With Diversity, Tolerance, Equity and Inclusion and taking it up the ass daily

Diversity as practiced by the left is monochrome.

Should this thread be in the Political Forum ?

"Should this thread be in the Political Forum ?"

what difference is that going to make? once you click onto discussions this thread is still going to appear no matter which forum type it should fall under.

In the political forum here has anyone ever said "I was wrong and you were right so thank you for straightening me out"?

Here's the red pill: we think we are in a human narrative where each of our stories matter. Actually we are farm equipment basically for the super rich. With new technology ascending the super rich have realized they don't need all these bio based farm animals around to serve them. Minding the animals takes a lot of work.

So what we are seeing now is the middle stage of a campaign to remake the world in their preferred image. Everything in modern society that emanates from the official channels of government and mass media is intended to make the herding and culling happen.

Diversity, for example, is not a strength when it means throwing together people of radically different backgrounds and pretending they're the same. That's actually a weakness because it breaks down cohesion.

Look what's being pushed on us:

Destruction of gender roles
Gun restrictions
Meat discouraged by prices and environmental guilt
Destruction of cohesive homogeneous communities ( must diverse)
Removal of cheap powerful hydrocarbon fuel access for regular people
Cashless society makes it difficult to hold private wealth

The list goes on.

What do all these things have in common? They make us farm animals weaker and this easier to reduce.

The DEI "tolerant" folx will bare the claws at the first sign of wrongthink. But they must be stood up to--they have no more power than we're willing to give them.

I guess you're Jenkins off to Pinochet right now

Jenkins off? You must have been whacking off to pics of Trump.

Diversity, tolerance and inclusion - three words perverted by liberals to try and beat dissenters into conformity.

Cashman by saying "dissenters" you mean bigots neonazos racists homophobes right wing nuts etc who oppose diversity equality social justice...

Icee. No.

I mean anyone who does not agree with the liberal version of diversity, tolerance and inclusion.

@Cashman, actually Icee gives a great example of how they believe.

It's the old saying that liberals claim to be tolerant of opposing opinions, then are quite shocked to learn there _are_ opposing opinions.

Thankfully I work for a non-US-based company, most of which thinks DEI is Yank nonsense.

Just like the meaning of conservative has been perverted over the last 10-15 years the word liberal has also become bastardized, years back you had real liberals that were thoughtful intelligent and would never dream of supporting such false elements like BLM and the other bullshit promoted by the loony left, and true conservatives were honest and able to reach a consensus on a whole range of issues important to governing the United States not any more, it has become a zero sum game between two bitter opponents where the objective is no longer consensus rathe the goal is to beat the other side into submission, if something doesn’t change and soon I fear for my country.

One benefit of being old is I recall liberal Republicans and Conservative Democrats. That was true diversity. That was a world where Biden couldn't win a primary in 1989 and where trump could not have run. The one area where 25 and I differ is that he fears for his country and I have accepted it no longer exists and will never return.

^ you need to remember I have children that I worry what we’re leaving for them to deal with is a crime, I have to believe it will get better somehow, I wish I could be more optimistic.

Tetradon. Bigotry isn't an opposing opinion. It's the belief that tolerance equity social justice etc are wrong. They're not to be tolerated. Claiming that hate speech homophobia racism etc are just differing views js asinine only the loony right believes that their Hate is valid. Fuck them.

@Icee, speaking of tolerance, I have a gay Christian friend who said it was easier to come out to his Christian friends as gay, than come out to his gay friends as Christian. Is that "intolerance" and "bigotry"? Or does that only apply one way?

Is it "racist" to believe that not every difference in outcomes between races is the result of discrimination? Or does the word of one controversial author have to be accepted as gospel without questioning?

Is it "hate speech" for a Yale psychiatrist to say she could shoot a white person and walk away with a spring in her step? Or is that acceptable?

Let's see if you have any nuance, or just want to start shit.

You're trying to rationalize bigotry. You're trying to argue that Christianity is accepting of homosexuality. That whites are the real victims of institutional racism. Neonazis and the kkk would agree with you.

^ who the fuck is saying anything like that, you are like a little ankle nipping dog, always trying to twist shit and get an elbow in someone’s rib, you’re a fuckn weasel go fuck your bigoted lying self.

@25, I said the last sentence of my last post knowing the answer.

Nuance and principle are about 35 IQ points beyond Pimpy.

^ you gotta know better he’s intentionally obtuse.

^ Oh I know. I knew he would proclaim that louder than I ever could.

It was during the Bush 43 administration, when Fox News rose to provide balance against the liberal news outlets of everyone else, that an idiot liberal on another board posted that liberalism was good because the founding fathers were liberals. That was the most liberal statement had ever heard at the time; liberal in the fact that it was based purely on labels, fuzzy logic, revisionist history, and factually false. The partisans that mattered 250 years ago were Loyalists and Revolutionaries. Monarchists and Federalists. The founders of our nation would have never countenanced identity politics, cradle-to-grave nanny states, socialism, defunding law enforcement, etc.

Liberalism has really always been wrong. Always. it was Friedrich Nietzsche who said that a liberal institution (not a physical institution, but more along the lines of paradigms and politics) ceases to be liberal once it is firmly established. Once that happens no greater threat to freedom exists. That is the purpose of liberalism/socialism/communism - to level mountain and valley; to make all men equally small, powerless, unimportant, and therefore hedonistic. Now you get into American Socialism 2022 - where making all men equally small and impotent is unacceptable as it does not include payback for perceived past offenses. Now, any Americans who are light-skinned, predominantly heterosexual, adhere to their birth gender, Christian, and patriotic must give reparations for offenses they did not give, to others (citizens and non-citizens) who were not alive centuries ago to be offended. And I am the bad guy for pointing out that that makes no sense and cannot be allowed.

So, yes, Muddy is right.

Icee theres some ways whites and asians are discriminated against like affirmative action.
There isn’t really much if any institutional racism around today. Most racism is individual. There are entire companies supporting racism like supporting blm for instance.
But as far as a professor or cop or stripper or someone being racist those are individual examples. Even if you have hundreds of cops or fast food workers doing racist stuff that’s still just a collection of individual examples its not institutional racism. Institutional racism would be like affirmative action or like having different laws and rules for people dependent on their race.
A cop might patrol a poorer neighborhood or mostly black neighborhood more often. But thats not institutional racism, and it may not even be individual racism. Is the cop patrolling it more because of the race of the people there or is he patrolling it more because it’s much easier to find drug deals or criminal activity in that area.

A neighborhood in a bad city might have a crime every 5 minutes. A neighborhood in the suburbs might have one crime every month or few months. It’s laughable to say its institutional racism because a cop chooses to patrol one neighborhood more than another

I followed Muddy's link from the Queen Elizabeth article and read what the dirtbag professor said. That is exactly the liberal mindset I was referencing above. Not Elizabeth nor any modern royals had a single damn thing to do with slavery. There has never been slavery in England. The English Empire did import slaves into the colonies, but remember that those slaves were sold to the English by African chiefs and rulers. However, liberals will wish excruciating death upon heterosexual White Christians who had nothing to do with offenses not given to those liberals, because that is liberal philosophy.

If Carnegie Mellon had one shred of true academic and social decency, that woman would have been fired the moment she tweeted that hateful comment.

Opposing social justice equates to supporting bigotry. It's pretty simple and straightforward

But theres like millions of people who claim to support social justice but then hold beliefs like homeless people should only be assisted if they belong to a specific race. The term social justice is worthless these days, and a lot of terms are becoming worthless. A bunch of people say they believe in equality but then hold racist views