Hacker News Reader

Comment by mmmpop | Hacker News Reader

Equity, not equality. Big difference in modern parlance.

It's remarkable how Equity was just smuggled into "Diversity, Equity & Inclusion", without people realising that it doesn't mean the sort of equality that the majority supports.

It was on purpose. It started as "Diversity and Inclusion", and anyone who questioned it was shouted down as racist. Once any opposition was squashed, they slip in the "Equity", which was really the point the whole time. Marxism using racial politics as a smoke screen.

It's all double-speak for Marxism, or equal outcomes for everyone.

AFAIK Marxism isn't about equal outcomes, but it is opposed to enforced classes. So a Marxist would likely argue you shouldn't have lower and advanced courses separate, but you'd still have one course with a distribution of grades. The teacher would just focus more on the kids that need more help to improve the mean of the distribution, where our current method would create unnatural multi-modal distributions

If you're opposed to Marxism you should also know "double-speak" comes from a book written in support of socialism[1]

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Orwell#Spanish_Civil_Wa...

>"double-speak comes form a book written in support of socialism"

LOL - whut? Did you read a different 1984?

Orwell's thoughts on governance was complicated, and changed over time, but in no way was 1984 some kind of endorsement of socialism.

Also, Marxism is not socialism.

https://www.thecoldwire.com/socialist-vs-marxist/#:~:text=Th....

I know they're not equal, but typically people lump them together and oppose both without knowing the differences, so I figured OP would like to know they're quoting a socialist to oppose Marxism, because they might actually really support socialism even if they oppose marxism. I guess I shouldn't have said "in support of socialism" and instead "by an author who hugely supported socialism", but I think it's fair to say his works were influenced and driven by his political beliefs since that's so much of the focus. It's not a book talking about how great socialism is, but it's also not at all a critique of socialism. It's just about totalitarianism, and people often use it to oppose socialism or marxism so wanted to throw this out for clarification

A classic example was Orwell in the Spanish civil war saying he was super against Stalinism specifically and also seemed to know that it was not at all communism, but overall he seemed to primarily like democratic socialism.

Maybe this is because I'm from the US but here most people think Stalinism==Communism==Socialism==Maoism, so I think it's important to point out differences

---

Also from your link

> This is different from Marxism which relies on a violent revolution

This is definitely not true so I wouldn't trust that source much. Some people think it's the only way but others don't

Reply on news.ycombinator.com