The Collapse of "DEI" - A Corporate Lie
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024
- "DEI" (Diversity Equity and Inclusion) initiatives are built on a falsehood. As with anything... building without a proper fundation, yields unsustainable results, and that is precisely what we are witnessing in the world of DEI, "BRIDGE", and ESG.
However, there is a widespread lack of understanding about what these issues are, where they came from, or why they are pulling back, which led me to making this video about the concept of DEI, where it came from, and the true reasons why we are now watching it fail.
As large companies like Microsoft, Google and Meta begin dismantling their DEI programs... the writing is on the wall for one of the most divisive topics of the past few years.
If you like the content please consider supporting through the links below, particularly Locals and Patreon. Thank you.
PATREON: / ueg
LOCALS: upperechelon.l...
Become a channel member: / @upperechelon
VPN DEAL: get.surfshark....
COMPLETE CYBER SECURITY PRODUCT LIST: linktr.ee/uppe...
ODYSEE INVITE: odysee.com/$/i...
⦁ UPPER ECHELON WEBSITE: upperechelon.gg
⦁ DISCORD SERVER: / discord
⦁ Giraffe Video: • Giraffe running in her...
⦁ Outtro Song: • Hot Heat - Topher Mohr... MY
BUSINESS EMAIL: upperechelongamers@yahoo.com
#DEI #corporate #culture
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (2/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GgeGQOP10RQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Ways to support the channel/special deals.
VPN DEAL: get.surfshark.net/aff_c?offer_id=1448&aff_id=19647
PATREON: www.patreon.com/UEG
LOCALS: upperechelon.locals.com/support
First! :D
This research paper that started DEI is funny and so racist and so obviously wrong. Not even a primary school teacher would accept it if you hand it in.
Im calling you and two others out.
th-cam.com/video/vUycrJ2eB6c/w-d-xo.html
Just a quick correction: Microsoft didn't lay off their DEI Teams, just one specific team, th-cam.com/video/L9WIfADgJrU/w-d-xo.html (I know Lunduke can be divisive)
I remember talking about "Frauenquote" (having a quota for women) in school in the mid-2000s, so the idea is not completely new.
Maybe the topic is dry, but its sheer pervasiveness should make people listen to your video to understand the background.
Government lie*
this didn't come from corpos, it came from corpos collaborating with the woke government. because when corporations collab with the government that's what you call fascism, and that's how you establish an authoritarian regime, which is exactly what the prog left is trying to do.
this is also the result of leftist movements like feminsism where hiring women = good because we need more women in , lgbtq because hiring queers = good, and blm because hiring nonwhites = good. all of these movements were pushed by western governments too.
all of this was entirely against the free market, corporations don't just commit sodoku on their own, DEI would have never existed if it was entirely up to supply and demand, the demand never justified the supply, so the government artificially created the demand and funded the supply through ESG scores
People are not against diversity. People are against forced diviersity and tokenism.
Nah I'm against diversity.
Tbh, seeing how y’all reacted to Yasuke made me question that…
@@Darth_Bateman the whole history of Yasuke being a samurai was just a man that quoted himself for almost a decade slowly editing Yasuke's bio on wikipedia from the looks of it
@@Darth_Bateman Seeing how ya'll treat your tokens makes you questionable
But that proves his point - the current obsession with yasuke is apex tokenism.
Multi billion dollar corporations will never care about your feelings. They follow the money.
Except this doesn't earn money, on the contrary it loses money like you wouldn't believe.
The motivation of money and greed is highly questionable. Look up the video _The Mother of Sunk Costs_ by Endeavour. In it, the elites who support the concept that video is discussing don't seen to care about money but rather care about a very internalized idealism, thinking that they are improving the world despite doing so at the expense of the people they hate, the negative consequences of their hubris, and the shrinking returns in profits.
The video also discusses that not every member of the elite agrees with this "idealism" because of the "competency crisis", one of whom questioning this is Elon Musk himself.
they do care about ur feelings, being able to control ones feelings can increase sales and brand recognition. also hatred sells. ALOT!
And that is why they will lose money if they continue to be spitefully/fearfully biased. Customers feeling bad = No money.
As they should, it predictable, unlike if they follow religion, ideology, or a the beliefs of a Feudal Lord
The DEI also have an effect on how people are viewed if they get a job or not. For instance, at Disney, it was recently to the public that they don't hire or promote anyone that is straight white and male, but even if you are say a black man, you may not get hired or promoted if your skin color isn't dark enough. Its straight up racism. In other words, they're hiring people based on how they look, not in how good they are at their job.
DEI in concept probably had good intentions however in Practice it is horribly corrupt. Furthermore focusing on Equity over Equality is one of the biggest failures of DEI as it attempts to make the Outcomes Equal instead of the Opportunities.
Equality = Equal Opportunity
Equity = Equal Outcomes
But in the Chaos of reality you can't control the Outcomes, you can only control the Opportunities to get the certain outcome (or as close as you can) you want, but even then it's up to chance.
that is blantantly illegal, so I hope you have some sources to back this up.
Isnt that illegal in america? Not hiring based on skin colour?
@@PoorMuttskithe one of the higher up literally said so on video, it’s on project Veritas.
@@why7654only if you can prove it without a doubt
No such thing as "anti-racism"
It's just more racism.
Same goes for “reverse racism”.
That’s just more racism, period.
Thats not what Ibram Kendi X and CRT proponents believe
@@duckymomo7935 well we don't care what dishonest grifters think.
DEI is our Stench
@@AszkalonOfVerra No yt supremacy is a stench
Props to Kirsche for bringing this up 7 months ago and being consistent with all the information. She’s been a beast at it and is still covering this.
People have been talking about this bs for 6 years now.😂
@@metallboy25Talking about it for years and still coming the wrong conclusion.
@@Snowie7826 what do you think the right conclusion is?
@@metallboy25 Nope.
Fuck me the Kirsche simps are out in force, whats it like to have ten second tom lives?
DEI is just racism with extra steps
A lot less steps in all actuality. Unless you consider Jim Crow racism equipped with an encyclopedia.
Only a tad less harmful than straight up classical nepotism. It's very rare that a boss's son is groomed to take over the company, so the results are predicably disastrous. While it's also rare that DEI are all that great, they usually aren't in upper management (unless you are Boeing, as how else does upper management with zero engineering background even get hired, for 40 years at this point. Boeing has been practicing DEI before DEI was even coined!). The bedlam is usually quite contained.
After all, the Japanese only technically have family enterprises when the 70 year old boss adopts a 30 year old successor with zero blood relationship, before handing over the business to said successor. Actual family enterprises rarely last 3 generations.
Unfortunately, while it's very easy to scrap DEI, it isn't very straightforward to scrap plain old nepotism, for that has been around for as long as human enterprises first founded in Sumer
There are no extra steps. It’s simply bigotry of the highest order. Actual bigotry and prejudice, not whatever bastardised version the left is using as an insult.
@@Demopans5990First it isn't rare for a family member to take over a PRIVATE business. Most big companies go public. Nepotism usually takes the form of back scratching between execs in that environment. Hire my son at your firm, he said during golf.
Second, you can google Boeing's entire management team right now. It is mostly men and mostly white people. You have a deeeeep political bias man. You couldn't be bothered to actually look this shit up before blithering about DEI. The actual problem at Boeing has been talked about by their own engineers had you bothered to listen. It is run entirely by the business end. No engineers, no one who gives a shit about safety.
As to DEI, is it why movies suck? No, they suck because the money men don't give a shit. DEI is a fad, they are dumping it because the fad is over. Will the movies get better? No, because they still don't give a shit. Perhaps some new upstarts will replace the old guard, but until then, you will get dogshit remake after dogshit remake.
What extra steps? It literally is just racism.
Big props to Kirsche for being one of the first people I saw to actually start talking about Bridge as a part of the whole DEI engine.
That's who he is calling a grifter because he's only here to do damage control for the left.
Upper Echelon Stole Kische's work and did not give her credit. He is a Fraud and a Grifter.
Odd he didn’t mention her. They played a big part in seeing the full picture.
@@ThatGuy-rz6tv do you not mean the first? Just saying I haven't seen anyone else talking about it at all before her
@@HoldinContempt @UpperEchelon Kirsche has made an almost 2 hour long response video to you going over all of her receipts to outline why DEI/BRIDGE is still a legitimate danger in the business world. This commenter here also thinks you're full of it & being fraudulent. Kirsche is at least good faith with you & encourages others to be as well, but not all commenters here are going to have the same view as you. You should get out ahead of this misunderstanding & talk to her, maybe a stream or something?
They will only rename it
Bam, and they did.
just like ufo’s
Yeah, a lot of DEI positions have already had title changes because it's not going away, it's just trying to be more subtle now the it realized it jumped the gun.
It's called bridge now
100%
This is not the end of dei, and dei is not good in any way whatsoever.
I am not as good at speaking as a certain fox woman, named kirsche, so I suggest everyone to go check out what she says on BRIDGE.
But basically, dei is not dead and they are trying to incorporate it into the DNA of companies so it is completely inescapable.
Not trying to harass upper echelon or anything, I'm just trying to spread the word, this is absolutely not the end.
It's too valuable to commies, because they can silence you for questioning it on the grounds you're "being mean" to someone.
well shiii
Dei is literally Marxism.
😅 I'm loving these reporting Anime Waifus... they seriously belong the internets deepest Lore section... I want somebody to make an anime Waifu Iceberg!
