Did anyone see that letter from DSCA Director regarding ending DEIA departments? It was disgustingly partisan as he sounded like a Trump acolyte. Then talks about reporting DEI like it’s really evil and we work for Donald Trump’s Nazi agency. Gross! Bootlicking behavior has no place in official government business. Gross!
Are you able to post it so non-DCSA people can form an opinion about it? Before even seeing it, my gut tells me it might have been written a couple of levels above Director C. and all agency heads were simply directed to send it out with minimal creative input. I could be wrong.
1 Like
Good theory, yet ….That would be disturbing if the Agency Director allows his name to be signed on something that he had little to no input on, then disseminated to all staff as if it’s his voice. Is that how U.S. government is normally ran? Nothing was expected normal but c’mon.
No I’m not going to explicitly post any internal docs here.
Neither does this comment.
1 Like
Actually I’m finding other agencies have sent the same letter so definitely a streamlined letter with different Director names on the bottom. Ugh
3 Likes
Love the part about reporting DEI coverups /name changes and the reported individuals will receive no negative consequences but if you do not report a DEI coverup/name change there will be a negative consequence for you. All the agencies are getting the same McCarthyesque letter to distribute. It appears it was written by a jealous angry fourth graders afraid that everyone else got more recess than them.
2 Likes
It definitely came from a much higher level and all were told to distribute this or resign or get fired and/or reappointed. The trickle down from executive orders is trickling.
2 Likes
This ridiculous administration obviously has no idea that the diversity wheel includes veterans, disabled, women, and over 40 workers.
2 Likes
Yup, seen screenshots of different agencies sending that same copy and paste email.
1 Like
In other related news, the administration has ordered Feds back to the office. No more telework. SMH. I do firmly believe they will reverse course on this as soon as they find out how much money it will cost them. They will have to spend tons to add workspaces and they will lose out on all the money they would have gotten for selling off the unused federal facilities.
2 Likes
DEI is divisive and wrong and creates division in our country. I applaud Trump for stopping this nonsense and divisiveness created by DEI. Now things are merit based like it always used to be until the left wing lunatics came into power and created nonsensical and radical changes.
Try writing your reports the last few years as they/them/their and non specific gender pronouns. It was painful.
I applaud Trump for his common sense policies and directives.
7 Likes
It’s the same ignorant talking points. Understand that calling you “ignorant” is giving you the benefit of the doubt that you’re somehow unaware of history and why DEI policies are in existence in the first place instead of assuming you’re really just a bigot, racist, sexist, a gaslighter, or a flat out idiot.
4 Likes
Oh cry me a river. Do you need some whine with that cheese?
What happened to judging people based upon the content of their character and not based upon the color of their skin?? 
Seems like someone important and influential in race relations may have said that somewhere and at sometime.
Let me educate you a little. Are you teachable? Are you amenable to correction?
DEI policies create what is called Reverse Discrimination. DEI initiatives inadvertently disadvantage majority groups, leading to reverse discrimination. This results in unfair treatment of others. DEI programs emphasize differences rather than commonalities, which fosters division within organizations. DEI initiatives inadvertently create an environment of exclusion rather than inclusion.
We should be ending discrimination based upon race and the use of harmful stereotypes. It has no place in our society. It’s wrong and discriminatory. We are living in 2025. Why would we want to go back to 1960 when people were actually judged prejudiciously by their skin color instead of their character and merit? DEI is harmful to society. Period. End of story.
By the way you are the definition of a typical left wing lunatic liberal. Name call, smear, whine, etc. without being able to thoughtfully debate. I’m neither of those things you named me but nice attempt at the smear job.
5 Likes
I have images of 50 formerly remote federal employees sitting in one tiny fed office taking turns using one computer in one office. 
1 Like
I’m not here to debate or call you names. Nowhere did I whine or call you names. Your whole argument is ignorant on its face and on its premise. Don’t attempt to educate me and I’m not bothering to educate you. People like you, your ignorance is by choice. You’re not interested in understanding anything. You’re likely something other than ignorant, to be honest. We both know it. Those who know, know. I hear you, I see you and I know you for what you are 
1 Like
Diversity is about making the military and the government it serves look more like the people it serves. It’s not about color of someone’s skin it’s about race, sex, marital status, age, veteran status, socioeconomic status, etc. etc. etc. It’s about giving people who are’t pale, male, christian and Yale a chance at success and opportunity. We all realize those have been the leaders from the past and they have done great things for this country but it’s time for them to set their automatic privileges aside and let people behind them feel some of the glow.
3 Likes
Yet you just proved my point again and reemphasized your prior name calling without any proof, evidence, or rational thought against me which is a true characteristic of a leftist and why 52% of Americans voted against your ideology.
We both know you’re not interested in proof, evidence, or rational thought. We both know what you are
1 Like
I have no problem with diversity but it needs to be based upon merit and effort.
The military and government should prioritize competence, experience, and leadership ability, not personal characteristics such as race, sex, or socioeconomic background.
Selecting individuals based on diversity metrics risks lowering standards and could lead to less qualified individuals being placed in crucial roles simply to meet demographic targets.Think hiring initiatives for black airline pilots that aren’t as qualified as pilots of other races just to bring in more black pilots to boost the numbers. We wouldn’t do that for the NBA or the NFL to get more white players that are less athletic and less deserving just to bring more numbers and diversity into that league yet there are many that believe it’s fine and dandy to do that in private and public sectors when these individuals are neither deserving nor qualified.
The best person for the job should be chosen regardless of background, rather than focusing on demographic representation. The claim that past leaders should have automatic privileges ignores the sacrifices, hardships, and individual achievements of those leaders.
Many successful figures, including those who were “pale, male, Christian, and Yale” educated earned their positions through merit, hard work, and leadership, not simply because of their identity.
While historical inequalities existed, many people from all backgrounds have faced hardships and earned success.
In institutions like the military and government sector, effectiveness and cohesion are more critical than demographic diversity for its own sake.
Prioritizing diversity over operational efficiency can lead to weaker decision-making, potentially compromising national security.
Studies have shown that forced diversity efforts can create division and resentment rather than unity. True fairness means equal opportunity, not equal outcomes or forced demographic representation.
If a group is underrepresented, it doesn’t necessarily mean discrimination, it could be due to different career preferences, interests, or qualifications. Instead of forcing diversity quotas, efforts should focus on removing barriers that prevent anyone from succeeding based on merit.
The military and government are already diverse with minority groups and continue to become more so organically, without the need for forced policies. The U.S. military, for example, is one of the most racially and socioeconomically diverse institutions in the country. Pushing for more artificial diversity suggests that past and current leadership lacks legitimacy, which can undermine morale and unity.
Viewing people primarily through the lens of their race, sex, or religion rather than their character, competence, and contributions fosters division, not inclusion. A true unifying vision should focus on shared values, duty, and excellence, not identity politics.
While diversity can be valuable, it should not be pursued at the expense of merit, effectiveness, or fairness. The military and government should focus on selecting the best people for the job, regardless of identity, rather than implementing policies that emphasize demographics over capability.
4 Likes
I’m not sure you understand the concept of diversity. It’s not just skin color or race. It is about fairness. The military only became mixed and representative of this country because it was forced to do so. Women and blacks were only allowed to vote in this country because it was forced to do so. History has shown us that if we wait for diversity to organically happen…It won’t.
4 Likes