I think there's potentially a real need to moderate on the issue that is absolutely ignored by Marc Andreesen going scorched earth in the other direction.
That's probably quite a popular viewpoint, shared by many on the left, too. Almost all my left-leaning friends agree (as do I). I think one problem here is that "that's racist" is a very powerful tool to shut down criticism. If you need to defend yourself with "I'm not racist" then you've kind of already lost, right?
Of course they themselves do exactly the same thing with "that's antisemitic!" to shut down criticism.
Obviously there is plenty of racism and antisemitism around and it's fine to call that out – I have done so myself. But it's such an easy and powerful tool to misuse. I don't really know how to solve this.
All of that said, Andreesen is just on another level. He complains about the last 60 years. That's going back to 1965. I'm not American and wasn't alive at the time, but it's not my impression that before 1965 there was a great harmonious environment of peace, love, and understanding between different ethnic groups in the United States. But maybe I'm wrong? I don't know.
It's of course just outright bizarre to take the end of segregation and Jim Crow laws as the starting point of "DEI gone mad".
People like Andreesen just latch on to "DEI" to spout their racist bollocks. Whatever he says bears no relation to the excesses of "DEI". He doesn't go too far in the other direction, because he's not on the same axis that we are. We could disagree on some things here, but there are a few core truth we (hopefully) agree on such as "all people are equal, regardless of ethnicity" and "talking about "our people" vs. them is not good, especially when it comes to black people, who have been here for hundreds of years". If you don't recognise those base values then you're just operating on an entirely different axis.
It wasn't even the end of segregation and Jim Crow in the 60s. Segregation Academies were legal until 1976. Palmer v Thompson was in 71 and was decided in favor of the segregationists. Milliken v Bradley was in 74 and decided in favor of the segregationists. Both remain good law.
United States v Virginia was in 1996, and finally required VMI to enroll women.
At best, segregation and jim crow ended in the mid 70s. In my opinion, it never really ended. Desegregation could never succeed because the steps required to make it succeed were blocked by the courts.
In my opinion, the most blindingly clear argument for Andreesen being motivated by racism rather than "merit" is that a16z hired Daniel Penny, a man whose only qualification was strangling another person to death on the subway. Merit.