So we can find out how deep those spunky waters really are !
Your %1000 right. It will never end because it is a woke mind virus, a cult, and they are systematically implementing it in such a way they cant undo it, especially if they depend on google, Microsoft, apple systems, they ALL want this DEI shit too and just keep forcing it more and more. Just because they say they are moving away from it, only means they were too cocky and got caught, just realized it red handed, now want to brainstorm on how to do it worse, and just not have to admit to it legally until way later when they have full control of the economy and the system simply through job hiring practices, and forcing DEI nonsense anytime they want to create a false flag event or crisis so they can try and force people to vote for them again, just do to it all over again.
Dude you gotta give Kirsche the credit she deserves. She is the one who has been uncovering everything on BRIDGE and working her ass off to spread informations about it everywhere. You wouldn’t have known about it unless the Foxu had uncovered it.
Yep, the spicy foxu deserves credit. And to think, the only reason she found out about BRIDGE, was from a deep dive into Campbells soup.
@@Khornate888 if you put that on a book, nobody would believe that is possible
Except he replied to her video and revealed where he got it from, along with never having heard of her before.
Quoted response :
"Haven't watched yet. Heard about bridge through a post on the Kotaku in action subreddit.
I have never heard of you before.
Also the main grifter I was referring to is grummz. Which I don't think should be disputed by anyone.
Watching now."
End quote.
Literally WHO?
@@foenrik8941honestly if echelon is claiming that grummz is the grifter while being routinely behind the ball on this topic for the last few years then that really tells me all i need to know about him anymore. Sad cuz i remember when he had more edgy content. Now he's ironically calling grummz and I'm sure others that have been vindicated over and over again over the course of this year, many being the tip of the spear sounding the alarm and taking the heat for it from obviously the left and many in the center (normies) to the right, calling them crazy etc...when it's echelon thats beating a dead horse at this point (could almost call it grifting) only reporting the tip of the iceberg while bringing nothing new to the table. Honestly this is stuff i was up to date on back at the end of the last year and hes hardly scratched the surface on bridge, their mission statement, and esg or the backers behind that initiative like black rock. Few months back echelon did a video calling this stuff conspiracy theory while i tried dropping a comment in said video pointing out how Larry Fink was literally talking about "forcing behaviors".
He's not the info powerhouse i once regarded him to be anymore.
DEI has come to mean racial and gender diversity partly because of McKinsey's study-- and partly because forced race and gender inclusion upsets the most people. Historically, DEI can also mean hiring and promoting more military veterans, more people with physical disabilities and more rural Americans (4H). Hijacking "DEI" to narrow the meaning benefited consultants but harmed the marginalized.
Woah, It's the chocolate rain guy. Absolute legend.
You certainly didn't get famous from DEI, you made a hit song
Still blows my mind seeing you drop into interesting videos and topics like this. Brings home the fact that pretty much every TH-camr we watch is just a normal person.
some stay dry and others feel the pain
Thank you for your input here. I honestly hadn’t even thought of it that way, and this was quite eye-opening.
Kirsche has been exposing so much of the secrets that are openly spoken about by their defenders yet MOST people who are against DEI rarely ever mention BRIDGE.
Gotta love the irony behind that acronym. Always makes me think "If you believe that, I got a BRIDGE to sell ya". Certainly fitting...
@@Bladorage she is self admitted not the sharpest coconut on the internet. I think she has a bias but she is also collecting as much info as she can and usually she uses their own words. And you can't be full serious all the time, you need some levity even if the discussion is serious
@@Bladorage I'd hardly call information from leading DEI advocates and BRIDGE's own website and newsletter a "narrow view."
@@BladorageShe always reads articles and studies from the actual sourced, liar.
@@Bladorage "Hell, even when she is doing interviews it comes off as somewhat of a comedy unlike how serious pipa is when she interviews someone." So you never have watched a Kirsche interview, Kirsche is of the let them speak style of interviewer and rarely does anything comedic or any kind of clowning on people, so your statement comes off as just pure ignorance.
The bizarre thing is I remember a world when this didn't matter and anything resembling racism was basically defeated. Born in 1992, in elementary during the early 2000's. Michael Vick was the most popular football player. Kobe Bryant the most popular basketball player. GTA San Andreas broke every sales record on the back of a little known rapper named Young Maylay. NHRA drag racing and monster truck racing full of successful female race car drivers. Then it feels like I woke up ten years later and suddenly every company and TV show was obsessed with racial and gender ratios, all at once, for seemingly no reason at all.
It is called social engineering
Yup, we watched Fresh prince, Blade was my favorite movie hero, Jackie Chan was huge, so was Eddie Murphy and Whoopie Goldberg had huge hits with sister act, there were great actors and actresses of every color that made it to the top on talent alone.
That's all out the window because now there are so many diversity hires that diversity hire is a word, and people no longer feel sure about the merits of a person, because so many have been put in positions they were not qualified for because they ticked some box.
@@Yattayatta Do you have any examples of that happening? Someone isn't going to become a liscensed doctor just because they're a minority. They still need the same skills and education as any other doctor. Same for fields in IT, engineering, research, etc. Do you think companies are willing to take liabilities for hiring people who are wholly unqualified for performing the duties they're hired for? The issue I have with the idea of "diversity hires" is that it seems to be thrown about whenever a minorities are involved in a process and something happens.
Ie ppl blaming Boeing plane malfunctions on diversity hires, ppl blaming the Kimberly Cheatle for you know what because she's a woman, despite not having any direct role to play in preventing you know what, etc. If diversity hires are as much of an issue as they seem, Id expect companies and businesses to be sued, consistently, for poor work performed by unqualified people, or evidence that suggests companies immediately hire people based on their race.
Same. I'm sure it was a thing for some people but my friend group and everyone I knew had no issues. Now I'm 32 and it's EVERYWHERE.
It's not racism it's just corporate grift. Actually it's both but they justify it for the grift.
BRIDGE exists, stop saying they're done
This!
True. Beware of fake outlooks. ESG backtrack 1 step but advances 3. Even my current company (which is quite diverse by nature) already fell victim to ESG and already started on DEI meetings. We are seeing meritocracy cease to exist slowly.
And even if bridge collapses, another takes its place. There's a lot of interest and investment behind this. Enough to aim lead at trump...
Also, the reason they can infiltrate companies is that civil right laws of the USA dictates you can prove discrimination by a non-diverse outcome. Meaning, a company with 9 men and 1 women is already in violation of civil rights and therefore DEI can infect it legally.
They don't need a excuse like 'diverse companies make more money' And until this law is changed, DEI can only increase.
So buckle up! We are just starting...
@@joshanonline It won't end until massive cultural trauma forces it too, or the people behind it die of old age. They're too powerful and too far gone to let it die.
@@joshanonline meritocracy is ceasing to exist? really? are you talking about corporate America? As this video discusses- the initiatives are evaporating. The vast majority of them have existed for less than four years. We don't need to have a meltdown over this.
It's not like these companions were bastions of fair play and merit, to begin with. The fortune 100 engineering firm I worked for, my region had an incompetent regional director installed, and he filled in the ranks with a bunch of people who were really incompetent (but loyal to him). Their poor management cost the company huge sums of money, tens of millions of dollars, squandered. None of it ever mattered. He not only kept his job, but got promoted, eventually. I saw one guy's team perform a million dollars of non billable work on a project budgeted for a million, totally insane. This is a guy who literally could not design a slab of concrete. But he had friends in high places, and they made creative excuses for him. They were all white males in management, a group of around ten people, and this all went on through the 2010s to 2020, when I was working there.
Because the company is a behemoth, and basically operates as a financial firm overseeing a portfolio of projects, rather than an engineering firm, it doesn't matter that their managers were super incompetent and lost a bunch of money for ten years straight. If you have a manager high up protecting you, then merit doesn't matter. They couldn't manage an engineering project to save their life, but they could make a lot of money on their investments, opaque financial instruments, weird tax loopholes, playing games with their assets, and bizarre schemes of internal loans and shells, lawsuits, change orders, and counter-claims. Their core service- engineering- it was secondary.
We had an MIT educated project manager who was beloved, a white woman in her mid 30s. They pushed her out because she accidentally revealed one of her peers was totally incompetent. This peer PM had been complaining for years about a bad project he had been managing, how this project was impossible, the client was unreasonable, it was going to take 12-18 months to get the project back on track, we were going to have to eat a whopping loss, and there were probably going to be lawsuits. They ended up giving the work to the young MIT PM. The MIT PM figured out what was wrong, mended relationships with the client, lead the team to come up with a clever engineering solution, and had everything fixed and delivered in eight weeks. No lawsuits, only modest losses. It made the regional manager look really, really bad. So they pushed her out.
It was a crazy place to work.
It's not a collapse; it's deliberate obfuscation that it is still happening. In the video you talked about various companies re-affirming their belief in DEI while removing the teams directly tied to it
From what I have observed within my workplace, DEI was invented solely for an executive to pad their resume without really doing anything substantive. If it means pinning people against others, who cares, they're not in that company anymore.
@@vgernyc They just hate Whites actually.
100% Black... The Most D of them all
100% White... The Most R of them all
It's about special group rights and nothing more. Never was about merit.
Don't forget money, it pays people, the ones who give workshops and lectures. These people use faulty graphs and lie to corporations to sound like they bring in money.
