Why People Leave The Left

[something_else]

10 minutes ago, SwiftQuill said:

They don't care if it's Illegal they do it anyways. I've seen videos of woke CEOs bragging they refuse to hire males or whites. They're still up on YouTube. And LinkedIn.

I'd appreciate a link to that. Even if this happens, it is not remotely close to common practice. Maybe 1 out of every 10,000 companies would have a policy of 'no white men'

If you are a woman, minority etc. and you're equally capable of completing a job as a white guy, the white guy is still more likely to be hired. DEI just exists as a way to balance that out. It doesn't exist specifically to fuck over white guys.

[zazen]

Economic disenfranchisement is the gut punch, cultural fatigue and overreach is the slap in the face, and a political system not taking either of those seriously is a spit in the face.

Ginger Hitler meets park ranger:

Society sets different standards for private spaces (where adults are) vs public spaces (where everyone including children are) People feel those norms are being disrupted when drag is in the public square - when it’s historically been for theatrical adult entertainment.

Lily Phillips above. Her mate Bonnie Blue below sleeping with a 1000 men in 12 hours:

“FrEdOoM” and “LiBeRtY” 

These very rightful values have been hollowed out into their most juvenile form.

Freedom is meant to mean something, to be substantial - but has turned into a performative spectacle. Something dignifying is turned into something degrading.

The same people who speak out against capitalism are the ones capitalizing most aggressively on its most sacred illusions - freedom, identity, expression - commodifying those same values into stunts and self-parody.

The wider world laughs. Even people these “movements” are supposed to represent laugh:

Edited Tuesday at 02:12 PM by zazen

[SwiftQuill]

@something_else

 

https://www.resumebuilder.com/1-in-6-hiring-managers-have-been-told-to-stop-hiring-white-men/

 

[SwiftQuill]

[PurpleTree]

35 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

Do you understand the difference between woke ideology and traditional left?

@something_else ?

[SwiftQuill]

Anyone who tells me I'm "privileged" because I dare to have been born white and male can fuck off.

I've spent 5 years, 5 years unemployed, sending thousands of CV's both in person and online. Very late in life did I finally get a job out of sheer luck. In this incredibly harsh job market, you think it's fair to reduce the chances of guys like me to get a job? Just to fill some HR quota? You want to reduce the number of jobs I can access, make shit even more difficult and competitive? Complete bullshit.

The job market already lacks meritocracy as is. We don't need to make it even more competitive and unfair. That zero sum attitude of "we need to hire fewer white men and more black women" isn't just retarded, it's immoral.

Of all the L's in the woke religion, DEI and Affirmative Action is the biggest L of them all.

If the system is broken, do something to fix it. Don't make it even more broken and unfair.

[Nemra]

@SwiftQuill, are you basing your understanding of terms on out-of-context videos?

I'm not ignoring that there cannot be people who wouldn't use DEI in their favor.

The survey suggests something might be happening, but we can't be certain because:

• It's just a survey of what people say they experienced, with no way to verify it.
• "Prioritize diversity" could mean many different things.

Edited Tuesday at 02:52 PM by Nemra

[SwiftQuill]

19 minutes ago, SwiftQuill said:

Anyone who tells me I'm "privileged" because I dare to have been born white and male can fuck off.

I've spent 5 years, 5 years unemployed, sending thousands of CV's both in person and online. Very late in life did I finally get a job out of sheer luck. In this incredibly harsh job market, you think it's fair to reduce the chances of guys like me to get a job? Just to fill some HR quota? You want to reduce the number of jobs I can access, make shit even more difficult and competitive? Complete bullshit.

The job market already lacks meritocracy as is. We don't need to make it even more competitive and unfair. That zero sum attitude of "we need to hire fewer white men and more black women" isn't just retarded, it's immoral.

Of all the L's in the woke religion, DEI and Affirmative Action is the biggest L of them all.

If the system is broken, do something to fix it. Don't make it even more broken and unfair.

@Nemra I've made myself clear on why DEI is unfair and why it harms what little meritocracy there is under current capitalism. One needs to be deeply brainwashed by the likes of Seder or Pakman or Harvard's Wokeology department in order to believe DEI constitutes fairness.

Are there problems in the system? Fix it. And let's stop with the zero sum thinking type solutions.

Big corporations have been reaching record high on profits in the past few years, and people cry "whaaaa that white (low income) man has it too easy I want to make my life easier by making his harder" this is preposterous.

Sometimes I do wonder if this is a Psyop. They be like "hey if we paint our logo rainbow colors and hire a few blacks, cheap immigrants, and women, they will believe society is becoming "progressive" and people will fall for it.

