Trumpist equity and inclusion.

In other words, stuffing the government full of people whose primary qualification is their unfaltering loyalty to President Trump. Is this meaningfully distinct on a structural level from DEI?
>DEI
A program which prioritizes over basic job competence a set of arbitrary metrics weighted stronger than said job competence. Primary inefficiency is in employing people who check political boxes but likely aren't the best people for the job.
>TEI
A program which prioritizes loyalty to the President over independent job competence. Likely also results in less competent people ending up in jobs for which others would be better suited... based on checking an arbitrary political box.

Can someone explain to me why DEI bad when brown people but OK when Trump loyalists? It seems to be the exact same metastructure... just with the shoe on the other foot.

>>508334616 (OP)
kikes?
well duh...

>>508334948
I'm not sure this has anything to do with Jews or trannies, anon...

Ok I hate the zionist faggot orange nigger but what the fuck are you actually talking about?
The president should hire people who are disloyal? What the fuck are you even proposing?

>>508335241
I'm proposing the admittedly radical idea that we should hire people based on their direct qualifications for the job instead of for political expediency. I would further suggest that loyalty, if it figures in at all, should be to the Constitution before it's to a man.

>>508335497
>I'm proposing the admittedly radical idea that we should hire people based on their direct qualifications for the job instead of for political expediency
Ok and? Do you think any actual jobs work like that? Everything in this country is based on nepotism or financial incentive.

>>508335972
I think the breakdown here is that you look at nepotism and seem to say "well, we might as well hire a poolboy and Safeway clerk to run our anti terrorism system," whereas I would probably prefer that we work harder to root out nepotism and loyalty hires... different strokes for different folks kind of thing, maybe? But geez, "antiterrorism" does seem to be kinda important, right? Sounds like there might be some stakes involved here...