It's a means for the less capable college grads (who all took big loans to go to school) to get high-paying jobs so they can actually pay back those loans. The banks need a body - regardless of its capabilities - in order to conjure the loan money to give to the potential student. It's the student's ass on the line - the money created goes to the college, so it's a win for them. Then, that graduate needs a job to pay back those loans, which is where the incentive on the banks' end to push DEI comes in.
Kirsche Verstahl would disagree that the companies are dismantling anything. That they're just integrating it and forcing everyone in the company to be the enforcers.
You may need to talk with her for more information.
1 day and comment mentioning the K-word is still up. Let's wait a bit more.
I'm here because a Kirsche reaction video to this was in my feed.
Yeah, and this clearly won't go away just because it's bad business. If that was the case, Disney would have rooted this out by now. These people aren't just going away, it's not getting shut down because it's not profitable. Profit was never their goal to begin with. This isn't about good business. No-one was deceived, everyone involved knew what this was. It's about making a massive change to culture, both corporate, pop and more in order to adopted a different ideology and it's weird that it's just not even mentioned in this video. These people are fanatics, the money is inconsequential.
Sorry but DEI is not going away. It is being subsumed by BRIDGE. The only thing about DEI that is going away are departments and job positions specifically tailored to and advertised under the umbrella of DEI, while BRIDGE’s initiative is to ensure that every position in the company - whether it be managerial, entry level, or at the tippy top - adheres to the DEI / ESG mantra. BRIDGE is not just a tool to ensure the execution of DEI. It IS DEI 2.0.
It will go because :
1. Its actively loosing big companies money
2. People are pushing back against it and they are becoming apathic about it.
It might take 10 or 20 years ( or maybe less ) but it will go.
Most people don't buy this obviously forced political ideology and lecturing.
We do like natural occuring diversity.
@@Vlad_-_-_ What if their job, regardless of position, was on the line?
@@Vlad_-_-_ This. Its cost money, its looks bad outside of the media and interest groups.
You will get racist lawsuits against it. Who is much easier on lower levels than on higher where stuff like reputation an networks matter a lot.
I say 2-5 years. Hollywood already starting to change as they are so our of money and this shit nuked them.
For bread none care much about the politic of who making it unless they get stupid .
For movies and games its very obvious and the bottom fell off.
Furiosa failed as most thought its probably woke shit about an side character.
Solution, don't make these sort of movies even if they made sense 30 years ago, tickets are much more expensive, by experience movie is probably shit and on streaming in an month.
@@Deadagentthat's like saying, if we get rid of all the insane people what would happen to the asylum workers.
Bro you're fixing something, they will find other jobs. Companies start up and close all the time, and yet people still work.
@@Vlad_-_-_it’ll take far less than 10 years at this point. It is just this year alone you can arguably say most of the western world takes this seriously. The moment the stock drops it drops fast. Even the biggest company can potentially go bankrupt within a year in modern world. Only reason it hasn’t happen is thanks to governmental support. When the government becomes aware your loss is due to incompetence the set company is forced to make priorities which more often leans the opposite direction. A year ago it was all about trans bathrooms and trans athletes. These two ideas are basically dead now thanks to sever financial and support losses
Dei is not goeing away it has been rebranded to Bridge Kirsche has explained this on youtube multiple times
I think you guys are putting way too much stock in this
So no mention of Kirsche? She's basically the only creator speaking on this topic, and she's doing great work btw
Vtubers aren't human so no mention of your safe for work wank personality.
Who? The man heard of BRIDGE in a subreddit, not from the spicy fox, my brother in christ.
@@TerebikunDayo Wrong.
@@ninjatango No u >:(
You should talk to a small youtuber named Kirsche about BRIDGE, she researched it a lot.She can tell you in-depth about it as she has been covering it for almost a year. She's a bit disappointed, nobody else wants to.
Talking to Kirsche, after calling everybody else a grifter, is an admission of a mistake. Mistakes can be corrected but pride is deadly and corrosive.
That’s the brain rot zoomer anime creep right?
It's hard to believe that a vague study with poorly worded and purposely misleading findings made such an impact on massive companies with tons of analysts and advisors. There has to be way more to this.
Agreed, it doesn't make sense as a fundamental cause.
There is much more to this, he is just describing the steps and timing of the planned implementation of this divisive propaganda campaign into corporate culture, this has been a coordinated pushed into all facets of our lives across all western civilization.
Check out the story about yasuke. The first black samurai from the upcoming Asassins Creed: Shadows game. It´s based on a book by Thomas Lockley. That changed articles under an alias on the wikipedia page starting in 2012 and referenced himself as an expert in this article. 10 years later his fantasy story gets made into a game.
It's the part that this video conveniently didn't cover. If you think about it, just because a study said DEI leads to profits, it doesn't mean companies will just outright push strong and hard for it without any actual proof. These companies' upper echelons do risk-assessment, after all. And if they actually try to assess the possibilities of DEI being a boon, they'd likely realize early that the study is mistaken. If so, why are there still companies that push the agenda? It's because it's monetarily incentivized via investments. Remember that the largest global entities who invest a ton of money into companies, for example Blackrock, push the idea of an ESG score being a good guide for how they choose which companies qualify for their investment money. And how does a company raise its ESG score? Pushing DEI. If it were not incentivized by globalist corporation investment money,, I highly doubt these companies would be pushing for DEI at all. Long story short, it's not that the companies are pursuing DEI out of that illusory growth the study falsely claims. It's that globalists will give you investment money if you push DEI that made it so prevalent across industries like the video game industry... Now ask yourself this question. What happens to a video game development studio if it goes bust due to releasing products that fail due to excessive DEI pushing? Who gets to own them or where are the rights handed over to? Me thinks the major shareholders each get a piece of the pie and it becomes their property. But that's just me.
You would be surprised. We love fads as humans. Greed is pretty shallow.
The backwards relationship was obvious from the first sentence. If you're a major successful company, you start to diversify to improve your public perception.
correct. You diversify to different areas, find experts there, those experts matriculate to other areas. Organically.
Ngl, you didn't cook with this one
The way you dismissed everyone else but yourself as "grifters" really left a poor impression.
I'm glad he talks about it, butyou presents DEI and BRIDGE as just investors and firms while handwaving concerns about what's going on, boiling it down to Internet grifting without looking into it further all while declaring DEI is going away.
If you have any clue what the goal of BRIDGE is, you should also know their MAIN GOAL is to incorporate DEI in the corporations without needing separate team for it.
DEI is not turning into BRIDGE. BRIDGE is incorporating DEI into corporations with gaslight statements like "we get rid of DEI team" so average person thinks they give up on it completely.
DEI is dead to the PUBLIC.
BUT it's not going away because they're using BRIDGE (which CREATED DEI) as a way to put it into ALL workplace culture.
The courts deem DEI unlawful, so the companies stopped calling it that but are STILL doing DEI things...
BRIDGE has its own website of all the big corporations that created it.
BRIDGE is an acronym for ;
Belonging
Representation
Inclusion
Diversity
the G is the Gap and E is for "Equity"
bridge is about rebranding and obfuscating in order to dodge accountability
The jews are still alive so expect a return on it
All you really need is a discrimination lawsuit to set precedent to end it. Simple, but NOT easy...
Jesus what is it with the acronyms with these people. And that McKinsey study has been widely debunked.
Upper E is completely wrong about his conclusions. DEI is a bad thing, and the entire Western world didn't start shoving immigration, diversity, multiculturalism down out throats via University propaganda, movies, TV shows, video games, corporations and governments because of a paper that said "DEI increases profits in large corporations"
His conclusion is so silly it is hard to believe. I feel like he is a coward who is afraid to say anything that might upset the mob. Otherwise, he is just stupid.
So a 'cherry picked' "research paper", that looked at coincidentally 'diverse' companies, that had diverse boards with the required skills for the jobs; Scammed a bunch of companies into letting themselves take massive profit hits while believing that "It's still good! It's still good!", just like Homer Simpson chasing his roast pig.
I think this deserves a nice little 'golf clap'.
I got censored, trying again: I'm not convinced that this one study was the primary driver.
@@ReturnOfHeresy,
Well, stranger things have happened. When companies chase the 'Almighty Dollar' so hard, that they chase it right down the toilet; It sounds pretty believable to me.
It worked and companies who 'advise' on DEI made bank.
I mean is it not possible this was done through investments from firms like Blackrock (directly or indirectly through other companies like Weird Ghost, Sweet Baby, etc.) to obtain more control in the entertainment industry? That's mainly what I'm concerned about with this stuff. It's had a sterilizing effect on some of my favorite entertainment franchises/IPs.
It's the same scam Elisabeth Holmes ran with Theranos. All hype No substance
"DEI is an ethos that recognizes that value of diverse voices" kinda sounds okay since it pretty much implies diversity of thought. In practice, as we have seen for years, is that their diversity is literally skin deep. You are hired based on your physical appearances, not the voice and skill you bring to the company. And given Western politics that push for DEI, it also seems like they prefer everyone thinking the same at least in terms of politics.
What jobs would you say companies are giving to people based on looks? I could see if looks were a factor and experience was largely considered for the job though. Like an investment company isn't going to hire someone who doesn't know how to read spreadsheets, doesn't know how to perform math, or doesn't know economic theories.
A clinic isnt going to hire a doctor who doesnt know the physiology, illnesses, etc of the concentration of the body they should've learned in medical school.
A company isnt going to hire an unlicensed electrician to fix their electronics or troubleshoot issues, etc.
