So-called Anti-Woke, Anti-DEI policy catch-all

[ZenMode]

I think we should make a point of having people who object to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion tell us up front which of those so upsets them.

Do they disagree that people unlike them can have valuable contributions to make? Do they not believe in being fair and just in the way people are treated? Do they not want people unlike themselves to be included in public spaces?

Lay it out for us.

And I definitely think we need to define "woke." Because right now it seems to be a catch-all pejorative rather than any kind of useful description of behavior or ideas.

The government shouldn't make hiring/promotion decisions based on skin color or genitalia.

Biden should select the best person for SCOTUS justice, not the best person with a vagina and sufficient melanin.

 

[StrangePackage]

The government shouldn't make hiring/promotion decisions based on skin color or genitalia.

Biden should select the best SCOTUS justice, not the person with a vagina and sufficient melanin.

Indeed. Just because someone is white and male is not a reason to select them over an equally (or better) qualified person with fewer or none of those qualities.

Glad we agree.

 

[ZenMode]

Indeed. Just because someone is white and male is not a reason to select them over an equally (or better) qualified person with fewer or none of those qualities.

Glad we agree.

Person = any genitals and amount of melanin. YOU (and Biden) are the ones making it about irrelevant characteristics that, BTW, not one person had any choice in. They are characteristics they have by sheer chance of birth.

 

[4thgenheel]

From Reddit (r/AskConservatives)

ahhh, yes. some of our more thoughtful conservatives entering the "find out" stage.

 

[ZenMode]

“It Takes All Of Us.” seems like a timely and appropriate message.

 

[Zoo_View]

NFL getting down on its knees to fellate the attending Trump at the SUper Bowl

Super Bowl to end "End Racism"

Super Bowl to end "End Racism"

www.avclub.com

Go with “Be Best.”

 

[Paine]

I think we should make a point of having people who object to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion tell us up front which of those so upsets them.

Do they disagree that people unlike them can have valuable contributions to make? Do they not believe in being fair and just in the way people are treated? Do they not want people unlike themselves to be included in public spaces?

Lay it out for us.

And I definitely think we need to define "woke." Because right now it seems to be a catch-all pejorative rather than any kind of useful description of behavior or ideas.

Woke = social justice politics with class taken out.

Social justice has been the domain of the left for its entire existence. This has always involved uplifting marginalized people through a universalist message. See: the Civil Rights Movement. However, this message has always also had a core class component.

Wokeness flips this traditional left message on its head by essentializing race. Whereas traditional leftist messaging emphasizes understanding and commonality, wokeness asserts that people of different races can never understand one another’s experiences.

Large corporations and universities were more than willing to accept this new paradigm. After all, putting a few people of color in high positions is a good way to deflect from any accusations that these institutions may face. Moreover, wokeness does not present a challenge to the entrenched class interests of elites.

The very real issues with this wokeness have been weaponized by the right as an all-out attack on the idea of diversity itself. They will label anything that disagrees with their political program “woke.” But that doesn’t mean that leftists and liberals should ignore the problem.

 

[superrific]

Woke = social justice politics with class taken out.

Social justice has been the domain of the left for its entire existence. This has always involved uplifting marginalized people through a universalist message. See: the Civil Rights Movement. However, this message has always also had a core class component.

Wokeness flips this traditional left message on its head by essentializing race. Whereas traditional leftist messaging emphasizes understanding and commonality, wokeness asserts that people of different races can never understand one another’s experiences.

Large corporations and universities were more than willing to accept this new paradigm. After all, putting a few people of color in high positions is a good way to deflect from any accusations that these institutions may face. Moreover, wokeness does not present a challenge to the entrenched class interests of elites.

The very real issues with this wokeness have been weaponized by the right as an all-out attack on the idea of diversity itself. They will label anything that disagrees with their political program “woke.” But that doesn’t mean that leftists and liberals should ignore the problem.

I really can't get on board with this. As an aside, I don't think "essentializing" race is the word you're looking for. I hope it's not. I think you mean focusing or centering.

If you want a materialist analysis, I think it's fairly straightforward: class-based politics are impossible without solidarity -- or to put it differently, false consciousness is an obstacle and sometimes an insuperable one. There is no solidarity among the working classes; in fact, it's anti-solidarity. White workers are specifically choosing to disassociate with minority workers, and they are choosing that disassociation even though it is materially bad for them.

