alt Hacker NewsI appreciate you engaging.
1) https://speechfirst.org/case/title-ix/ is the third ddg result for title ix compelled speech. Basically, the feds under Biden were going to compel use of people's preferred pronouns. Ideally it would have failed in court.
Elaboration: For a very long time, in many states and parts of the federal government, there has been overt discrimination on the basis of race, sex, disability status, etc. in direct and obvious violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Things like skin-color quotas for hiring, preferences for vendors, etc. You're certainly familiar. They hired people who would, at the very least, not speak out against their regime's practices, and ideally who would help perpetuate them.
> Again, cancel culture, no matter how aggressive... It's not just twitter mobs. To get the large gov't grants necessary to be successful in science, for instance, it was ~mandatory for the past while to have a DEI angle on your application. Many forms actually had a section for it. So, in this case, the gov't isn't using its monopoly on violence exactly, but it's not cancel culture. (and of course there were many grants funded that weren't just a DEI angle, it was 100% DEI bullshit)
"A huge conspiracy to overtly break the law" is what DEI was and still sadly largely is.
> were going to compel use of people's preferred pronouns
This is the exact mindset I mentioned above where Democrats are judged based on what they might've done or might happen, while Trump has clearly done things that go against our basic rights yet they're being shined in the same light. To be clear: I'm not saying we shouldn't criticize policy proposals.
> "A huge conspiracy to overtly break the law" is what DEI was and still sadly largely is.
DEI is a very wide tent, and the intentions of it are to widen the hiring pools to consider more people. If there are specific programs breaking the law, then those can be discussed specifically. Right wingers are typically for meritocracy (which has been shown to be a red herring with this loyalist admin, but w/e) and in theory they'd actually support a wider pool of people being considered.
Academia can be quite left leaning, so training about white supremacy or woke shit there is certainly over the top, but I have a problem with the broad brushes you're applying to something that has a lot more nuance. If this lawlessness was as pervasive as you make it seem in every sector, wouldn't we have seen a major loss in court already that requires these programs to be axed across the board?