For most jobs, people need to have at least a baseline understanding to get the job done; otherwise, there's a high liability for the company. Ie, someone ruining company balance sheets, a patient becoming ill or harmed from malpractice, and a company losing power and its ability to get a task done. All of which cause a loss of money, and potential lawsuits.
If companies want to take the person's attitude, race, etc into consideration, I don't necessarily see a problem in that.
@@trainerkam3218 Barring modeling agencies which I think does have to consider appearances, IMO all other companies should have to hire based on merit first. If they also happen to be part of a minority group, then that's a bonus.
With DEI initiatives in place, they hire based on gender and race first, with skill being a bonus. This is because of the ESG reports companies have to do to get more ESG money. These ESG reports want to see minorities being present in all levels of your company, in other words diversity quotas.
For example, take American colleges during the heavy push for Affirmative Action roughly a few years ago. Asians and White people that score high are being skipped for admission in favor of blacks and browns who score a lot less. Ivy Leagues want their ESG portfolio to look "diverse and inclusive" so they're admitting less qualified individuals for their courses in order to meet quotas. They treat minorities as nothing more than statistics and perhaps set them up for failure as well. And apparently this happens to a lot of private companies (allegedly silicon valley techs) who want a taste of ESG money.
My source for this isn't exactly asspull, just a cumulative information I got from various sites and video over these years. I'm sure the affirmative action thing is a highly publicized fact so I hope I don't need to expand on that.
@@trainerkam3218 Of course they're not gonna hire / admit totally unqualified individuals for the positions. It's just that less qualified people get the positions first as long as they meet diversity criteria. The result of this is lesser quality products being produced.
Major critics of DEI point this to happen a lot in the entertainment industry. Comics, games, movies, etc. Hence we see a lot of flops lately.
If a company REALLY wants to hire based on race, for example it's part of their mission-vision to uplift specific minorities, then I guess that's okay. But apparently America has codified into law that hiring based on race is illegal. Also, they still have to compete in the market anyways. The customers aren't obligated to consume their product just because it's made by minorities. In the end, quality of a product is not tied to racial identity.
@@randomanonymousperson3603
> With DEI initiatives in place, they hire based on gender and race first, with skill being a bonus.
This is exactly the problem. Exhibit A) The current state of Windows.
I could go on and on and on. I work in IT for a government entity. Every single product from every single company we deal with that goes on and on about their DEI practices is utter and outright *garbage* riddled with issues.
@@trainerkam3218 Oh let me see...Well here in the UK those who are black/brown/women are being given probity with regards to hiring when it comes to certain jobs like firefighting and the police (just two examples) with the results that white men are being discriminated against since certain companies won't hire them (or at least make them very low in priority), _furthermore_ a lot of these people being hired are inept in every possible way (female cops looking scared or running around in a blind panic) although of course the requirements for said jobs have also being altered or even downright lowered. For example, you now need a degree to get into policing which is ridiculous. So yes at least some companies _ARE_ hiring based on skin colour and gender alone rather than merit.
They arent going away, they are doublin down and getting a name change. Kirsche did a great job researching this. highly recommend you check her out.
If they keep losing money and companies going out of buissnes, they cant keep that up forever
@@noania629 Tell that to Black Rock.
It's insane how easy it is to manipulate people to suddenly forget that corporations aren't your friends
Cel to the moon
It is amazing to watch this entire comment section be so manipulated to think a single paper about diversity is why all the corporations across the Western world suddenly started implementing the practices.
It is also crazy to see this guy be so much of a coward that he won't come out and say "diversity is a bad thing"
“Didn’t earn it”
😂 im stealing that terminology
@@dariusaliena5237 The way you stole opportunities from minorities.
"Destroying Enterprises Internally", "Don't Even Invest", "Discouraging Employee Initiative", so many more. The best one is "Didn't Earn It".
Birth is a random lottery and when done right, equity is about making it so that random chance dosent matter. Different people have different needs.
@@deohere7647 Lottery? So you are treating some ethnicities as jackpot? You probably have an inferiority complex
"It's all boring and dull and numb"
**Me watching this with utter fixation**
I think that is the difference between somone more mature who can follow and the avverage tik tok user who likely clicked off a dozend times already, while being "bored to death" it's a shame what the internet did to some folks.
He's a great presenter, right? I'm never bored with his videos.
@@EliSkylander his voice and speech is also really nice and easy to listen to.
It is consistent with the argument of the video though. If well-paid corporate execs who enforced DEI initially never bothered to read the actual investment study claiming DEI is more profitable, then the average laymen certainly isn't going to care about the flaws in research methodology of the study either!
@@GengoSenmon It makes me think of a the quote by George Orwell "there are things so stupid only an intellectual would believe them" and people who make money by manipulating the market and stocks are either on the intellectual or stupid side, no in between.
Meanwhile the lay person (of non progressive thought) could have easily told you that made no sense and must be a flawed research. I could have tell you that without reading it because in this day and age you're not to trust any paper claiming anything, the idea of falsidical paradoxes (something that all intuition tells you is true (like the claim that diversity hiring loses money) but it's actually false (diversity hiring makes money)) is stretched to make you doubt yourself when in reality you perhaps shouldn't. Women aren't a majority of videogamers in the console, high end space, and diversity, gender and race based hiring isn't a money making strategy and any claim to the contrary is fabricated. The Chad move is to dismiss the study outright if it says progressives are right and say "the data is all false, forged, altered and made up", 100% of the time you'll be right.
I'd argue there *IS* a problem with Equity.
Equality is good. Equity is not.
Forced equity is bad
In particular: equality under the law.
@@jiripazour9551 Equality = Equal Opportunity.
Equity = Equal outcome.
Equity justifies discrimination in the pursuit of ensuring all groups have equal percentages of representation at the top. Equality says everyone gets a shot at success, and those who work hard and earn it, will obtain it, regardless of skin color or what other group they belong to.
Equity is always forced.
@@jiripazour9551 Equity in "practice" is bad.
@@jazzyjswift yep
Don't be stupid, this is never going away, just folded into new acronyms and substituted vocab.
If they keep losing money more and more companies will be going out if business. They can't keep this up forever.
Depends on the endgame and timeline.
@jacquelineking5783 and if the bankrupt companies are classified as too big to fail, well...hello tax payor bailouts.
Same ol' wash, rinse, repeat etc...
@@jakethomas1829 Thanks for saying that, I'm getting tired of being the only one. The hyper wealthy have access to the money printer. So long as the US can just print money forever, this won't end, because these people will never need to truly fight and be profitable.
No one's backing away from anything, they're obfuscating and burying it and their "work", while using content creators like yourself to spread the lie and making people relax. Well done for buying in to it.
The reason why diversity works (that DEI gets wrong) is this: By being open minded who you hire for a position, you unlock a vast pool of potential employees. If you hire good people, independent of their gender, skin color or creed, you create an efficient team. DEI does diversity for diversity sake, which is the wrong approach. HIre for expertise and have an open mind while doing it. Thats the recipe for success.
Except, of course, for "their" folks. Just look at the photos in that Bridge Steering Committee. Not a whole lot of that there diversity stuff they talk about in that group! "But, they are mostly black women!" Yeah, that's the problem; if diversity is your goal, then a group of mostly black women IS JUST AS BAD as a group of mostly white men!
Saved me from writing it. Successful companies have diversity because that diversity is a reflection of what makes them successful. Adding diversity to an unsuccessful company is polishing a turd.
lol what do you mean that’s what DEI gets wrong? That’s one of the concepts of DEI 😂 companies trying to showcase how “diverse” they are to make them appear attractive to a diverse range of candidates. For example, paid paternal leave can allow a very talented engineer to pick one job offer over another. That is what DEI is about - to improve employee relations. Employees that are taken care of will take care of the company. It’s really not that hard of a concept.
Diversity is an empty virtue. It depends on what’s diverse and how that diversity is applied. It isn’t an inherent good, just something that can be good when paired with an expression of actual virtue (such as fairly hiring based on merit)
indeed you could end up with a 5 man team with a white dude, a hispanic woman, a black man and asían woman & man because they happen to be the best but you could equally end up with 5 white dudes or 5 asian dudes because they come out on top. If a top basketball team is all black because those happen to be the best players then that happened naturally not because they wanted maximum "diversity" as silly as it is to call something diverse if it's 100% black people which should be the oppisite of diverse.
I will say diversity is a bad thing in business. Everything should be strictly based on skill alone.
Not like the average person ever encounters a situation where your position is stolen based on diversity alone anyway. There will be exceptions to this but I bet the people who complain about this type of stuff are just skill-less yuppies anyways
If you focus on things other than merit, you get less merit.
Most companies aren’t even founded on skill alone 😂 most high ranking positions aren’t obtained via skill. How many times have you heard of the kid who was granted high level positions simply from their father knowing the owner. Merit based wage/labor has never existed in the United States
Just be aware, the reason this stuff exists is to try and level the playing field. You could have someone from a poor, deprived background that scores low at face value, but is very capable and has underlying ability and intelligence. OR you can have the rich kid who has been tutored all the way and has networks from the get go from Dad.
In this scenario, the poor kid is smarter and has higher potential, but is not going to get a chance at college or at the job......
You are trying to cater for societal factors that ensure the playing field isn't level to begin with (poverty, crap schooling, illness etc all of which occur in marginalised sectors of society, like POC or trans and even white trash trailer park).
So, do you make any adjustment or not?
Because if you don't, the rich get to game the market. And that's not meritocracy either.
Without comment as to how well all this DEI and diversity stuff is functioning, that's the stated aim.
