That's incorrect. The main use of diversity is in an antiracist fashion. I'd suggest you read one of Kendi's books. Stamped from the Beginning has clear and readable descriptions of the difference, but it's a relatively long work, so you might start with one of his shorter books.

Why not? My point is that it should! What percentage of the US population is from South / East Asia? How does it compare to the representation of others? If it's similar or less, and it still somehow doesn't "count," then we have a diversity problem.

> Put more frankly, the success of recent immigrants does not erase America's long history of brutality and exploitation toward blacks and Latin Americans.

But given that America was far more brutal and exploitative towards Chinese immigrants than towards Latin Americans, why are Latinos so prioritized by these initiatives to favor certain racial groups?

> And I think it's worth noting that some of the immigrants have brought their own biases with them, such that caste discrimination is now also a problem in Silicon Valley: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/10/27/indian-...

Ironic that in a discussion about diversity, you believe in a prejudiced stereotype about a major ethnic group in Silicon Valley. Casteism is pretty much a nonissue in Silicon Valley, if only for the simple reason that most Indian-Americans tend to be ignorant about the castes of most other Indian-Americans.

Sure, and we are discussing the existence of racial discrimination in engineering hiring at top tech companies, not American history or South Asian culture. Asian immigrants on H1-B conducting coding tests as interviewers at FAANG did not involve themselves in the American Jim Crowe south, for example. It's saddening to see America's own past being used to justify discrimination in the present, even to people who aren't originally from the US.

You might not share the beliefs of others that are gainfully rallying behind diversity as a cause to justify penalizing some minority groups for "doing too well" and bolstering others (the literal definition of discrimination), but it IS happening -- and certainly more people than "nobody" are backing it, provoking my original statements. Someone had to put Prop 16 on the ballot, for example (which was thankfully voted against by a large margin of fellow CA Democrats).

While I certainly understand bad PR (a surprising number of people lack critical thinking skills), what is wrong or biased about hiring for coding positions based on merit-based performance on an objective coding test? Anybody regardless of background or group membership that passes will be hired, meaning it is fair and unbiased, by definition -- that is the diversity program, and if there is some lack of objectivity, that is what needs to be addressed. If that is not the case, then yes, I agree with you, the hiring process would be biased.

Actually listening to minorities instead of summoning some kind of sick quota for different ethnicities. Racists are in stark decline and it didn't even take a diversity program or a change in language rules.

The companies are then righting the wrongs on the shoulders of innocents, that most likely never were racists to begin with. In short, just committing to another mistake.

> South Asia and SE Asia, maybe. But East Asia (NE China, Korea, Japan) has actually one of the most ethnically "pure" populations in the world.

Northeast China–usually defined as the provinces of Liaoning, Jilin, and Heilongjiang–does not belong on your list. According to the 2000 Chinese census, about 10% of the population of Northeast China comes from ethnic minorities – the majority of whom are Manchus, but also including significant numbers of Mongols and Koreans. That is far from being 'one of the most ethnically "pure" populations in the world'-especially when compared to Japan or Korea.

Indeed, even though Northeast China was (in 2000) approximately 90% Han, prior to the 19th century Han were a minority in the region, and Manchus were the numerically (and politically) dominant ethnic group.

According to the 2000 Census, the most ethnically homogenous part of China is not the North or Northeast, but rather Eastern China, which is over 99% Han (and, as well as being over 99% Han overall, 4 of its 7 provinces are over 99% Han too.) By contrast, North China is about 94% Han and Northeast China is only around 90% Han.

(There have been two Chinese censuses since, in 2010 and 2020, but I can't find ethnicity figures for them.)

This is so ridiculously ignorant.