Seattle hosts Segregated Diversity Training for Employees

[lfromnj]

https://komonews.com/news/local/segregated-diversity-training-seattle-city-hall-stirs-controversy

The email that invited municipal workers said it was for "city employees who identify as white,” giving them a specific place to sign up for the class.

The training was called Internalized Racial Superiority, and the email about it said, “We’ll examine our complicity in the system of white supremacy . . . and begin to cultivate practices that enable us to interrupt racism in ways that are accountable to Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC)."

The city also offered a similar training for "city employees who identify as a person of color."

Slowly edging back to the 1950s

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

It appears the training is being run by Enlightenment-skeptics: https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1280277424794513408
Worth opposing, in my view. Probably not a priority compared to corona etc., but it'd be ideal to end the illiberal trends quickly before they get conflated with the Biden presidency.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

People who believe this sort of thing should have been laughed at.  But instead, respectable society decided that these views contribute something to public discourse.

[Del Tachi]

This is why Biden will lose.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

This is why Biden will lose.

Not in 2020. A lot of this will be blamed on Trump just as much of what happened in Ferguson etc. was blamed on Obama. There was a racist element to that too, but it's more a phenomenon of blaming the incumbent for the problems of both teams.

[jimrtex]

https://komonews.com/news/local/segregated-diversity-training-seattle-city-hall-stirs-controversy

The email that invited municipal workers said it was for "city employees who identify as white,” giving them a specific place to sign up for the class.

The training was called Internalized Racial Superiority, and the email about it said, “We’ll examine our complicity in the system of white supremacy . . . and begin to cultivate practices that enable us to interrupt racism in ways that are accountable to Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC)."

The city also offered a similar training for "city employees who identify as a person of color."

Slowly edging back to the 1950s

What about Hispanic employees who identify as white?

[Tartarus Sauce]

Utterly ridiculous. This is not the correct way to go about combatting unconscious racial biases and is more likely to contribute to backlashes against the entire project of inclusive diversity.

[Horus]

Not surprised that this was Seattle. That city always tries to be woke in the worst ways. Just talk to each other.

[T'Chenka]

This is why Steven Crowder and Ben Shapiro are popular. Utter nonsense mixed in with a few truths, and then you segregate the employees by race. Absolute trash HP move.

[DrScholl]

You cannot offer the same diversity training to all employees because different people have different biases. A bias that a white person has isn't necessarily the same bias that a black person has. Plus the majority is going to feel far more secure in being biased because they feel they can get away. Some minorities feel they cannot be racist because they don't control the levers of institutionalized racism. It seems that a lot of people are ignorant of how complex these issues can be.

The people who really want to turn back the clock to the 1950s aren't the ones who created this training. It's conservatives who are always talking about how much better things were in the 1950s and even some progressives wanted to throw minorities under the bus after 2016 to make white working class voters feel better.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

The people who really want to turn back the clock to the 1950s aren't the ones who created this training. It's conservatives who are always talking about how much better things were in the 1950s and even some progressives wanted to throw minorities under the bus after 2016 to make white working class voters feel better.

Neither of those statements are true.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

You cannot offer the same diversity training to all employees because different people have different biases. A bias that a white person has isn't necessarily the same bias that a black person has. Plus the majority is going to feel far more secure in being biased because they feel they can get away. Some minorities feel they cannot be racist because they don't control the levers of institutionalized racism. It seems that a lot of people are ignorant of how complex these issues can be.

The people who really want to turn back the clock to the 1950s aren't the ones who created this training. It's conservatives who are always talking about how much better things were in the 1950s and even some progressives wanted to throw minorities under the bus after 2016 to make white working class voters feel better.

Look at the content of the training. Do you really think hauling white people into classrooms and telling them "objectivity" is internalised racial superiority is helpful?

[lfromnj]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.
I think its completely fair to call this a cultural revolution.

[T'Chenka]

You cannot offer the same diversity training to all employees because different people have different biases. A bias that a white person has isn't necessarily the same bias that a black person has. Plus the majority is going to feel far more secure in being biased because they feel they can get away. Some minorities feel they cannot be racist because they don't control the levers of institutionalized racism. It seems that a lot of people are ignorant of how complex these issues can be.