The source of this false consciousness is the virulent racism that has been the defining feature of southern politics since the Founding. White southerners have never accepted a political coalition with black people. The New Deal was possible only because it did not question white supremacy in any significant way. As soon as white supremacy was legally defeated by Brown and the Civil Rights Movement, white southerners, especially the working classes, bailed on the Dems and exited the New Deal coalition immediately, under cover of guns and God bullshit.

Class based politics simply cannot work in a country where the white working classes side with white rich people over black working class people.

 

[farce©]

Woke = social justice politics with class taken out.

Social justice has been the domain of the left for its entire existence. This has always involved uplifting marginalized people through a universalist message. See: the Civil Rights Movement. However, this message has always also had a core class component.

Wokeness flips this traditional left message on its head by essentializing race. Whereas traditional leftist messaging emphasizes understanding and commonality, wokeness asserts that people of different races can never understand one another’s experiences.

Large corporations and universities were more than willing to accept this new paradigm. After all, putting a few people of color in high positions is a good way to deflect from any accusations that these institutions may face. Moreover, wokeness does not present a challenge to the entrenched class interests of elites.

The very real issues with this wokeness have been weaponized by the right as an all-out attack on the idea of diversity itself. They will label anything that disagrees with their political program “woke.” But that doesn’t mean that leftists and liberals should ignore the problem.

This is unmitigated bullshit.

 

[Callatoroy]

Couldn’t agree with you more. Absolutely no issue whatsoever- absolutely, positively no problem – with examining and correcting awkward, ineffective corporate DEI programs. In fact, I’d be the biggest cheerleader of such. But that’s not what the right wing is doing. They are wanting to completely eliminate any and all cultural references that are not heterosexual, Caucasian, and Christian. I’m about as white as the driven snow, as straight as an arrow, and as Christian as any failed sinner can be, and the absolute last thing I want in the world is for there to be no celebration of multiculturalism. I truly cannot understand the perspective of anyone who thinks otherwise, and honestly, I’m not really willing to try.

Call it virtue signaling or whatever if you want, but my straightness, my whiteness, and my Christianity are not in any way threatened by the existence and celebration of other cultures, and in fact, they are nothing but enhanced by being exposed to them.

I’m not really sure how any Republicans can defend this, but then again, that’s why I am no longer Republican – because I won’t defend it. It’s just like how they pretend that they care so deeply about protecting the sanctity of sports as it pertains to transgender people participating. They don’t care about that at all, because if they did, they wouldn’t be also trying to make gender affirming healthcare illegal. Same with DEI. They don’t care about clunky corporate DEI programs, because if they did, they would just focus on eliminating or reconfiguring those, instead of literally trying to erase any and all references whatsoever to other culture.

"They are wanting to completely eliminate any and all cultural references that are not heterosexual, Caucasian, and Christian."

Is that really true?

"Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on Sunday said the removal of Tuskegee Airmen videos and curriculum about the Tuskegee Airmen from its military instruction curriculum “has been immediately reversed.”
Hegesth posted the comment in response to concerns from U.S. Sen. Katie Britt about “malicious compliance we’ve seen in recent days.”
“We’re all over it Senator. This will not stand,” Hegseth posted in response to Britt’s social media comments. “This will not stand.”

 

[4thgenheel]

The government shouldn't make hiring/promotion decisions based on skin color or genitalia.

Biden should select the best person for SCOTUS justice, not the best person with a vagina and sufficient melanin.

tell this shit to the current occupant of the white house. ACB and Kavanaugh are hacks who shouldn't be anywhere near scotus.

KBJ was one of the most qualified candidates in history.

 

[Paine]

This is unmitigated bullshit.

Good talk.

 

[Paine]

I really can't get on board with this. As an aside, I don't think "essentializing" race is the word you're looking for. I hope it's not. I think you mean focusing or centering.

If you want a materialist analysis, I think it's fairly straightforward: class-based politics are impossible without solidarity -- or to put it differently, false consciousness is an obstacle and sometimes an insuperable one. There is no solidarity among the working classes; in fact, it's anti-solidarity. White workers are specifically choosing to disassociate with minority workers, and they are choosing that disassociation even though it is materially bad for them.

