisements. Though, that requires a particular kind of indefatigable campaign worker who is at least as good at listening as speaking.

[thewayne]

I think that is an idea with great merit.  Who would know where to effectively place TV ads?  With people streaming more and more, and most streaming services not running political ads if ads at all, seems a losing game.

[shadowkat]

Well, I work for a State government agency with Federal and State funds which has a lot of Diversity Goals in place. At the last "all hands on deck" meeting via Zoom - they informed us that the only additional requirement in regards to diversity that the Fed's were currently imposing was "hire based on merit". So yes, you can continue to pursue diversity goals, but merit has to be a factor. This explanation came from the "BLACK" woman who ran the Diversity Department (ie the Chief Diversity and Compliance Officer.

Whenever we hire a contractor, consultant, design-builder, personal services - we have to meet a specific set of diversity goals: 15% Minority Owned Businesses, 15% Women Own Businesses, and 6% Veteran Owned Businesses. For Federal? 22.5% Disadvantaged Businesses (which is anyone who is considered a small disadvantaged business). Also all of them have to have EEO in place, Affirmative Action policies in place, etc.

There are a lot of State and Federal Affirmative Action, Equal Employment and Diversity Laws across the board, many of which are supported by State and Federal Constitutions.