Hacker News Reader

Comment by Anon1096 | Hacker News Reader

The American conception of diversity that looks for race and gender ends up grouping 60% of the world together as "Asian". These are regions of the world with vast cultural differences (the obvious because South VS East Asia) and even within countries someone from Beijing is vastly different from someone from Xinjiang. It's extremely western-biased to look at what's going on in DEI efforts and think that it in any way represents actual diversity. It mostly means white women and educated black men get jobs while spewing the exact same thoughts as the HR department.

View on HN

I agree with what you’re explicitly stating, but I can’t tell if you acknowledge and accept the implications.

As it stands, your statement boils down to “DEI is not diverse enough.”

If one also accepts gp’s point, then it seems DEI should continue, but be applied more carefully and thoughtfully. This would likely mean an increase in resources dedicated to DEI.

I agree and would welcome this (without requiring it legally). But I doubt most others would agree.

To be fair to DEI, the D could easily stand for “anti-homogeneity”. To that extent, Beijing, Xinjiang, Lahore, Jakarta, or Manila makes no difference. All that matters is you’re not being excluded just because you look or sound different.

"AAPI" is truly the epitome of a DEI term that is racist in exactly the way the ideology pretends not to be.

Really, you're going to group indigenous New Zealanders with Han Chinese as "one" racial group? Just to pick two very different groups at random. There are many absurd pairings that fit under "AAPI" and it's a parody of itself.

It's erasing these cultures to group them all under one constructed postmodern umbrella

A more pragmatic reason for this approach is many subgroups lack sufficient population sizes in relevant candidate pools to realistically attempt such a high-context focus with any sort of evaluation of efficacy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com