Christopher RufoDEIFeaturedMark Cuban

Oh, Chris Rufo Wasn’t Through Demolishing Mark Cuban and DEI Last Night By a LONG Shot – Twitchy

April 2, 2024
0 0
0
0
Tiffany Justice Demolishes Joy Reid on Her Own Show (Watch) – Twitchy
0
Shares

If you were with us yesterday, Twitchy readers, you will recall that Mark Cuban decided he wanted to wade into the waters of the DEI debate and embarrass himself … again. It started with Cuban replying to Jordan Peterson, but before long Christopher Rufo stepped in — because Cuban quoted his book, after all — and challenged Cuban to a long-form debate on the topic. 

Cuban proceeded to display his Trump Derangement Syndrome publicly, and we kind of left it at that for the time being. 

But Rufo was not done with Cuban. Not by a long shot. 

Later last evening, after Rufo had defined DEI for Cuban’s benefit, Cuban decided to step on a rake with a tweet demanding that Rufo show him examples of companies that desired ‘equity of outcome’ as part of their DEI initiatives.

The relevant portion of Cuban’s extended tweet reads:

Never in my professional career have I ever heard a CEO of a company of any size infer the following or anything close :

‘Equity,’ on the other hand, treats all inequality as illegitimate and attempts to force group equalization, or ‘equality of outcomes,’ through redistribution of wealth and property.’ 

Never. Not close.  

You are the researcher.  Can you show me any interviews with CEOs of American companies where the CEO says anything close to this? 

We will leave aside for the moment the fact that Cuben does not seem to know the difference between ‘imply’ and ‘infer.’

From this point, as they say … it was SO on.  

We won’t paste them all here, but in the thread below that tweet, Rufo showed public statements and policies from several companies explicitly outlining exactly how they would achieve ‘equality of outcome’ through DEI initiatives such as ‘antiracism’ and eliminating ‘white supremacy’ and ‘white privilege.’ Those companies included Google, Walmart, Verizon, AT&T, Bank of America, American Express, Raytheon, Disney, Lockheed Martin, and CVS. 

Recommended

So, you know, none of the big ones, LOL. 

Here are just a couple of the examples Rufo showed in his ‘thread of threads’:

All extremely scary. You’d think that Cuban would want to read through some of the threads that Rufo linked to learn more about the extensive answer Rufo provided, but he did not. He merely selected one of the tweets, and replied just a few minutes later (demonstrating he had not read any of them) with a condescending tweet. 

Of course. He played the ‘you didn’t respond with the EXACT words I gave you, so you are not answering my question’ card. 

But he forgot who he was playing against (or never knew in the first place). 

Rufo’s response: 

Verbatim. Good enough for you, Mark Cuban? 

What Cuban SHOULD have done is stop responding. But his actual next step was to try to condescend again, claiming that these are just ‘third-party’ training programs and not evidence that companies were really implementing these policies in their C-suites. 

Umm … WHAT? 

I wanted to see if Raytheon used Equality of Outcomes in any of their published materials. I couldn’t find any such reference  

What I did find was references and comments to Equality of Opportunity.  

You can go through their website for your own references https://rtx.com/our-responsibility/diversity-equity-inclusion/diversity-equity-inclusion-pillars-for-action#work… 

I’ve added some examples.   

That doesn’t mean you can’t be right and I’m wrong.  

Do you have any data on how Raytheon tried to implement “Equality of Outcomes”? I couldn’t find any

This is pure projection. Cuban accuses Rufo of doing shoddy research and uses his own — very limited — anecdotal research to prove it. 

Again we have to ask … does Cuban know who he was talking to here? Rufo is nothing if not thorough in his research. 

Actual quotas (which are illegal, by the way). Does Cuban still think this is merely ‘third-party training material’?

Rufo wasn’t done. 

… tying it to compensation, and discriminating against mostly whites, men, and Asians in order to realize it. The goal is ‘equal outcomes’ of employment and compensation by racial group, using affirmative action and ‘anti-racist discrimination’ to forcibly override group disparities in education, hours worked, math/verbal skill, and other merit-based measures. 

This might help clarify a misunderstanding that we’re running into: a corporation can attempt to create ‘equal outcomes’ within the firm, but not throughout society. That’s where government ‘equity’ policies come in. A government can adopt ‘equity’ using more aggressive means of equalizing group outcomes, namely, affirmative action, taxation and redistribution, cash reparations, or, in the extreme form, property expropriation, a policy that the critical race theorists admired when studying post-colonial African regimes. This is more classical, Marxist-style ‘equity.’

At this point, Cuban had stopped responding to Rufo directly, instead trying the deflection tactic of responding to others in the replies. But it didn’t save him. 