Just for clarity.
So.... if it's based on skill alone, would you go for the tutored rich kid or the poor kid with potential?
That's the question.
@@Shblibble You will hire the kid with skill, otherwise someone else will, look at Boeing and SpaceX, you can work at SpaceX without any degree at all if you can prove that you are qualified, just send in your work and if you are good enough, hey, welcome.
Now Boeing is getting absolutely crushed by SpaceX.
Nepotism works for a generation or two, but it doesn't work long term, if you hire 10 "rich kids" and I hire 10 "smart kids"my company will destroy yours within a couple of generations.
By the way, none of the DEI stuff is working, the groups that are being "helped" have further fallen behind.
Let people stand on their own 2 legs, only way upward and forward.
DEI is not merely a "bureaucratic initiative". ESG and DEI are intentional relabeling (mislabeling) of neo-Marxist ideologies. You say there is nothing wrong with diversity, equity or inclusion. I would argue that there is. Diversity doesn't mean diversity of ideas, just diversity of arbitrary classifications of human beings. Equity doesn't mean equality, it means hiring quotas. Inclusion doesn't mean being more welcoming, it means excluding certain classes of human beings to make room for other classes (quotas, again).
People know that Marxism doesn't work. People know that socialism doesn't work. People know that hiring quotas imply being forced to hire unqualified personnel. People know that investing in expensive renewable energy doesn't make energy cheaper. But call it ESG and DEI, and suddenly it's a brand new idea, and oh, look, there's a study that "proves" it works. As you say, it's a corporate lie, but it's not that the original concepts are good but somehow got captured by evil corporate bureaucracies. No, the original concepts are bad, because they're neo-Marxist lies. The point of those lies was to dupe corporate bureaucracies into implementing them. They were successfully duped because billionaires love to virtue signal - look up "luxury beliefs".
This comment should be pinned
@@videosbruno hell it should be published and distributed
Cite your sources
Begone commie @@nopenopenopenope4076
100% accurate description of DEI
13:35 "There's nothing wrong with the concepts of diversity, equity, or inclusion" - Speaking as a researcher studying how it is affecting my field (Computer Science), where it is being used a cudgel to discriminate against innocent people and mess with research [my federal government is helping feed this, and universities are enabling types of discriminatory hiring in relation to this], right now begs to differ significantly on this statement. I beg to differ on this statement, and think you're being naive. There's at least two tendrils to DIE/EDI/DEI, the corporate one and the ideological/activist one; the latter isn't just something "grifters" are concerned about, those working in higher ed or other sectors are seeing it and it is very real.
There's a TON wrong with it. It's a family of methods, it's not a universal blanket of these concepts. Heck the words "diversity, equity, and inclusion" are ambiguous and could easily be changed to something else, that's how horrifically flawed they are that they don't even represent these things and usurp language to press forth radical ideological causes.
You are correct about the corporate component of it with respect to its promises [and those promises not actually being accurate], it's a management strategy too however. And that has burrowed itself into many public institutions [I can say that at least here in Canada]. This is not a "grift" or something, people like me can't get jobs because of it. EDI's core concepts are radical and activist in nature, the institutions themselves define it so. I invite you to go look up your typical elite university's machinations of these terms, and you'll see you're mistaken. Where do you think these corporations get their middle managers and "managerial" types from? I distinctly remember watching institutions adopt this nonsense pre-2015.
So you're against diversity and inclusion to other types of people (black, asian, disabled, lgbt, etc?)
You are completely off the mark and ironic you call them grifters. Some of the screenshots you show even say DEI isn't going anywhere. They are just softening thier language and contining to do the same things they did under DEI just so they can pretend they swept it under the rug and you're helping them by using a broom.
It's just simple math.
If 200 people apply to a job and 160 are while male, 20 are black, 20 are women, then forcing a 50% minority means that someone who would effectively score a 60% match would beat a 90% match simply because they're not filling the role, their filling the criteria.
Think of it another way. You enter a building and there are 3 tables. As people enter they are divided into which table to go to. Unknown to the people arriving, the tables are all authorized to give 1 job each.
At table one are 73 people. Table two, 5 people. Table three, 6 people.
The ratio of people arriving for a job were not evenly distributed to genuinely provide an equal outcome. All the people at table one are at a laughable disadvantage compared to if they had gotten into table 2 or 3. Furthermore if there were no genuinely good applicants at table 3 and peolme were just reaching out for a job because they have to, that is a severe disadvantage for the company to choose over someone who genuinely appreciated and takes pride in what they do but ended up at table 1.
Dei is a great comparison in dating.
Let's say you meet someone who is wonderful, kind, caring, laughs at your jokes, would be a great mother / father, etc - the absolute perfect mate. However, you're simply not attracted to them.
At this point what do you do? You'll never find a more perfect match, but they simply didn't arrive at your table, they are missing a pivotal part of mating - attraction. If your goal is simply find the best long term partner then by all means, propose and have a happy fulfilling life. As a company, this would be the goal. They don't care how much you like what you do, only that you make more profit than you cost.
In dating, we value the other persons attraction higher than other values. You can see this easily with the crazy scale theories and such. The more attracted you are to your partner, the less bad traits bother you. Your girlfriend could be rude and instigating fights constantly but if she's gorgeous and makes you happy, then she's a keeper. The criteria for dating starts at physical attraction, not necessarily compatibility.
Dei prioritizes the diversity over credentials the same way dating prioritizes attraction over compatibility. If we need to fill a gender or race role, anyone not in that role is immediately out, the same way as when looking for a partner, anyone you're not attracted to is out.
I thought your first analogy was on point. The dating one? Not so much. But the initial one was, dare I say, perfect 👍
That sounds crazy, you'd quickly run out of minorities if this procedure was widely adopted. Frankly, I find it hard to believe that any company anywhere would do it like that, nor that anyone is a proponent of such a strategy.
Diversity based on race has never been needed. Diversity of thought is what is important.
They really don't like that part though...
I disagree. I don't actually, but I'm trying to add diverse thoughts here 😂
Yeap, intellectual diversity is what's important.
@@Me_Caveman well I’d listen but you don’t have the skin color of grapes
I can see how diversity would introduce culture into the equation and possibly counter bias in for instance training data for AI. That's an assumption of course and counter examples can be found.
Bro calls everyone grifters and make a video completely miss-representing what bridge is.
My guy, Bridge isn't the "renaming of DEI", it's LITERALLY the idea that DEI has to be embed into the company fabric, that EVERYONE need to be a DEI actor rather than having a DEI pole.
All the companies that say they are cutting their DEI program literally adding in the same sentence that their DEI commitment won't change, this is literally what DEI is about.
You have to stop believing in the lie that these companies are only motivated by money and their shift toward DEI was just them getting fooled by bad studies into thinking this would give them more money. That's a lie.
The reality here is that these companies have been infiltrated by ideologues, people that put their agenda over the business and that's why everything we see these days in entertainment media is so bad. It's not because "the company thought making thos things would make them more money", it's because it was their "moral imperative" to do so.
That's why companies have constantly called consumers istophobs for not liking their products rather than acknowledging the feedback and shifting course.
This has nothing to do with business and everything to do with a ideological push.
"Diversity, Equity and Inclusion" is subversion of language and you of all people should know that mister Echelon.
In short: BRIDGE is thought reform.
Division, Exclusion, Indoctrination.
You have a nice point but lose the "bro" "my guy" "literally" you sound like you've been lobotomized by social media, ****** gen Zs.
I used to work at a woke corporation who took most of their money from Pfizer, Moderna, CVS, and Walgreens for advertising. In 2020, they replaced our entire HR department with a DEI director
Suddenly the talks went from PTO, benefits, employee retention, and general satisfaction to a weekly series of lectures on the history of police brutality in the US called "The George Floyd Project". All conversations shifted to how to stop being "white coded" and my direct VP was openly questioned in front of the entire company about why our department had so few black people
🐈🔄
It's hard to deny that DEI as an ideology played a role in this. While it may very well be true that a 2015 study (I use that term loosely) kicked off corporate DEI funding and initiatives, you have to ask *why* a misleading "study" like that was created in the first place. McKinsey repeatedly doubled down on their findings and are part of Bridge today- I think it'd be a bit of a stretch to say the entire thing was just an honest mistake and had nothing to do with injecting their ideological beliefs into the corporate world.
You acknowledge yourself that this is a topic that causes a lot of social unrest- while corporations will wake up if their profits are threatened, I don't think the rank-and-file DEI supporters that live on social media are going anywhere anytime soon. This is a more complex topic borne from the cognitive dissonance that comes from being told their entire life that they are simultaneously smarter than their peers but also the victims of oppression; and so as long as a politician needs their vote, they will continue to be told this.
Regardless of the infrastructure behind DEI, forcing diversity quotas and woke checkboxes at the cost of talent and artistic freedom is what is destroying western movies and aaa videogames.
And everything else. It's why Google products are garbage. It's why Microsoft products are garbage. It's endless.
No, the destruction of all of that isn't because of being diverse and more inclusive, it is because recent company decisions have been made with shareholder profits and trying to capitalize on trends vs actually being creatively invested or listening to their product developers when they tell the executive level something wouldnt work.
Don't blame the hiring of *insert demographic group here* for shitty business decisions at the top and a focus solely on lining shareholder profit.