We offer the same training to men and women for basically every job, even though in some cases the social dynamics are completely different.

[DrScholl]

The people who really want to turn back the clock to the 1950s aren't the ones who created this training. It's conservatives who are always talking about how much better things were in the 1950s and even some progressives wanted to throw minorities under the bus after 2016 to make white working class voters feel better.

Neither of those statements are true.

Would you really be unhappy is things went back to how they were in the 1950s? You would probably think that your life was a lot better because "socialism" wasn't ruining it.

You cannot offer the same diversity training to all employees because different people have different biases. A bias that a white person has isn't necessarily the same bias that a black person has. Plus the majority is going to feel far more secure in being biased because they feel they can get away. Some minorities feel they cannot be racist because they don't control the levers of institutionalized racism. It seems that a lot of people are ignorant of how complex these issues can be.

The people who really want to turn back the clock to the 1950s aren't the ones who created this training. It's conservatives who are always talking about how much better things were in the 1950s and even some progressives wanted to throw minorities under the bus after 2016 to make white working class voters feel better.

Look at the content of the training. Do you really think hauling white people into classrooms and telling them "objectivity" is internalised racial superiority is helpful?

Some people think they have an increased ability to be objective based on a variety of factors that can include not just race, but also income, class, etc. It's not as simple as you think.

You cannot offer the same diversity training to all employees because different people have different biases. A bias that a white person has isn't necessarily the same bias that a black person has. Plus the majority is going to feel far more secure in being biased because they feel they can get away. Some minorities feel they cannot be racist because they don't control the levers of institutionalized racism. It seems that a lot of people are ignorant of how complex these issues can be.

We offer the same training to men and women for basically every job, even though in some cases the social dynamics are completely different.

That's fine, but it should be acknowledged that men and woman might come away from the training with different perceptions.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

You cannot offer the same diversity training to all employees because different people have different biases. A bias that a white person has isn't necessarily the same bias that a black person has. Plus the majority is going to feel far more secure in being biased because they feel they can get away. Some minorities feel they cannot be racist because they don't control the levers of institutionalized racism. It seems that a lot of people are ignorant of how complex these issues can be.

The people who really want to turn back the clock to the 1950s aren't the ones who created this training. It's conservatives who are always talking about how much better things were in the 1950s and even some progressives wanted to throw minorities under the bus after 2016 to make white working class voters feel better.

Look at the content of the training. Do you really think hauling white people into classrooms and telling them "objectivity" is internalised racial superiority is helpful?

Some people think they have an increased ability to be objective based on a variety of factors that can include not just race, but also income, class, etc. It's not as simple as you think.

I happen to agree that a false conviction in one's own ability to be rational allows bigotry to flourish (and that the "neutral" tone is often one invested with power), but that doesn't mean rationalism itself should be abandoned. Saying "objectivity is a vestige of internalised racial superiority" does not persuade one to try to be more objective and either suggests anti-racism is irrational or encourages a minority of anti-racists to abandon rationality in their approach to anti-racism. Both of these results are counterproductive.

[DrScholl]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Because some people take individualism to mean "I can do whatever I want to anyone because I'm an individual therefore only my concerns matter".

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Because some people take individualism to mean "I can do whatever I want to anyone because I'm an individual therefore only my concerns matter".

That doesn't mean individualism is racist. People's incorrect interpretations of various concepts does not define those concepts and terms like individualism and objectivity should not be surrendered to racists.

[John Dule]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Individualism is racist because it forces you to judge a person by their own actions instead of by the group they belong to. Wokies don't realize that that's precisely what makes it not racist.

[DrScholl]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Because some people take individualism to mean "I can do whatever I want to anyone because I'm an individual therefore only my concerns matter".

That doesn't mean individualism is racist. People's incorrect interpretations of various concepts does not define those concepts and terms like individualism and objectivity should not be surrendered to racists.

That's not what I'm saying. My point is that if people are misusing these terms to justify their biases then the training should highlight this.