The source of this false consciousness is the virulent racism that has been the defining feature of southern politics since the Founding. White southerners have never accepted a political coalition with black people. The New Deal was possible only because it did not question white supremacy in any significant way. As soon as white supremacy was legally defeated by Brown and the Civil Rights Movement, white southerners, especially the working classes, bailed on the Dems and exited the New Deal coalition immediately, under cover of guns and God bullshit.

Class based politics simply cannot work in a country where the white working classes side with white rich people over black working class people.

Respect your opinion but the two of us have discussed this enough.

 

[superrific]

tell this shit to the current occupant of the white house. ACB and Kavanaugh are hacks who shouldn't be anywhere near scotus.

KBJ was one of the most qualified candidates in history.

OK, OK, slow down. KBJ was no more qualified than Kav. She had only been an appeals court judge for a year or two. No matter how you want to define "qualified," she wasn't "most in history." The point here is that qualifications for the Supreme Court are not what the right-wingers claim (and of course they choke over themselves when forced to admit that Thomas was an affirmative action hire and completely unqualified by any measure).

 

[superrific]

Respect your opinion but the two of us have discussed this enough.

Well, then, let me not stand in the way of the other conversations going on. Wasn't there one about "unmitigated bullshit"? That seemed productive.

 

[4thgenheel]

OK, OK, slow down. KBJ was no more qualified than Kav. She had only been an appeals court judge for a year or two. No matter how you want to define "qualified," she wasn't "most in history." The point here is that qualifications for the Supreme Court are not what the right-wingers claim (and of course they choke over themselves when forced to admit that Thomas was an affirmative action hire and completely unqualified by any measure).

the skeletons in his closet made him wildly unqualified.

and i didn't say "most" i said "one of the most."

 

[Paine]

Well, then, let me not stand in the way of the other conversations going on. Wasn't there one about "unmitigated bullshit"? That seemed productive.

Farce’s response is exactly why broaching this topic on the board is useless.

 

[superrific]

the skeletons in his closet made him wildly unqualified.

and i didn't say "most" i said "one of the most."

I don't think that has anything to do with being qualified or not. That's a question of fitness. And KBJ is not "one of the most" either. It's not close. Breyer was a law professor at Harvard for 13 years before being appointed to the First Circuit, where he served for another 14 years before being nominated to the Supreme Court. Along the way, he had experience working in Congressional offices and as a special prosecutor for Whitewater. And Breyer's bio was not particularly unusual. Ginsburg was a DC Circuit judge for 13 years, after having been a successful Supreme Court advocate.

KBJ is great. Kagan is great (she hadn't been a judge at all, but had been Dean at Harvard Law). Let's not pretend that they were "qualified" according to traditional criteria, because that's false. Let's use them to point out that traditional "qualifications" are often bullshit that neither predict nor relate to job performance.

 

[rodoheel]

I don't know how the Trump administration defines woke or DEI, but, like closing down the department website, canceling these clubs sounds like malicious compliance to me. We will see how things shake out.

LOL you act like this stuff is a bug, and not a feature, of the anti-DEI push. I wonder if you were, in fact, born yesterday?

 

[rodoheel]

Woke = social justice politics with class taken out.

Social justice has been the domain of the left for its entire existence. This has always involved uplifting marginalized people through a universalist message. See: the Civil Rights Movement. However, this message has always also had a core class component.

Wokeness flips this traditional left message on its head by essentializing race. Whereas traditional leftist messaging emphasizes understanding and commonality, wokeness asserts that people of different races can never understand one another’s experiences.

Large corporations and universities were more than willing to accept this new paradigm. After all, putting a few people of color in high positions is a good way to deflect from any accusations that these institutions may face. Moreover, wokeness does not present a challenge to the entrenched class interests of elites.

The very real issues with this wokeness have been weaponized by the right as an all-out attack on the idea of diversity itself. They will label anything that disagrees with their political program “woke.” But that doesn’t mean that leftists and liberals should ignore the problem.

I think the criticism of some aspects of modern leftist activism being too race-focused is fair. But the attempt to retroactively cast historical leftism as inherently superior to this current strain of leftist thought - as having always "uplifted marginalized people through a universalist message" - seems historically questionable to me.