And all else that it's applied to
@@Spidahman4283the 2 are tied, that's the issue. Simply hiring someone of a group is harmless, hiring them because they are of that group is questionable at best, hiring them because they are of that group inspire of having lesser capability/ experience/ qualifications, let alone not having them at all, or worse yet holding them to a different standard absolutely is a bad thing, and that is what has been consistently happening along side the other bad business decisions
@@christophermonteith2774 "hiring them because they are of that group is questionable at best" There is no "at best here".
"Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against someone (applicant or employee) because of that person's race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information"
This reminds me of BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) in South Africa. On paper it was meant to allow previously disadvantaged groups the chance to get into better job positions. The problem is, the people in power use BEE to force blacks into positions they don't even qualify for. And yes, BEE has only benefited blacks, no other ethnic group, as well as only SOME blacks as there's too many black people in SA to allow all of them into those positions. A lot of companies in SA only meet the minimum requirements of BEE, and only because they have to, because they choose to rather employ people who are actually qualified for their positions.
Most people are not against diversity, they're against systemic racism/sexism.
Which "diversity" is a code word for.
The problem with diversity is it always relates to skin colour and never thought, having different shades of ppl does nothing for anyone and doesnt improve or decrease anything, diversity of thought will get you out of hell and solve problems.
@@eprimchad2576 Well they've completely fetishized race/gender/orientation with the cultish belief that the less white, male, or straight you are, the more true your beliefs and claim to power are. That fact is, there' best ways to do things, and it's just a coincidence that a lot of people who are white, straight, or male happen to have had those best ideas and positions, because in a country where those groups are the majority, that's what you're going to see. They have this cultist belief that you can't reach the best logical conclusions if you're not a self proclaimed minority victim being oppressed because it makes them feel good and gives them power.
I'm against diversity. Anyone that isn't against diversity at this point after witnessing its destructive power and the coming death of the West is a propagandized drooling idiot. The fact that anyone would even still talk about diversity as if it is viable shows the level of brainwashing and cowardice in the public. You've been told that "diversity" is a moral good and you must accept the destruction of the West, your culture, your point and the future in the name of "diversity".... and people are so brainwashed and afraid they won't even call it out.
you started off with saying people were grifting when they talked about this? who specifically? Kirsche who was talking about this for a while now?
He meant himself.
Didnt they just rebrand into bridge?
Yes but the video is about to point this out.
The real focal point should be on how the time was made for Bridge/DEI to be enacted in the first place.
It started in HR, just as HR started to become less useful owing to dead-end employers attempting to build cults around their companies with scores of 'team-building exercises'.
What's the first four letters of "culture"?
Did you watch the video?
@@joeyjojoshabbadoo8153 Yeah I did, after i posted the comment.
@@Randomusername56782 Why the rush to post on something you haven't fully seen? Is being early with a question more important than getting it right? It's common among those who speak more than they listen. It's also the biggest problem mainstream media now has.
I'll be real, you didn't really tell me anything I didn't already know from listening to Kirsche (that white fox vtuber), aside from the original study being a causation correlation mishap. Though I do know the types you mean when you are talking about the grifters who are less informed. That said; I think you down playing just how many malicious actors are involved with these marxist initiatives certainly doesn't help the industry get back to reasonable state. I'm sure most investors who aren't tied to the black rocks/stones and what not don't care outside of "number go up", but those WEF types definitely have far more sway and influence.
Pushed by Blackrock with the control how people think as well as ESG.
The major finance companies that want to influence behaviors, even "force" them.
Is larry fink's private jet pilots and maintenance crew DEI ESG and BRIDGE?
The minute you talk about "forcing behaviors" you've crossed the line.
If you do things correctly you never have to force anything. Also I can never ever not think about all the "consent issues" people love to talk about when I hear that line. Forcing people to do something is just gross.
Wonder what tribe those people are from
@@voidimperial1179 Chosen, of course.
I'm having trouble believing the claim that serious multi-billion companies would just go along with some initiative based on flimsy research without double-checking the results themselves. Echelon is saying that all those companies just wanted to make a buck and they seriously believed that hiring more wheelchaired lesbians is the sure way to do it. This especially makes sense when accepting lower-quality diversity hires over their non-diverse counterparts. Yes, this is the way to profits. This guy is a manager who worked with big companies and led them to success, the other guy is black. Surely the best way to make our company earn more is to hire the black guy. This is a purely capitalistic profit-based decision.
It's obvious that there is an ideological factor at play here, and it's obvious that the motive for this is not a dry calculated desire to maximize profits.
Its really tiring of seeing these long line of 'Journalistic news' TH-camrs not reading the whole article that they use in their videos. DEI is very much still in the work place, just more intergrated and not labeled, like before.
Another factor involving DEI is companies using it as a crutch to cover for their own mistakes. Rather than admit they made a mistake, they excuse any criticism away by calling everyone racist/sexist/etc. Hence why so many people believe that DEI is ruining entertainment because it makes those who practice it think they are morally superior to anyone who criticizes them. A lot of the people who I think you're talking about have no problem with diversity, they have a problem with companies using it to call everyone racist when something fails.
Honestly these people using the word sexist and racist or bigots repeating it the words over again because starting losing the meaning it's just excuse The never to take criticism of their the ideas or the work without reasons and common sense because they never learn since childhood the parents always praise them giving false hope even the societies giving out participation trophy that is result these people these days denial and overbearing selfish narcissist asshole's.
You ignored the conspiratorial element and then claimed it doesn't exist. When people want people like them to be represented, it is not because they think it's profitable, it's because the individual benefits when their group benefits. And it started, even in video games, before the 2015 McKinsey "research" found a way to justify their activism.
DEI is now being rebranded as BRIDGE.
We're still going to call a spade a spade
@@AmberCommentsThings "A sewer by any other name would smell as grotesque"
Belt and road. China pays for American movies when American citizens won't. They pay the movie directors to make Chinese propaganda in western media.
Worse than rebranding; they’re making it everyone’s job instead of its own thing.
No, bridge is a company leading the charge for DEI
DEI is not dead or dying, they are just changing the names and hiding it better. Kirsche has some great videos on it!
I thank Kirsche for pointing all of this out way before this video
You can preach inclusion and diversity to a company or even coerce them into it, but the market will never adapt to those things. For many a decade now, companies have hired people based on their experience and talents, rather than the color of their skin, the genitals they were born with, or their sexual preferences because experience and talents are what dictates how well people would perform at a given position. I am genuinely surprised DEI lasted this long.
Culturally diverse is such an odd phrase to me for an American to use. That's like, the whole thing here. Melting pot and all that.
Inequity doesn't necessarily equate to inequality.
It's worth pointing out, again, that the sort of diversity that naively seems useful, diversity of thought, is very much not something these ideologues tolerate.
Funny that. It was always a grift.
Yes and no, Americans may be ethnically diverse as the American identity is not an ethnic identity, thus the popular us of X-American (African American, Italian American, Jewish American, etc.) We typically have cultural predispositions towards things like individualism, willingness to argue (though not as much as germanic countries), and predisposition to be friendly (though not as much as Canadians). Individually, we may not fit into each of these perfectly, but holistically we do regardless of ethnic background.
What's the funniest is that the people who champion 'cultural diversity ' almost always eat the same thing, dress the same, watch the same shows, and listen to the same music and insult anyone who doesn't agree with their opinions. Almost sounds like a lack of diversity if you ask me
Because Inequity does not. Equity is Outcomes. Equality is Opportunity and people all choose different things. there will never be true "Equity" because that goes against free will and the ability to choose your own future. The Goal is everyone has the ability to be greater. Whether or not you Choose todo so is your own decision to make use of those opportunities
I never had a problem with diversity until I was told I had a problem with diversity
BRIDGE says otherwise; they’re going from overt to making its EVERYONE’S job. It’s clearly spoken as such in some of the various articles you cite!
Diversity must never take precedent over meritocracy
Kirsche has been covering this for months.
who's kirche? i've heard of new discourses
If only there was a built in search function on youtube or something ............@billynomates920
@@billynomates920 Kirsche is a Vtuber that got into this rabbit hole because her favorite canned soup brand got on The Quartering radar.
She streams here and on twitch.
@@billynomates920A Vtuber who also does political stuff. She stumbled onto this last year and has been covering BRIDGE in-depth based on their own reports.
Sargon's been covering it for a decade.
Well done. Isn't it true though that as part of receiving E.S.G. investments you have to have a DEI program? So that, therefore it's not just about McKenzie study and increasing profits, but also and probably more about making yourself available to receive investment from E.S.G. investors?
Sorry to reply to my own post, but I know this to be the case from personal experience. I own a small company with a Dunn and Bradstreet number. When I login to my portal, there's a section about how to increase my E.S.G. score therefore make myself more attractive to E.S.G. investors. In that section, the first thing it tells you is to create a diversity equity and inclusion program. The reason why it's funny is because my company has two employees lol.
@@williamobraidislee3433things like this make me wonder what the priority of those companies that try to push dei+esg is
It seems the the thesis of the video is that all of this, including ESG, is fundamentally based on the McKinsey study. Now with 4 years of real world praxis and the McKinsey study being questioned, everyone's realizing it's not' profitable and all of this is going to quickly reduce, including ESG investment.
Even if true I doubt it will ever go away entirely, some people will still want to be ESG investors, but the pool will be smaller so the incentives will be too, so the number of DEI departments will shrink.
Though I'll also mention I'm not convinced a single mediocre study was the fundamental basis of all of it...
Yeah but that's just such a short minded goal... I understand that these E.S.G. investors have a lot of money, but they surely can't be the only investors out there? These company's are thinking too much in the short term, this is what Disney mostly fails to see with Epic Universe absolutely going to kick their ass.
