Here we go again with the ‘race-isn’t-real-just-a-construct-but-‘diversity’-is-so-we’ll-just-call-it-diversity-instead-of-race’
“Diversity does not mean forced equivalencies; for example, because you have a Black/African-American employee-resource group, a company is not compelled to have a KKK employee-resource group.”
Not so fast, Diversity-Man. You are trying to suggest that anyone White who challenges your agenda is lighting a cross every Saturday night while humming the ‘Battle Hymn of the Republic’. You are also trying to suggest also that not only should we throw our coat down and hold the door for any minority when it concerns work, school, or whatever in the interest of Pretend Equality (or as you put it “forced equivalencies”?) , but that we should also shut up about it in our private life as well as at work, and that is where you cross the line into invasion of privacy and totalitarianism. Someone of the Caucasian Persuasion is not necessarily in the Klan, just as whoever represents blacks isn’t just like Rev .Wright, Right?
“By the way, in my opinion, this extends to your private life as well.
YOU don’t get it , Visconti, that most people, White or not,have beliefs regarding race and culture, and yes,opinions and preferences based on behaviors associated with such. In the land of fallacious arguments, one is either waving a rainbow or rebel flag, there exists no normal Whites who happen to have ideas of their own regarding race, which is spectacularly and patently false- Whites having our own probably mostly private beliefs about various groups is the DEFAULT. If there is no choice BUT to ‘go along to get along’ , well then, you can’t really be too sure what your employees believe, now can you? One does not need those kind of accoutrements to affirm or confirm that one has racial opinions. You’re hanging yourself with your own thread-count challenged sheet.
Asking the White Guys: Don’t Try This at Home, by DiversityInc Partner and Cofounder Luke Visconti, continues to spark a heated debate about how white men should be included in diversity management. Today, Visconti responds to a reader who calls him a fascist for advising against holding a diversity summit that included a panel called “Ask the White Guys.”
“Diversity management is a disciplined business subject that, properly implemented, drives productivity, innovation, profitability and sustainability. It does not mean that people have an open license to sound off on their opinions.”
Celebrating all the so-called wonderful attributes of diversity without free opinion, thought or speech.Freaking fascists!
In a business setting, which is what the original question is about, I absolutely stand by those words. Employees do not have the “right” to express disruptive opinions or values that are contrary to the values of the leadership of the company. Diversity does not mean forced equivalencies; for example, because you have a Black/African-American employee-resource group, a company is not compelled to have a KKK employee-resource group.>>
By the way, in my opinion, this extends to your “private” life as well. I don’t think it’s a good management practice to tell people to “check it at the door.” If you want to fly a Confederate flag over your house and march around with a sheet on your head, that’s your right. But it doesn’t mean you have a right to be employed by a company that doesn’t share your views.
More : ‘Ask the White Guy’
Is Dressing Like a CEO the Same as ‘Dressing White’?
One thought on “Silencing the White Guys: Is It Fascism?”
Though the comment I’d like to make is not off topic (Diversity) it’s not exactly in line with the article above. So, in an attempt to provide a link between the article and my comment I’ll use a line from the article before proceeding to my comment.
” Most of the boneheaded things I hear at diversity conferences concern confusion on this topic.”
I would offer that the source of the confusion is that most of the people using the word simply do not know anything about its origin and intent.
I’m not talking about the standard dictionary definition of the word.
I’m talking about the roots of its modern use today. Its roots stem from the great figures of Romanticism, which strictly speaking, is the period of Cultural History we’re still in today.
Long story short, they saw that, as Family Systems Psychology might put it, “the sicker the system, the more rigid the roles.” And that one of the sources of societies problems was its refusal to recognize the value of the self behind the roles we all must play as our price of admission into society. Nietzsche was the culmination, though not completion of this, and his quote “You must become who you are” gives perfection expression to exactly what was meant by Diversity.
It’s actually very inspiring because as the word was intended it provided us with a call to action as well as a basis for morality. The call to action was to, be, think, and feel, who you are, and not just what society tells you. And in the process you discover its moral imperative, ie; Empathy – that if you have a self, then so does everyone else. Negotiating your way through this is not so easy, but it’s rarely boring, and it eliminates all Either/Or, Black and White, thinking. It requires a genuine sensitivity, and not the bogus, sentimental, touchy-feely sensitivity we see so much of today.
And that brings us to its current use. It is my view that the Left has taken virtually all of the good stuff of the Romantics, all of their concepts, and have proceeded to use them in a mystified way.
In short, they take what is essentially a Spiritual concept, which if properly understood and applied leads to the Sovereign Individual – the noblest and most profound idea Mankind has ever created – and they use it for Political purposes.
They take a concept designed for the Individual and use it for the Group.
No wonder everyone is so confused!
One could go on, but maybe now’s a good time to cork this bottle.