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Individualism is racist because it forces you to judge a person by their own actions instead of by the group they belong to. Wokies don't realize that that's precisely what makes it not racist.

But plenty of conservatives don't judge people by their actions. Every time a Republican loses an election somehow it's because the "blacks" in the inner city stuffed the ballot boxes. When you stop doing that then maybe you can call yourselves individualists.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Because some people take individualism to mean "I can do whatever I want to anyone because I'm an individual therefore only my concerns matter".

That doesn't mean individualism is racist. People's incorrect interpretations of various concepts does not define those concepts and terms like individualism and objectivity should not be surrendered to racists.

That's not what I'm saying. My point is that if people are misusing these terms to justify their biases then the training should highlight this.

Ok, but that is not what seems to be going on and the differences between misuse of these terms and the terms themselves must be stressed so as not to suggest anti-racism is opposed to objectivism or whatever term is being discussed.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

The people who really want to turn back the clock to the 1950s aren't the ones who created this training. It's conservatives who are always talking about how much better things were in the 1950s and even some progressives wanted to throw minorities under the bus after 2016 to make white working class voters feel better.

Neither of those statements are true.

Would you really be unhappy is things went back to how they were in the 1950s? You would probably think that your life was a lot better because "socialism" wasn't ruining it.

Obviously some things were better in the 50s, other things were a lot worse.  I don't have any great love for the 50s.

[John Dule]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Individualism is racist because it forces you to judge a person by their own actions instead of by the group they belong to. Wokies don't realize that that's precisely what makes it not racist.

But plenty of conservatives don't judge people by their actions. Every time a Republican loses an election somehow it's because the "blacks" in the inner city stuffed the ballot boxes. When you stop doing that then maybe you can call yourselves individualists.

"When you stop doing that?" Who is the "you" that you are referring to in that sentence? Republicans? If so, I'm not a Republican. Right-wingers in general? Well, if you'd like to paint the entire vast spectrum of the right, which covers everything from libertarian capitalism to ethno-fascism, with the same brush... then I guess that's your prerogative. But ironically, this is precisely why anti-individualism is so harmful. It allows you to judge an individual by their membership to a group instead of, you know, actually listening to what the person is saying to you.

[DrScholl]

Also how is individualism "racist"?
If theres ever a moment that the word cultural Marxism actually makes sense one could use it here. I do wish there was a better word that captured that feeling without the anti-Semitic nature of Cultural Marxism.

Individualism is racist because it forces you to judge a person by their own actions instead of by the group they belong to. Wokies don't realize that that's precisely what makes it not racist.

But plenty of conservatives don't judge people by their actions. Every time a Republican loses an election somehow it's because the "blacks" in the inner city stuffed the ballot boxes. When you stop doing that then maybe you can call yourselves individualists.

"When you stop doing that?" Who is the "you" that you are referring to in that sentence? Republicans? If so, I'm not a Republican. Right-wingers in general? Well, if you'd like to paint the entire vast spectrum of the right, which covers everything from libertarian capitalism to ethno-fascism, with the same brush... then I guess that's your prerogative. But ironically, this is precisely why anti-individualism is so harmful. It allows you to judge an individual by their membership to a group instead of, you know, actually listening to what the person is saying to you.

I didn't say you were a Republican and specifically said conservatives. There are plenty of right-wingers from all over the spectrum who push the idea of voter fraud in black areas. Even moderate Mark Kirk said East St. Louis would jigger the vote against him. Really my point is that a lot of right-wingers want individualism for themselves, but like to judge people on which group they belong too.

[John Dule]

I didn't say you were a Republican and specifically said conservatives. There are plenty of right-wingers from all over the spectrum who push the idea of voter fraud in black areas. Even moderate Mark Kirk said East St. Louis would jigger the vote against him. Really my point is that a lot of right-wingers want individualism for themselves, but like to judge people on which group they belong too.

Yeah, but you're not talking to "a lot of right-wingers" right now, you're talking to me. And I have never pushed a black voter fraud narrative on this site, ever. Do you see the irony here? In accusing me of making generalizations based on group, you yourself made a generalization based on my group.