Either way we really don't have to do anything, if the product is bad you as the consumer has to do what you have always done and not buy that product to begin with.
"Bridge" is the current movement. DEI as the term may be falling but the people are still there. just under a new name. and its far more agressive
In regards to DEI and BRIDGE - While most of your base facts are correct, your conclusion, unfortunately, is 100% not correct. A young VTuber by the name of Kirsche has been digging extremely deeply into the DEI/BRIDGE nonsense, complete with *exhaustive* fact checking and has, through directly exposing DEI's own proponents, exposed their efforts to simply blend themselves into the businesses they've "infected" to further their efforts. furthermore, up until very recently, Kirsche has been the *Only* creator, of any genre, to be shining a light onto this nonsense. I highly encourage for you and everyone to look into her work - its archived here on YT - to understand just how deep this goes.
Exactly, and I think the best example of "getting rid of DEI" but keeping the "Idea of DEI" is Disney, we constantly see them fumbling the bag because they don't realize how DEEP the rot is at their own company... Effectively it seems like nobody at Disney knows how to do their job anymore. Bob Igor only knows how to buy stuff, but he doesn't know how to actually work on any of it.
Disney has lot a lot of their original crew, you have OG Disney animators working for other companies now like DreamWorks and Netflix, so their institutional knowledge is going to them NOT to Disney.
Then you have the guy in charge of theme parks, who seems that they have absolutely nothing because they thought that a re-skined splash mountain would do well.... And while the animatronics look nice, the ride STILL has the same problems as splash mountain. And don't even get me started on how they thought spending like a billion dollars on a star wars larping hotel and over-charging their customers was a good idea... We all know how that turned out.
And don't get me started on Kathleen Kennedy, the fact that she is STILL THERE shows how DEEP the rot is at Disney.... It will literally take the company years to fix their reputation at this point but for now I think it's too late... Disney has had several chances to course correct and every, single, time they have failed because DEI is so heavily infested in their company they don't even realize that it's killing them.
Kirsche adds alot of context for what you're saying, but also shows how Bridge is not a rebrand of DEI, and that these initiatives are not dying, just going more extreme. th-cam.com/video/3vg1fsaZO8M/w-d-xo.htmlsi=ZOQND9gCnYQzVfkW
There's a lot more to this topic than what your video presents, and I'd suggest looking at Kirsche Verstahl's coverage on the topic, she's been talking about BRIDGE for months and is probably the most knowledgable online creator on the topic.
@@Bladorage Also someone who barely follows V-Tuber that does seem to be the case.
Yes she covered BRIDGE a lot but she just goes over info on their website and videos.
This is a different type of video looking at the source of DEI and not where it is at the moment.
@@Bladorageanyone who looks at it impartially will have what you call a Republican perspective, because that is the right one to have, since it was arrived at impartially. If Upper Echelon had dived into research for months he would know that the 2015 McKinsey research paper was not the start of this.
@@Bladorage Kirche spends 5 hours going thoroughly going over every word of internal documents, websites, video, etc. She spent an over hour going over THIS 16 minute video and bringing up sources that refute some of the points UE makes in this video. She's spent 7 months researching this and talking about it, and all of that research is shown on those 5 hour long streams.
@@Bladorage you are just boldface lying, you are just trying to spread misinformation about kirsche, and are just trying to convince other people what you are saying is truth, but in reality it's all lies. Kirsche is far more knowledgeable about bridge and and dei than anybody else i've seen.
@@Bladorage You come off as someone who hasn't watched Kirsche. Honestly, more people need to go and watch Kirsche, she's been deep diving on the subject of BRIDGE for 7 months. A lot of people still aren't aware of BRIDGE, and think that all these companies dropping DEI means it's going away... it's not, it's just putting on a new skinsuit.
As a black person. This is the equivalent of government backed aid programs. - Throwing money at anything never makes it work long term...
Pretty sure my disability check helps me a lot.
@deohere7647 doesn't mean it's a good long term fix.
@@deohere7647 Yeah being black isn't the same as a disability. He obviously isn't saying firefighters, hospitals, post offices, company payrolls and anything else you can spend money on on an indefinite basis is a bad idea. He's saying throwing money at a problem that doesn't necessitate it is a bad idea in the long term.
@@ergerg2so whats the problem? Elaborate
@@JoJo-ze3en People shouldn't immediately assume that at some point if they throw enough money at an issue it will magically solve itself. It makes you feel good, makes people think you're doing something, and hasn't worked for the past century (usually the goal posts shift somewhere down the line after these programs are implemented, and they're touted as a success regardless of whether they accomplished their actual goals). I could take advantage of race based quotas and grants, but I won't because then I'd be letting policy makers pass the buck, at my own expense, to the next generation.
Look up Paul O'Neil and his solution to the infant mortality crisis in the US and you'll see a great example. Politically popular solution was always to build more hospitals, which didn't help. Root cause was malnutrition, so Paul mandated that teachers take a nutrition course to get certified. Actually worked and at pennies on the dollar of building even one more hospital. It took years to play out and, in fact, to a voter it may have looked like politicians turning a blind eye. Regardless, it was the right thing to do.
Actually, diversity/equality/inclusion area bad thing, because you haven't defined what the (*dolphin clicks) those words means. Leftist are notorious for using deliberately vague and undefined words to enable doublespeak, newspeak, as well as t0rturing the definitions of words to advance their arguments and goals and hiding behind semantic and pedantic rhetorical shields.
Thomas Sowell (famed American economist and social theorist) has famously pointed out that leftists (especially academic leftists and activists) are highly vulnerable to confirmation bias thanks to their ego investment, self-identification with, and sense of own righteousness gained by holding the particular left-wing ideology they adopt, and thus more readily accept any convenient assertions (regardless of their truthfulness) that back up their worldview; which is what the picking up of that flawed McKenzie study by neo-M@rx!st activists in contemporary corporate culture showed.
And it it clearly conspiratorial that those of the left-wing ideological mindset collectively picked up and applied that McKenzie study, considering that dogmatic religious movements--(what Crit!cal The0ry neo-M@rx!sm is, given it demands you believe there would be no difference in outcome (i.e. equality) between categories of people if not for discrimination, and to not believe your lying senses when obvious causes of differences, from geography to cultural values affecting ethnic profession preference and educational attainment levels, directly impact outcomes humans have, are also visible)--have a habit of producing followers with matching ideological, worldview, and reasoning maxims, and thus reach the same conclusions, so that all of them work towards a common goal absent of classic centralized direction (something called the Cathedral, as coined by Curtis "Moldbug" Yarvin).
The DEI crowd does have a lot of power in corporations, because they overwhelmingly staff the Human Resources departments and thus control who gets hired and fired at the company, in a cartel fashion similar to how Joseph Stalin controlled the Soviet party and got himself into the Soviet dictatorship through being the General Secretary of the Soviet Party (which had job and role assignments as part of his authorities, enabling him to put allies and lackeys of his in key positions in the Soviet government, who then supported his ascension to power after the de@th of Lenin). And they will definitely drive companies into the ground in the name of their pseudo-religious beliefs in Equity.
Also, I'd rather have a company that is ethnically homogenous (all English, all Swahili, all Japanese, et cetera) and all of its members are meritoriously there, rather than have a widely diverse set of undeserving diversity-hires brought on through lowered standards and thus both as individuals and as a group perform worse. In highly competitive fields, industries, or endeavors like warfare, the united highly meritorious ethnically homogenous team/company will crush the meritoriously-mediocre diversity team/company every time.
Hallelujah 🙌🏻!!!!! The daily jesus devotional has been a huge part of my transformation, God is good 🙌🏻🙌🏻. I was owing a loan of $49,000 to the bank for my son's brain surgery, Now I'm no longer in debt after I invested $11,000 and got my payout of $290,500 every month…God bless Mrs Susan Jane Christy ❤️
Hello how do you make such monthly??
I'm a born Christian and sometimes I feel so down🤦🏼of myself because of low finance but I still believe in God🙏.
Thanks to my co-worker (Alex) who suggested Ms Susan Jane Christy
She's a licensed broker here in the states🇺🇸 finance advisor.
After I raised up to 525k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the states 🇺🇸🇺🇸and also paid for my son's surgery (Oscar). Glory to God.shalom.
Can I also do it??? My life is facing lots of challenges lately.
I must strongly disagree with the premise that when a business simply realizes that an action does not result in optimal profits it will completely abandon the ideology. Businesses are organizations like any other and are swayed by the ideology, morals and beliefs of those that make up the organization.
For many their only motive is not just profit, there is legacy, social validation and group identity that will also sway people’s decisions. For example, Henry Ford would only hire married, practicing Christians for a time, this was not the best for making the greatest profits but he himself and others in his business valued ideology/ beliefs over pure profit.
As long as some people view DEI and similar such ideas as a moral imperative (supposing these people are in a position of power or influence) I believe that the ideology will be pushed even if it harms the businesses bottom line.
There actually is more to it. DEI is just the business world's version of the left's cultural movement towards Marxism through the prism of identity groups instead of economic class. I think you should talk with MentisWave. I think the two of you would have a lot to learn from each other (and it would make for great content).
Oh no us leftists want everyone to be able to live decent lives, won't someone think of the children?
Fun fact: DEI is not collapsing and is in fact stronger now more than ever. I observe reality, not TH-camrs.
