I think it's a good thing that admission criteria based on race are dis-allowed. I'd rather support dis-advantaged people over people of a particular race. Doesn't mean you can't still support dis-advantaged people in many ways - and I strongly think they should be supported. The left doesn't have to rely on identity politics to achieve good outcomes. They would be far more effective and less divisive if they did so.

Does that supreme court ruling also rule out admissions decided on the basis of income, where a person lives, etc? I assume the answer is no? Low income scholarships are clearly a thing... why not admissions?

If I'm wrong in this regard - then boost support to pre-college students (scholarships, tutoring programs etc). Earlier the better - as I am given to understand that earlier intervention is better than later in terms of outcomes.

It didn't boost profits and in some very high profile cases it caused some serious declines, bud light and Disney for example.

It's became an end in itself rather than a reminder that discrimination can be harmful to the organisation by excluding good people.

One large media company mentioned how they rejected excellent scripts because they weren't diverse enough. They probably regret their decision now.

The article attributes the change to the shift in political power, but it may very well be bottom-up backfiring of policies that could be easily seen as pointless or stupid by regular people who got sick of the extreme push.

People and businesses are learning that good intentions don't guarantee good outcomes. It is about time.

DEI started as a positive thing but has become weaponised to get positive press coverage, and was completely emptied of meaning very quickly by the companies who ran these initiatives themselves.

Honestly, you probably want to shoot for the middle with everything in moderation and I think it's hard for people to see that in this age of the internet where extreme voices win out.

Good idea, encouraging diversity at your company. Bad idea, trying to enforce a rigid system of quotas where you are literally discriminating against people based on their race.

Good idea, encouraging ESG investments. Bad idea, creating a complex statistical system gameable system where Tesla is not an ESG investment, but literally investing in an oil company is?

Another thing, are israel or black lives matter immune from critism? Of course not. If you go to a rally or start joining a cause against them, are you essentially surrounding yourself with some really evil people who could potentially be really bad for your reputation in the long run in a justifiable way.

Again, probably want to aim for the more sane moderate middle in most things.