The moral case against equity language

Re:The moral case against equity language by bnralt on Thursday March 02, 2023 @11:40PM (#35005895)

I came to realize that this is the case with advocacy groups. These groups will never want to say, "Hey, things aren't that bad anymore. We're working on some small problems, but honestly, we solved most of the stuff we were concerned about." Everything always needs to be in perpetual crisis. Wikipedia always needs to be in danger of shutting down. Political enemies are always supposed to be one step away from destroying the country forever. That's what drives the donations and prestige that keeps these groups going.

As groups become more successful, they're more likely to shift from reasonable goals to extreme goals.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The moral case against equity language by fidgewidge on Friday March 03, 2023 @02:50AM (#35006931)

Yeah. Over time this has killed my interest in charitable organizations, sad to say. I just don't trust them anymore because I think if I donate to an apparently well defined cause it'll actually just be embezzled and put to use hiring hard left activists who spend all their time harassing normal people in pursuit of their deranged ideology. The prevalence of dumb language purity guides amongst these organizations just reinforces that feeling. Nowadays I'm much now likely to donate to crowdfunders for the victims legal fees.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The moral case against equity language by worrycue on Friday March 03, 2023 @07:32AM (#35008675)

Organizations tend to be self-perpetuating. People whose power is derived from the organization and people who make money from the organization will want to keep the racket going.

[ Parent | on HN ]