this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2026
389 points (99.7% liked)

politics

30879 readers
1852 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
Theonetheycall1845@lemmy.world
JuBe@lemmy.world
Lasherz12@lemmy.world
389
US firms that kept DEI policies despite ‘go woke, go broke’ threats thrived (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 1 week ago by savvie@lemmy.zip to c/politics@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

…new research published Friday and shared exclusively with the Guardian found that companies that resisted the pressure and kept their DEI practices, including Costco, Apple and Delta Air Lines, performed just as well as their competitors who pulled back.

top 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 103 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Company A: "We're done with this DEI shit. Fire everyone browner than a paper bag and promote only the most nepotistic failkids during White Boy Summer"

Company B: "We're going to continue hiring and promoting on merit and... oh wow, we've got a bumper crop of talented, motivated LGBTQ and POC suddenly lining up outside the door."

Wonder what happens next

[–] TheGoldenGod@lemmy.world 41 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Company A starts what we’ve discovered is essentially an inbreeding program, with extra steps. Generations of it will fail and live off large corporate bailouts, which it will later use to try eating smaller companies to appear successful from the outside to the less educated public.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

Company A starts what we’ve discovered is essentially an inbreeding program, with extra steps.

The Habsburgs prove you can keep grinding on for a while even when you're inbreed to shit. But the notion that you need to inbreed in order to get ahead in business is borderline superstitious. Rather, large and entrenched businesses have the luxury of doing this inbred bullshit so long as their social networks can support a steady business income from monopolized industry and captured markets.

[–] sodiumbromley@lemmy.blahaj.zone 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And as a trans person I'll also say my Costco membership isn't going anywhere. That'd also because I have a big dog and she can't afford est anywhere else.

[–] Dultas@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Even though they're cheap you shouldn't feed dogs hotdogs /s

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Coincidentally, I had to give a past dog pain meds after an ACL surgery, and the pills were notoriously bitter and awful. Hiding them in hotdogs worked for a little while until she tasted a pill once. We also did cheese and chicken, which again worked until she tasted a pill then didn't trust us anymore. It was a long couple weeks.

[–] Dultas@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Our cat was the same way. Pill pockets worked until they tasted it once. Then we'd have to switch flavors or brands.

[–] ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

the pills were notoriously bitter and awful

... Did people taste them? How do we know the dog meds tasted bad?

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Often times dog meds are just people meds. I just looked it up and in my case we were giving her Tramadol. Once upon a time we were giving our dogs Zyrtec for allergies, but the dose was like 6x the human equivalent. We found an alternative that maybe was new at the time that was much cheaper and was a single pill dose.

[–] VAK@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Didn't make a difference as per the article

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 68 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's probably not just the policies themselves. Caving to that type of pressure raises a big red flag about leadership competence.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 14 points 1 week ago

Companies didn't adopt DEI to "go woke" they adopted it because it gave them access to a larger talent pool, which was often cheaper because they had not previously been recognized and therefore didn't have the work history to command higher wages. There was always a business case to be made for this kind of program and its why it was so broadly implemented.

No one abandoned programs like this because they were costly or harmful, the only companies that did so were trying to score political points with jerks. And the outcome of that is pretty predictable.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 42 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've walked into a Target one time since they used the excuse of political pressure to drop their dei initiatives, and haven't made a purchase. I can't control a lot of things, but what I can do is not give money to shitty people and companies (short of taxes and other legally required payments). The list keeps growing, and I'm far from perfect at avoiding places, but the spend has definitely gone down at most of these places that I'm aware of.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Target has completely changed direction, btw. They fired the asshole CEO and flipped 180. Public is understandably hesitant to trust, but keep in mind Target is based in Minneapolis and they were not happy.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Target actually has an entire surveillance and video forensic side business based in Minneapolis that works closely with Federal law enforcement and almost certainly worked directly with ICE and their operations in Minneapolis and is likely why they were exceptionally aggressive in that city.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/01/29/retailer-target-branches-out-into-police-work-span-classbankheadminneapolis-forensics-lab-donations-help-law-enforcement-agenciesspan/32273b10-40fa-4db4-a4a1-88b77eafb891/

https://kpfa.org/area941/episode/the-hidden-side-of-target-surveillance-policing-and-a-call-for-scrutiny/

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/237917.pdf

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-08-25/how-target-tgt-police-surveilled-black-neighbors-in-inner-cities

Target is the tip of the fucking spear when it comes to fascist corporate/state law enforcement collaboration. They are NOT on our side and never have been.

Most, if not all, large corporations are inherently evil. Target is exceptional in that they have made a deliberate choice to make evil a core element of their business operations.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago

Awful and depressing. Target is a giant company and I can only speak to what I can see. Needless to say, I didn’t know about this.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It’s not that corporations are inherently evil. It’s that profit optimizing algorithms are inherently non-empathetic. These companies are basically algorithms, in the same way that a computer is basically a calculator (bad analogy, I know).

Every company has a value stream in which capital is produced through labor. The working components are the protocols, the procedure is the algorithm. The algorithm gets optimized by C-suite for the benefit of stakeholders. Benefit, meaning profit.

We’ve always known that corporation interests only sometimes align with social interests, because there’s a difference. Socially, you want a good life. Corporations want good profit. Sometimes having good profit means capitulating to society, but most often it actually doesn’t.

I’d like to see more worker owned businesses. The problem is that we don’t really have a culture where groups of people come together in order to form democratically run worker collectives. How can we build this culture?

If we could build that culture, I’d favor worker collectives over traditional corps any day of the week. It would fit into my mind much like preferring open source over SaaS.

I want to see groups of people with entrepreneurial spirits that get excited about the idea of building a worker collective to compete in the various sectors of the economy. We could create a “hit list,” containing some of the most shitty companies that we’d like to displace. We can target them while prioritizing collectives to produce.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That’s a really long, roundabout way to say “the system is working exactly as intended and must be dismantled” 🤔

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I would like to include large partnerships and sole propietorships for sake of pedanting

[–] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Nuh-uh. They had the benefit of the doubt before, no longer. Have they brought back DEI initiatives? No, so they can fucking burn in a hole for all I care. They not getting my money.

[–] Grainne@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Headline: “Thrived”

Body: “Performed just as well”

Hmmmm

[–] Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

By definition a company must thrive or be stamped out. There are no other options.

[–] AgentSeven@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

"It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail." - Gore Vidal

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

LOL, not all that surprising.

[–] jim_v@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Tartco™.

[–] aceshigh@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

So this is saying that pulling back dei practices did not negatively impact the companies. I would love to see the comparison of projected revenue and benchmarks.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm surprised it's only just as well. DEI is meant to help the cream rise to the top

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago

Yep. These practices were not adopted because corporations are nice people that wanted to help improve society. They were implemented because they are good at identifying talent at bargain prices.