It's the same story with the craze of letting unborn infants listen to Beethoven because of a correlation between life achievement and listening to Beethoven at an early age. Turns out that highly educated/richer people were more likely to listen to Beethoven and their achievements are what pushed their children ahead, not playing a particular CD.
It seem you either delete or hide my comment so I am going to say it again.
DEI destroyed the video industry as a consequence, sure it wasn't intentional but it happens when you are virtual signal and fill in check boxes for DEI.
Heard comments are being deleted, sure enough this has happened, one I left isn't here. Doesn't look too good given you have complained Business Basics doing that.
I was under the impression this was because BlackRock was giving loans but not charging as much interest if they were following the DEI doctrine
I am a first generation american, my parents were both born in europe. I have bright white skin and bright orange hair. I get picked on by all races and dont have any family in the usa or "colonial privilege" I have to work for everything I have, the same way any immigrant does.
Inclusion seems to have skipped me!
No, brother. You're my kin just by being White, your hair and skin are yours and ours(in our genetics), you don't need to be proud, but never feel shame. 💪
The true issue with “DEI” lies right in the middle of it. “Equity”. I’ve heard somebody say the most evil concept in any society is Equity.
Equity is another name for Communism
Real equity; fake-equity is bad.
Why would you consider equity evil?
You work 80 hours in a week; I work 40. Same skills, same job, same wage.
Equity says your effort is not rewarded, since we both get the same amount, despite doing an unequal amount of work, and putting in an unequal amount of time. Our gross income is equal, but our proportion of work-to-income is absolutely not. Why work a single second longer if you get nothing for it?
Equality says you earn twice the gross income, since you worked twice the hours. Our pay-to-work proportion is equal, even though our pay is not.
@@a_lost_one That is equity applied to an entire economy, equity in business is to cut slack to those who might be disadvantaged. Equity is just a concept, and it applies differently and will have a different result depending on what it is applied on.
Equity is a tool, like equality, or difference.
Major issue with his final dig at people claiming dei is ruining games and movies. He totally glosses over the fact that these companies in a bid to force diversity to meet their goals brought in less skilled workers who's main qualifications was their identity. This inevitably lead to a drop in quality in their products. As a result you get less imaginative movies and games focused primarily on identity politics since that's what these people understand. None of the content creators, gamers or movie fans have ever said diversity is a bad thing, they said forced diversity is detrimental if you ignore the meritocracy.
People should be hired based on talent not identity. And products should be based on delivering the best quality that can be achieved reasonably instead of prioritizing messaging or idiology. You see a major cultural push against all forms of diversity in certain mediums because its been forced on people in such a negative way that there is a prejudice built against anything that seems to fit that model even if its not justified. Now people scoff at female lead action movies assuming its another "girl boss" because its what they have been conditioned to expect. Not surprising to see a public move away from these practices but it will be sometime before all the dead weight that was introduced to these companies is removed.
You could work with Kirsche to dig deeper into this
UE does excellent work on other topics but here he misses. This phenomenon is not new. The facade is new, with all these boring-sounding acronyms. The practice has been going on for decades, albeit at a slower rate, to replace men, white men in particular, with politically loyal left-leaning activists. Just ask yourselves, how many conservative black men got hired under these initiatives?
'At the height of civil unrest in America' That was not the height, mate.
It is affirmative action all over again. They were cutting corners by hiring minority members so that they would take lower salaries. Then cut corners on the products temporarily increasing profits, but reducing the quality. Eventually people buy different products and profit tanks. Like someone said "Cherry Picked" data, using profitable windows allows the research to be viewed in very certain ways. Never mind the reality is that it has all been tried before with affirmative action. It didn't work then and it won't work now. These methods are all about exploiting the underserved people.
You should talk to Kirsche. she knows alot about BRIDGE
Lol it's not going anywhere. It's just being replaced by BRIDGE
maybe it is one of the starting points, but ESG money was dished out prior to DEI being a thing and vanguard/blackrock investements were already driving the directions of companies. not the products.
but mc kinsey did pop up back then, as they are one of the "not completely unknown" evaluation companies.
E standing for "Equity" instead of "Equality" is already exposing the bull no. 2.
Eh no; it's Blackrock.
Diversity isn’t a bad thing. The thing is, like you said, this was never about diversity. It was about companies virtue signaling that they are “diverse”. I’m glad this seems to be ending because it felt so disingenuous.
Heck, feel like this concept applies to politics as well. I see a lot of men complain in the comments. I am a woman and I’m fed up too. Would have been great to have first female Vice President of the United States be someone that earned it.
You should be fed up, as part of the divisive inclusion propaganda campaign, females rights to privacy and identity are being replace by indoctrinated males. Diversity is a bad thing if it is at the expense of our individual freedoms, meritocracy, and our American values.
Please tell the positives of diversity, please. And "Food" doesn't count.
Preach queen
@Steve_Just_Steve what do you mean diversity can be very good, for example if you wanted too make an African game based on African tribalism and culture you would most likly hire an African too help visualise your game, diversity also in terms so that you don't just have 10 other yes men sitting next too you
@@Steve_Just_SteveIn terms of gaming or life itself? Because there’s multiple reasons for both. At a very baseline for gaming though, diversity allows new players into the ecosystem who might not’ve shown up before, which would translate to more money.
You're very arrogant in this video and assume that you're 100% right. Sorry but no, DEI and BRIDGE and similar won't go away, they will change names, wording of what they do, but companies like Blackrock or organizations like WEF will NEVER let those initiatives go. This is about changing culture in the workplace and from workplace it will spill to other aspects of life.
I would advise do more research next time as you're skipping much details and don't even credit/engage people who did much better research on this topic than you.
@@UniqueBreakfastTaco This has happened before?
"DEI" stands for "DIDNT EARN IT"
Great video but, hold on, hold on. Do you really think that it really explains the level to which DEI has been pushed in things like, the movie industry for example? I believe Netflix took it to the extreme of using black actors/actresses to play historical figures that were not black, and not necessarily with story-telling motivations, ensuing controversy and even, as in the case of Egyptians and Cleopatra, potentially offending people (as it actually ended up doing in that case, seemingly). Are you saying that that was a reasonable step, for Netflix to take, in order to increase diversity for the sake of profits? Wouldn't Netflix just increase diversity in it's workforce in ways that were not so blatantly risky? Like, even producing more 'diverse' content doesn't require apocryphal representations of history. Don't you think there is at least a possibility that other motives were involved? especially when there are multiple examples. I mean, it's been years of financial failures for many of these type of productions and, although, arguably, the deeper problem might, in all likelihood, be poor writing and things like that, there is no denial that consumers have rejected in significant ways, this forced-diversity, so, why didn't 'they' (the corporations) like, tone it down during all these years, like course-correcting if you will, in order to pursue profit, instead of doubling down in things that, were not even a necessity (again, I mean, they could've increased their diversity without pushing what many people feel to be an ideology). Another very known example, from Disney, The little mermaid, I personally didn't care that they used a black actress, but I believe that the vast majority of people that did, is simply because, like I said, they felt that they were being pushed an ideology, and, whether those people were informed or not about the real origins of DEI, I don't think you can blame them for feeling that way. But I digress, sorry, back to The Little Mermaid; do you really think that, what inspired the change, was a desire to increase profit by virtue of diversity? I believe at that point, it was pretty obvious that that would be, far from the likely result. So, all I'm asking, being very redundant now, is, do you really think there's zero chance that other intentions or motives played a role, at any given level, on the many examples where such things happened? I apologize for the long text. Feel free not to reply.
Yeah I think he missed out some important factors in play.
Tend to agree. First, DEI was far more impactful and harmful than a mere corporate bureaucracy. It caused, for example, the western world to turn to unicorn vomit every June in ways we hadn't seen previously, to the point where very adult topics and products were marketed to children. There might be a deeper dive to take here examining the feedback mechanisms of large corporations piggybacking off of culture while simultaneously accidentally creating culture, but big brand endorsement of these topics definitely helped to normalize them.
Second, in media: It permeated the Western AAA video game market to the point where I don't think there's been a western video game with a conventionally attractive female lead for a while now (though I certainly may have missed some games). As you discussed, it permeated the film industry. At first it only really hit review scores -- most of the movies were still profitable, though less so than they had any right to be. But at this point, these franchises are actively losing money....yet they're still being made.
@@bvoyelrKirsche does a better job with this topic her videos and info dumps are worth checking out.
He's talking about general corporate America, not about specific industries or niche examples.
@@ShawnF0912 But those examples are part of corporate America, and just a small sample of tons of other examples, ranging from a wide variety of industries.
... you mentioned bridge and then never addressed it after the DEI portion is there a part 2 coming or did i miss something? DEI is not going away if Bridge is still in effect no?
DEI is nonsense. Has always been. I’ve left three jobs because the employer embraced DEI. Now in a family business who’s focusing on work and not politics.
Were they large multinational corporations, medium sized operations or small local business? Don't say the company names if you don't want
To be fair, DEI absolutely destroyed pop culture and entertainment, and hearing how supposedly it all started, did not change that fact in my head, sorry, UE. But great video. I'm not entirely convinced that all this madness literally was just based on one shitty """"research""""" paper, they are clilnging to it way too hard for that. Also, BRIDGE is going to be just another name for DEI in some company's case. But may you be right on that front, I genuinely wish for that.
'I'm not saying diversity is bad'
Fine.
I will.
UEG doesn't know the concept of language subversion
The grifter has been sitting on the fence for quite a while now, just like Charlie