Swordsmyth
01-15-2019, 06:06 PM
As the Democrats take control of the House in the new year, reports (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/0ddcc7f9c070d7e83f3fe6f5fb6d180c6a1fe328?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fstory%2F2019%2F01%2F01 %2Fhouse-democrats-corporate-diversity-1040900&userId=3043600&signature=c3ed7cc27e938fe6) are emerging that corporate quotas will be a high priority for House Financial Services Committee Chair Maxine Waters and her colleagues. They want to increase the number of women and minorities in America’s top boardrooms, set up subcommittees on corporate diversity and inclusion, and introduce legislation to force public disclosure of the sex and racial makeup of company boards.
This is the same politically correct agenda that is commonplace on college campuses, where race and sex pandering have led to the rise of bloated “diversity bureaucracies.” These aggressive organizations are ever-expanding in their reach and oversight into the lives of students and faculty. A 2018 report (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/6ac87290d96969b067b8ca10633a4a836868c40e?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.economist.com%2Fthe-economist-explains%2F2018%2F05%2F08%2Fthe-rise-of-universities-diversity-bureaucrats&userId=3043600&signature=00821966091aa46a) from The Economist highlighted a nationwide trend toward increased spending on useless administrative positions, which provide student services focused on racial and sexual politics.
Many of these jobs have little actual effect on diversity (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/ed60879e99b4b7962d6dd3ab07b3403668226b5a?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.jamesgmartin.center%2F2018%2F10%2Fwha t-do-college-chief-diversity-officers-accomplish%2F&userId=3043600&signature=ac6efa5b571a16ab), and exist for the sole purpose of churning out hollow marketing campaigns and strategic plans that appeal to donors and college ranking organizations. Many administrators have an almost militant devotion to cultivating a politically correct campus atmosphere. But in so doing, they sometimes invent oppression where none exists, and emphasize surface-level aspects of students’ identities like skin color and sex above actual life experiences.
This cultish devotion to identity politics that was once limited to campus is invading the corporate space, and its new reign in American boardrooms would only be further cemented by Rep. Waters’ proposed regulations (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/e6fe16fb536d549c780b6209b395f5459a2b94cf?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fstory%2F2019%2F01%2F01 %2Fhouse-democrats-corporate-diversity-1040900&userId=3043600&signature=e9220ba84c7edb0d). Of course, many companies fear what increased government scrutiny could mean for their hiring and promotion practices.
Business leaders are already working (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/6d3e7e7a981d823ffbddf9e5b2fe7e61a70747b0?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fstory%2F2019%2F01%2F01 %2Fhouse-democrats-corporate-diversity-1040900&userId=3043600&signature=426353a3d31bdc17) with key players on Capitol Hill to discuss ways to increase race- and sex-based promotions among their ranks. Unfortunately, this is likely not out of any genuine desire to increase diversity, but instead driven by anxiety over what the government will do if they do not conform. In the end, we have a government fear campaign forcing companies into identity politics expansion efforts. It’s hard to see how anyone could call that “progressive.”
Democrats’ plan to mandate that businesses publicly disclose the sex and race breakdowns of corporations’ top leadership is frightening. Essentially, they aim to name and shame companies that do not fit their idea of what a diverse leadership should be. Very soon, companies could be led to make decisions about promotions or leadership appointments based on skin color or sex instead of merit.
More at: http://thefederalist.com/2019/01/14/democrats-seek-make-companies-hire-people-based-sex-race/
This is the same politically correct agenda that is commonplace on college campuses, where race and sex pandering have led to the rise of bloated “diversity bureaucracies.” These aggressive organizations are ever-expanding in their reach and oversight into the lives of students and faculty. A 2018 report (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/6ac87290d96969b067b8ca10633a4a836868c40e?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.economist.com%2Fthe-economist-explains%2F2018%2F05%2F08%2Fthe-rise-of-universities-diversity-bureaucrats&userId=3043600&signature=00821966091aa46a) from The Economist highlighted a nationwide trend toward increased spending on useless administrative positions, which provide student services focused on racial and sexual politics.
Many of these jobs have little actual effect on diversity (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/ed60879e99b4b7962d6dd3ab07b3403668226b5a?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.jamesgmartin.center%2F2018%2F10%2Fwha t-do-college-chief-diversity-officers-accomplish%2F&userId=3043600&signature=ac6efa5b571a16ab), and exist for the sole purpose of churning out hollow marketing campaigns and strategic plans that appeal to donors and college ranking organizations. Many administrators have an almost militant devotion to cultivating a politically correct campus atmosphere. But in so doing, they sometimes invent oppression where none exists, and emphasize surface-level aspects of students’ identities like skin color and sex above actual life experiences.
This cultish devotion to identity politics that was once limited to campus is invading the corporate space, and its new reign in American boardrooms would only be further cemented by Rep. Waters’ proposed regulations (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/e6fe16fb536d549c780b6209b395f5459a2b94cf?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fstory%2F2019%2F01%2F01 %2Fhouse-democrats-corporate-diversity-1040900&userId=3043600&signature=e9220ba84c7edb0d). Of course, many companies fear what increased government scrutiny could mean for their hiring and promotion practices.
Business leaders are already working (https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/6d3e7e7a981d823ffbddf9e5b2fe7e61a70747b0?url=https %3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com%2Fstory%2F2019%2F01%2F01 %2Fhouse-democrats-corporate-diversity-1040900&userId=3043600&signature=426353a3d31bdc17) with key players on Capitol Hill to discuss ways to increase race- and sex-based promotions among their ranks. Unfortunately, this is likely not out of any genuine desire to increase diversity, but instead driven by anxiety over what the government will do if they do not conform. In the end, we have a government fear campaign forcing companies into identity politics expansion efforts. It’s hard to see how anyone could call that “progressive.”
Democrats’ plan to mandate that businesses publicly disclose the sex and race breakdowns of corporations’ top leadership is frightening. Essentially, they aim to name and shame companies that do not fit their idea of what a diverse leadership should be. Very soon, companies could be led to make decisions about promotions or leadership appointments based on skin color or sex instead of merit.
More at: http://thefederalist.com/2019/01/14/democrats-seek-make-companies-hire-people-based-sex-race/