Perhaps OP feels that the specific strategy Mozilla employee for helping diversity is ineffective; in the same manner that refusing to donate to ineffective anti-poverty charities, is not the same as supporting poverty.

Edit: rather than trying to read OP's mind or surmise what they may be thinking, I'll give my own experience on this. I have seen companies spend money on diversity as lip-service, or targeting groups that don't really aid diversity much.

As much as I support female/LGBTQ/race rights and diversity, I suspect many companies I have been a part of would have got a better number of "units of diversity per dollar spent" had they spent money on people from lower socio-economic classes, or countries with poorer education/access to facilities (or maybe combined with the previous groups; I suspect the middle+ classes of female/LGBTQ/different ethnic origin groups are far better catered for than their working class counterparts).

But perhaps people don't consider social class or country of origin diversity? Perhaps "we hired lots of underprivileged people" doesn't give as much political capital? I'm not sure.

I agree with this. It might not be that he feels contemptuously about eliminating discrimination but rather than that he's unhappy with the way diversity campaigns are run.

Sometimes it seems to me that whereas in the past we had Churches in a privileged position, telling us how to behave, that we now have NGOs doing the same thing.

For example there was just last week a report in the UK about how employees in oxfam shops had sign NDAs in settlements so that the organisation would not get negative publicity for not practicing as they preach.

The irony is, females/LGBTQ/race rights compromise, statistically, a large majority of the lower socio-economic class and are poorly educated (especially with regards to race).

It's very perplexing that you make this conclusion as a legitimate opposition to diversity.

I think particularly in the US, there is certainly a link between race rights and socio-economic class, but I think to that end ,improving access to education and helping lift those in the least-privileged socio-economic class out of poverty would do a lot more to combat racial imbalance than anything else. As far as female/LGBTQ rights, I'm not aware of them being statistically more likely to come from a lower socio-economic class, but I could well be wrong!

If I donate to cancer research and find out that the money went on a "diversity in research" campaign, I'd be of the opinion that my money had been misused. Not because diversity in sciences isn't important, but because that wasn't what I wanted to spend my donation on.

I think diversity is just being used as a proxy for "social do-gooding, rather than tech do-gooding" and the commenter feels the former is not the thing s/he cares to support. Which is fine! I choose not to support all sorts of nominally good things. Lets not witch-hunt people for caring about different things.

I can't speak for the OP, but just so we don't a priori pin opposition to diversity campaigns as indefensible, I really loathe them. It's a real position people have!