And if the sea of examples that Rufo provided was not enough, he then included an example from the highest level of the U.S. government. 

Leave it to Vice President Giggles to point out the terms in such a kindergarten fashion that even someone like Cuban could understand that when they say ‘equality of outcome,’ they mean EQUALITY OF OUTCOME. 

Of course, it all fell on deaf ears. Cuban did not reply to or QT this final example. He was too busy repeating his mantra to others. 

… or would want ‘Equality of Outcomes’ for employees

Yet this is the exact argument that @realchrisrufo

 and most others with an anti DEI position make.  

They say that Equity is defined as Equal Outcomes.  It’s not.   

Equity is putting employees in a position to succeed.  End of story.

Un-freaking-believable. We can understand why Cuban stopped engaging with Rufo and went off on tangents. It’s not that he didn’t see the evidence. It’s not that he couldn’t understand the evidence. How could he not with something so childlike as a Kamala Harris tweet? 

It’s that he refused to accept the evidence, so he just returned to his mantra and declared ‘victory.’

We’re not going to hold our breath hoping for the long-form discussion that Rufo requested. Cuban will never accept such a discussion and now we know why: he simply is not up to it. He is an acolyte of DEI and no amount of evidence will ever persuade him otherwise. 

That’s what’s known as being in a cult. 

It seems fitting to let Jordan Peterson, who started the whole discussion yesterday, to put the final nail in it. 

The full tweet is quite long but worth reading: 

I’ve talked to dozens of @TheDemocrats Congressmen and Senators alike over the last eight years: not one would draw a line between the classic liberals in the left and the bloody radicals. Seriously. Not a single one. Even when asked repeatedly. Even when in private. Even when prompted.

They refused outright to address what could well be the central issue of our time , which I formulated as a simple question: when does the left go too far? They would never even admit to the existence of the post-modern met-Marxists, insisting upon oppression at every turn, even though it is those ideologues who completely dominate, for example, the entire educational apparatus (and through that control more than 50% of the typical state budget).  

So far I see no indication whatsoever that Mr Cuban has the willingness to draw this necessary distinction, or even to consider the possibility that it might be necessary. He merely makes excuses for those who would if given the opportunity destroy him and everyone in his circle. This is exactly the attitude that characterizes the @TheDemocrats

 moderate leadership. It’s true even of Dean Phillips and RFK Jr (I asked them both directly) and they have more reason than most on the left to have been once bitten, twice shy.  

Why is this the case? First, perhaps, is straightforward refusal to admit to the magnitude of the problem. That’s the wilful blindness I alluded to earlier. Mr. Cuban stated recently with @lexfridman

 that he couldn’t imagine a cabal of therapeutic and medical professionals corrupt enough to enable the current trans epidemic and the butchery that accompanies it. So be it. It’s understandable: who wants to see that? Even 

@shellenberger  admitted to me that he had his head stuck in the sand regarding such things for about two years.   

Second: Perhaps Mr. Cuban, like the other moderate once-liberals, also harbours the desire to have it both ways. He is wildly rich–and more power to him, insofar as that was earned productively. But he also wants to play benevolent ally to those screaming ‘victim.’ The desire for both forms of status simultaneously is simply too much to ask for, just as in the case of the Ivy League students claiming their faux-allegiance with the dispossessed.  

Third, and finally: Mr. Cuban, like the other moderates, also appears not to understand that the true Dark Tetrad types (and beware of them, truly)–the true narcissists, manipulators, psychopaths and sadists–habitually dusguise themselves in the cloak of oppression. This heightens their danger, as that adopted status allows them to reputation-savage and even to steal with an attitude or moral superiority. Property, after all, is theft. Mr. Cuban: do you think that the typical DEI advocate is more or less likely, say, than the typical liberal to hold that view? If ‘yes,’ then think it through. If you believe that the correct answer is ‘no’ then that’s more comprehensive evidence that you just don’t understand the ideological terrain.  

The leftist moderates in the West appear hell-bent on learning everything about human nature the hard way.

It’s too bad that the rest of us will be dragged along for the ride.  

Hang on. It’s about to get bumpy.

Even though we made fun of him here, Mark Cuban is not dumb. He does not lack intelligence or the capability for critical thinking and analysis. On the contrary, he is an extremely smart man. But he flat-out refuses to look at the evidence he demands, even when it is shown to him in direct and no uncertain terms. 

That is ideological capture.

And it is emblematic of today’s leftists (no longer liberals).

If a lot of other CEOs are as wilfully blind as Cuban, it’s going to get VERY bumpy indeed. 

***

Editor’s Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy’s conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 50% off your VIP membership!



Source link

Related Posts

Load More Posts Loading...No More Posts.
© 2024 ariseright
© 2024 ariseright
Your text