Well, pro sports doesn’t require an antidote to DEI because there is no DEI there. That is because of which groups are dominant. This applies to athletes but not coaches/managers.
I think my point was more that the response to DEI doesn't necessarily need to be race realism. Rather we can aim for an equilibrium where neither mindset is salient. I'd prefer the pushback against DEI be along the lines of advocating for colorblindness and meritocracy rather than trotting out Charles Murray. I think Coleman Hughes does an admirable job of this, although as I've argued elsewhere I believe he overstates the appeal of colorblindness by suggesting that race should be totally irrelevant to how people understand and view themselves.
I’m not disagreeing with Charles Murray. I just don’t think race realism needs to be the primary antidote to DEI. As a political strategy it's almost certainly going to make most people less amenable to meritocracy rather than more so.
Well, pro sports doesn’t require an antidote to DEI because there is no DEI there. That is because of which groups are dominant. This applies to athletes but not coaches/managers.
I think my point was more that the response to DEI doesn't necessarily need to be race realism. Rather we can aim for an equilibrium where neither mindset is salient. I'd prefer the pushback against DEI be along the lines of advocating for colorblindness and meritocracy rather than trotting out Charles Murray. I think Coleman Hughes does an admirable job of this, although as I've argued elsewhere I believe he overstates the appeal of colorblindness by suggesting that race should be totally irrelevant to how people understand and view themselves.
Charles Murray did science and reported his findings. Why do you dislike science?
I’m not disagreeing with Charles Murray. I just don’t think race realism needs to be the primary antidote to DEI. As a political strategy it's almost certainly going to make most people less amenable to meritocracy rather than more so.