[Joshe]

I think it helps to try to understand the scale of " the leftists". For the U.S, it's something like this:

 

As you can see, "the leftists" account for a very small percentage of the population. Of those, the leftists this forum is always talking about are the SJWs. Then, the SJWs end up getting lumped into the Bernie Bros and the rest. So people end up conflating the nonsense of the SJW with the entire left. And keep in mind, these are small fractions of population. But it doesn't seem like such a small fraction after one gets tied up in these conversations.

In zooming into the left to analyze it's psychology and its implications for society, we forget to zoom back out. Once you’re locked in online discourse, it warps your sense of proportion, then the entire progressive wing becomes this amorphous “woke left.” In reality, these are small and distinct groups, and relatively inconsequential in national influence relative to how much attention they get.

Don't get me wrong, turn over every stone, but it's important to understand the implications of the scale so you don't spend all your time looking at a piece of sand when you could be analyzing an intricate amethyst. 

We overanalyze a fringe until it feels like a dominant force.

The SJWs are mostly young, egotistical, idealistic, empathetic college kids. The reason they are so cringe is because they're not mature yet. They still have strong egos. Mix a strong ego with extroversion, idealism, empathy, knowledge of the world's injustices, and an environment that facilitates activism, and you get something like a loud, annoying SJW. Ta daaa!!!

To me, it doesn't make much sense to analyze a group that barely exists at scale, while there are much more consequential threats on the horizon. Now, if they had evil intentions, like say we replaced the woke left with neo-nazis, then the attention would be warranted, but these are mostly just annoying, well-meaning kids with big egos. Nothing to fucking see here really. 

Edited Tuesday at 04:28 PM by Joshe

[SwiftQuill]

@Joshe that's why I make a distinction between cultural Left (wokeness) and political Left (progressive, liberal, socialist, etc).

And my issue isn't with the 5% loud sjw activists. It's with the 50% of people who think like Pakman, sound "normal", but still promote really bad ideas and a culture of censorship, self censorship, virtue signaling, radical feminist misandry, and a hyper politicized perspective on everything in society. Even things that shouldn't be political like videogames or Hollywood movies.

[Joshe]

@SwiftQuill

Yes, I thought of that after I made the post. I was trying to figure out how I could understand that actual influence of the cultural left but it's not as easy to figure out. I know it's bigger than the political left, but not sure how to go about getting the numbers for it yet. Although I highly doubt it's anywhere approaching 50%. 

[Nemra]

1 hour ago, SwiftQuill said:

Sometimes I do wonder if this is a Psyop. They be like "hey if we paint our logo rainbow colors and hire a few blacks, cheap immigrants, and women, they will believe society is becoming "progressive" and people will fall for it.

That could be virtue signaling for a company.

What matters is how employees are being treated in the company.

1 hour ago, SwiftQuill said:

I've made myself clear on why DEI is unfair and why it harms what little meritocracy there is under current capitalism. One needs to be deeply brainwashed by the likes of Seder or Pakman or Harvard's Wokeology department in order to believe DEI constitutes fairness.

DEI was created to fix unfair treatment and lack of opportunities that certain groups faced.

However, the implementation could be problematic.

Edited Tuesday at 04:40 PM by Nemra

[Joshe]

@SwiftQuill Have you ever tried to do demographic breakdowns of the entire U.S population? 

If you think about all the kids, all the old people, genders, ethnicity, religion, etc, and break all that down, I think that could give you a better sense of the actual numbers. 50% is definitely way too high.

You could dive into each bracket and flesh out the prominent subgroups and then figure out which of those do or don't fit the bill. Would be interesting to do, but I gotta get to work, unfortunately. 

Tip: you can use Claude AI to generate these charts right in the browser. 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 04:24 PM by Joshe

[PurpleTree]

39 minutes ago, Joshe said:

The SJWs are mostly young, egotistical, idealistic, empathetic college kids. The reason they are so cringe is because they're not mature yet. They still have strong egos. Mix a strong ego with extroversion, idealism, empathy, knowledge of the world's injustices, and an environment that facilitates activism, and you get something like a loud, annoying SJW. Ta daaa!!!

 

Also the urge or need to belong to a group or a herd as a social animal. With group activities a simple world view and catch words and phrases.

[Joshe]

43 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

Also the urge or need to belong to a group or a herd as a social animal. With group activities a simple world view and catch words and phrases.

True. That's a big one. It's universal though. It brings people into the fold who aren't necessarily ideologically aligned but embrace the ideology anyway just to belong to a group. This is also the dominant factor in the recent movement of youngsters embracing MAGA. 

 

Edited Tuesday at 05:07 PM by Joshe

[something_else]

2 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

@something_else

 

 

That's pretty fucking wacky, I'll give you that. However this is ultimately just one small team at one company.

