https://www.palladiummag.com/2023/06/01/complex-systems-wont-survive-the-competence-crisis/
interesting article arguing that optimizing DIE policies at the expense of competence will lead to increasing system failures. not a new idea, but surprised to see the idea argued so eloquently with good evidence at this level.
By the 1960s, the systematic selection for competence came into direct conflict with the political imperatives of the civil rights movement. During the period from 1961 to 1972, a series of Supreme Court rulings, executive orders, and laws—most critically, the Civil Rights Act of 1964—put meritocracy and the new political imperative of protected-group diversity on a collision course. Administrative law judges have accepted statistically observable disparities in outcomes between groups as prima facie evidence of illegal discrimination. The result has been clear: any time meritocracy and diversity come into direct conflict, diversity must take priority.
The resulting norms have steadily eroded institutional competency, causing America’s complex systems to fail with increasing regularity. In the language of a systems theorist, by decreasing the competency of the actors within the system, formerly stable systems have begun to experience normal accidents at a rate that is faster than the system can adapt. The prognosis is harsh but clear: either selection for competence will return or America will experience devolution to more primitive forms of civilization and loss of geopolitical power.
I'm for building our own systems outside of theirs, where competence and morals matter more than race or status.
competent people will not be valued in the DIE system, so those people focusing on their own area makes more sense. is DIE the poison pill in the technological or transhumanist implementation? or is the intent for a botched offering.
Either way arrogance leads to its own destruction. They can play all the games they want. They will wish for death if they reach their transhumanist goals.
good article worth the read. ty!
it's hard not to see the diversity hire push as a (((deliberate attempt))) to weaken the U.S. very much in line with the protocols.
Unintended consequences
https://www.fastcompany.com/90899625/11-years-into-oklahomas-affirmative-action-ban-the-state-has-seen-some-unintended-consequences?partner=rss&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=rss+fastcompany&utm_content=rss
Imagine the posters on this site working a nuke plant.
Dumber than Homer.
Being implies dissembled (partial) within a deregulating whole, hence each partial within being able to make irregular choices freely.
All suggested systems represent collectivism (e pluribus unum aka out of many; one), hence a distraction from the ongoing disassembly of whole (inception towards death) into each partial (life)...
a) all suggested systems by the few are held together by consent of the many...consenting to want to hold onto tempts one to ignore need to let go; hence being tempted to ignore adaptation within perceivable need, when holding onto suggested want.
b) inception towards death (flow) implies faster than life (form)...others suggest progressivism (gotta go fast) to tempt one to ignore that being alive requires resisting being progressed from inception towards death.
Holding onto suggested fiction makes it harder and harder to ignore perceivable reality coming through...
Being implies elect as (partial) to select from (whole); yet the free will of choice used by elect (perceiving) to select (perceivable) also implies being able to select (consent) from other elects (suggested).
Ones choice implies competence of partial within whole; other choices represent competition among partials when ignoring whole.
If partial adapts to whole (if/then implication) then increase of competence; yet if partial competes with other partials (conflicts of reason) then diminishing of competence (incompetence); while increasing competition.