Uplifting News
Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews, a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good.
Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!
view the rest of the comments
This kind of policy was always a better idea than DEI.
This literally is DEI.
I've never seen "poor" as included under DEI.
Sure, just without the racism. Ask a low-income Asian-American what they think of DEI.
PS: Yeah, you can downvote but that's not actually a response. If you defend DEI in college admissions, you defend racism. It really is as simple as that. Harvard is doing things better at last, the way things are done in more civilized countries than the USA. That is: help people because they are POOR, not because they belong to some BS pseudoscientific category defined by their skin color.
Not American here: isn't a large proportion of the USA's impoverished population made up of immigrants and people of colour?
So... Would that make poverty BS a pseudoscientific category (partly) defined by skin colour?
Firstly "people of color" is, yes, a BS pseudoscientific category which is not recognized outside the USA and a few other countries in its cultural orbit.
Poverty is above all correlated with access to economic capital. If "people of color" are poor, and it's important to you to help "people of color" (rather than poor people), then you should be pleased, because Harvard is helping them. Personally, I care about helping poor people regardless of their genetic or dermatological characteristics.
Okay, so since you don't recognise that people of colour are a thing outside of America...
Is it not a DEI program to provide Diverse, Equitable and Inclusive school admissions to the poor.
They mean the term “people of colour” is BS.
And I agree. “Coloured people” is offensive but “people of colour” isn’t?
I roll my eyes so hard I see my brain every time I hear it.
They're not a thing anywhere. It's pseudoscience based on America's unusual history.
Not sure what point this is making. Diversity and inclusion of values, or viewpoints, say, is a decent and valuable goal. But what it means in America is diversity of skin color. Which is only interesting if one is a racist (very literally) - as it seems many American progressives are, deep down. I'm talking about the racism of low expectations - the belief that poor little dark-skinned people can't make it on their own (despite all the evidence) and need special treatment.