Talk:Diversity (politics)

message: Moved from the main page:
:In the political arena, diversity is a code word for forcing people to tolerate or approve people and practices they find repugnant. Diversity laws or rules forbid any criticism of certain protected groups of people; oof
 are labeled hate speech.''
* "Diversity laws" don't exist.
* In the West, there are no laws "forbidding any criticsm of certain protected groups".
AxelBoldt
*This is scary language.  Maybe we should find some links for these people to look at.  Their hatred and anger is evident.
*"In the West, there are no laws "forbidding any criticsm of certain protected groups"." This is untrue. There is controversy over how far hate speech laws goes in curtailing the free speech rights of individuals as one cen be fined or even jailed for saying things that might be construed as "hate."
----
Removing: In the political arena, diversity is a code word for forcing people to tolerate or approve people and practices they find repugnant. Many US universities have speech codes that forbid certain criticism of protected groups of people; violations are labeled hate speech. Thus diversity masquerades as pluralism, which is the presence in one population of a wide variety of cultures, opinions, ethnic groups, et cetera.  
As AxelBolt says, the facts are incorrect and the presentation is too partisan. Diversity is not solely defined or used as defined above.  US universities do not forbid criticisms of "protected groups," only the manner in which certain criticisms can be expressed.   -- April
Conversely, just about all institutions have some heavily enforced rules on the restriction of what they deem 'hate speech'. What constitutes hate speech is undefined, and it remains ambigous. With this in mind, any criticism has the possibility to be called hate speech and if it is (correctly or incorrectly) the governing authority will see that it has a duty to investigate, given to how serious the allegations are. This will (and does) lead to self-censorship, even when the criticism would be completely valid. There does not need to be a law banning any criticism for the law to do that.  text adder: adding text
Honestly, it's just really sad that such people really think that's what diversity is all about. It's a little bit of hate speech all into itself.
As I work with an organization on diversity, we'll be hopefully populating these diversity sites with some concrete information. Stay tuned...
- Monica
:This page is not for general discussions about diversity - please limit comments to the content of the article and ways to improve the article. See WP:TPG -- The Red Pen of Doom 18:45, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics 

message: "These critics claim that pluralism is a more accurate term for the presence of variation, and that, under the banner of "diversity," groups actually forbid criticism of groups that are, in essence, privileged by their minority status."
:Isn't diversity actually a purely descriptive term which says that there a given society consists of more than one group? What is treated under the label of diversity here has more to do with value judgements of this situation and should, in my opinion, rather go under respect for diversity or perhaps multiculturalism. 
:Moreover, I find this whole section very partisan, representing mainly an anti-diversity POV. --Robin.rueth 07:02, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't the language 'privileged by their minority status' be removed?
---- Porsche ahind colby r just love birds............sike
How exactly are white males a "non-minority group"? If 51-52% of the population are women, then men (or any proper subset of that category) technically can't be a non-minority, at least in the mathematical sense of these words. --66.102.74.57 03:29, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: These arguments need to be elaborated upon in the article.  FYI, quoting a book doesn't prove an argument.  Cornel West is not infallible.  Keep in mind, the pot is calling the kettle white.  So:
# Explain why "minority" does not refer to the mathmatically fewer group.
# Explain what a minority is not.  Is it any dominant group?  Or is it a combination of all dominant groups, i.e., those who are Anglo-Saxon, male, mainstream Protestant, heterosexual, middle-to-upper-class, physically and mentally able, etc.?  If the former, is a gay white male not a minority?  If the latter, who are these people?
I don't know if there's an end to all this.  These politically-charged abstract Latinate terms can mean whatever you want them to.  That's how you "export democracy."
Mikepjones 07:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed 

message: I see little difference between the ideologies in the Diversity (business) (an organization (a business) with a  diverse membership (employees) that work together well is positioned to do  better than one that is not) article and Diversity (politics) (an organization (neighborhood, city, nation, etc.) with a diverse membership (citizens) that live in harmony is positioned to do better for its citizens than one that is not) article. 
Any specific differences can easily be addressed in sub-categories. 
144.15.115.165 16:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Diversity (business) 

message: I removed this paragraph from the intro:
In a political context, the word "diversity" is often differently understood outside of North America: for example in the UK and most parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa, the US concept of diversity does not wholly exist as there are few US-styled affirmative action programs. This is not to say that others are not supportive of the underlying agenda of US diversity, but it is usually described in different words, such as the terms "respect", "tolerance" and "multiculturalism."
This appears to be referring to a long ago version of introduction which equated 'diversity' to 'Affirmative Action' and no longer seems applicable. 144.15.115.165 22:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  World-wide views of diversity 

message: — Assignment last updated by Deparkozee (talk) 19:17, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Political Communication

message: I have found two academic sources that might fit into this article. I was thinking of using these sources to expand upon racial diversity in politics, since that part is currently not covered in the article.
1) Forest, Benjamin (2005-10-25). "The changing demographic, legal, and technological contexts of political representation". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 102 (43): 15331–15336. doi:10.1073/pnas.0507314102. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 1266125. PMID 16230615.
2) Griffin, John D.; Flavin, Patrick. "How Citizens and Their Legislators Prioritize Spheres of Representation". Political Research Quarterly. 64 (3): 520–533. doi:10.1177/1065912910373552. ISSN 1065-9129.
Cat6095 (talk) 00:31, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential Sources