Quote

https://www.resumebuilder.com/1-in-6-hiring-managers-have-been-told-to-stop-hiring-white-men/

I’m immediately skeptical of this study because the headline is deliberately misleading. The actual finding was that 1 in 6 hiring managers have been asked—not told—to deprioritise—not stop—hiring white men. That’s a big difference in tone and intent and shows a very clear bias.

In industries where white men (or white women, like in healthcare or education) are significantly overrepresented, aiming for a more diverse workforce isn’t unreasonable. If you’re part of the majority, DEI makes you feel like you’re being penalised, but it’s less about making things harder for you and more about easing access for people who’ve historically faced more barriers, even when just as qualified.

Take tech, for example. If you’re a white man entering a field where 70–80% of employees are white men, you’re still statistically far more likely to land a job in that field than, say, a Black woman with equivalent skills. She’s going to have a much harder time in a white male dominated field because humans are naturally so biased towards their in-groups.

And it’s worth noting that startups and small-to-midsize tech companies usually don’t push DEI initiatives very hard. It’s mostly the big firms that make a point of it. I’m using tech as the example because it’s the space I know best, but the same pattern holds in many industries.

 

[SwiftQuill]

2 minutes ago, something_else said:

That's pretty fucking wacky, I'll give you that. However this is ultimately just one small team at one company.

I’m immediately skeptical of this study because the headline is deliberately misleading. The actual finding was that 1 in 6 hiring managers have been asked—not told—to deprioritise—not stop—hiring white men. That’s a big difference in tone and intent and shows a very clear bias.

In industries where white men (or white women, like in healthcare or education) are significantly overrepresented, aiming for a more diverse workforce isn’t unreasonable. If you’re part of the majority, DEI makes you feel like you’re being penalised, but it’s less about making things harder for you and more about easing access for people who’ve historically faced more barriers, even when just as qualified.

Take tech, for example. If you’re a white man entering a field where 70–80% of employees are white men, you’re still statistically far more likely to land a job in that field than, say, a Black woman with equivalent skills. She’s going to have a much harder time in a white male dominated field because humans are naturally so biased towards their in-groups.

And it’s worth noting that startups and small-to-midsize tech companies usually don’t push DEI initiatives very hard. It’s mostly the big firms that make a point of it. I’m using tech as the example because it’s the space I know best, but the same pattern holds in many industries.

 

Woke mental gymnastics. Fallacious reasoning, hypocritical reasoning, ignores asymmetries in other industries (like how women dominate ok psychology or the beauty industry), ignores all the points I made, anti-meriticratic, misuse of statistics.

Seen these same arguments hundreds of times before and refuted all of them many times.

White men privileged. White men have easy life. Everyone else victim.

Double standards everywhere.

[something_else]

3 hours ago, SwiftQuill said:

The job market already lacks meritocracy as is. We don't need to make it even more competitive and unfair. That zero sum attitude of "we need to hire fewer white men and more black women" isn't just retarded, it's immoral.

A true meritocracy would be amazing, but it’s just not possible. At least not anytime soon. Humans are too biased for that.

Even if we could make hiring decisions perfectly merit-based, it would still be unfair because the playing field isn’t level to begin with. If white people are far more likely to have access to quality education than black people, then even a “pure” meritocracy (where equal education leads to equal hiring chances) still reinforces inequality.

To have a truly fair meritocracy, you’d need a truly fair society. One where everyone has the same opportunities from the start, especially in education. And right now, we’re nowhere close to that.

Edited Tuesday at 05:51 PM by something_else

[PurpleTree]

6 minutes ago, something_else said:

A true meritocracy would be amazing, but it’s just not possible. At least not anytime soon. Humans are too biased for that.

Even if we could make hiring decisions perfectly merit-based, it would still be unfair because the playing field isn’t level to begin with. If white people are far more likely to have access to quality education than black people, then even a “pure” meritocracy (where equal education leads to equal hiring chances) still reinforces inequality.

To have a truly fair meritocracy, you’d need a truly fair society. One where everyone has the same opportunities from the start, especially in education. And right now, we’re nowhere close to that.

Ok so you don’t know the difference between woke ideology and traditional left. It’s fine don’t worry you can ask gpt. But next time maybe don’t be so smug.

[Leo Gura]

For me the biggest turn-off about the left is the endless whining. Nothing is ever good enough for them. They will whine till they hit the grave. To me this is an improper attitude towards reality.

If you are always whining, maybe the problem is you, not the world.

After years of listening to their whining, I just can't stand it any more.

Edited Tuesday at 06:01 PM by Leo Gura