All you need to know about this WSJ article is that the author is one of those diversity of thought people who can’t imagine that racial or gender based discrimination could shape the worldview of wealthy people.
I'm a little confused. In the screenshot I see "appointing worker representatives", but he doesn't assign them a hypothetical race, like he did with the single-person examples. Does he idealize white laborers elsewhere in the article? I tried to read it for more context, but it's paywalled
Isn't he arguing that people's class shapes their worldviews and goals *in addition to* their race and gender? I see qualifiers like "would probably think" and "may have". He doesn't say race and gender have no correlation, only that they don't perfectly capture people's thinking in all cases
Right, but if you read further in the screenshot he says a (white) laborer would bring diversity of thought. the idea is that race and gender play little to no role thus diversity means hiring poor white people. Don’t let the weasel words fool you.
