Woke and DEI - good intentions, so-so, dogmatic solutions

[icehorse]

I'm lumping "woke" and DEI ideas into the same category. I'm not attached to this lumping, so I don't want to get side-tracked if all you want to do is some un-lumping. But let's try to keep the lumping / unlumping separate from the point of the OP.

==

For the sake of this discussion, I'm happy to grant that the woke / DEI folks are well intended. You know "diversity, equality, inclusion", those all sound like good ideas! But the devil is in the details. For example, there is a HUGE difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

But what I see is that there is a powerful, vocal group within the woke / DEI community who push their solutions quite dogmatically and often intolerantly. Further, part of their dogma asserts that many of us aren't even allowed into the conversation!! E.g., regardless of a cis-white-male's credentials or expertise, he's not allowed to have a voice in the conversation.

This dogmatic approach is hurting ALL liberals. I've linked to a portion of a speech that DeSantis gave recently. IMO, because of the extraordinary claims and proposals of the woke / DEI crowd, someone like DeSantis can push back quite reasonably. He talks about "quality of character". As a liberal, I have to agree with that idea. He talks (indirectly), about problems with identity politics. Again, as a liberal, I have to agree.

So we need to be suspicious of all dogma, and especially post-truth, extraordinary, fuzzy-on-the-details, no discussions allowed dogma.

This kind of thing is giving easy fodder to the diseased right.

 

[Orbit]

I respectfully disagree with the premise. DeSantis creates a straw man out of extreme cases and then issues an extreme reaction.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This dogmatic approach is hurting ALL liberals. I've linked to a portion of a speech that DeSantis gave recently. IMO, because of the extraordinary claims and proposals of the woke / DEI crowd, someone like DeSantis can push back quite reasonably.

You stated that the supposedly dogmatic approach hurts all liberals, but then you cited an American demagogue's response to an extreme image of American identity politics.

On a global level, I think DEI is most likely a net good, if only because most countries in the world have yet to implement even the bare basics thereof such as workplace policies to protect minorities from discrimination. The globally anomalous fixations of American politics, such as unbridled "freedom of speech" and racial nitpicking, mean little to nothing for many people in other parts of the world.

 

[icehorse]

I respectfully disagree with the premise. DeSantis creates a straw man out of extreme cases and then issues an extreme reaction.

The woke / DEI folks set themselves up for this sort of attack

You can claim it's not fair, but the right is capturing too many hearts and minds, and the woke / DEI folks are making that easy.

 

[icehorse]

You stated that the supposedly dogmatic approach hurts all liberals, but then you cited an American demagogue's response to an extreme image of American identity politics.

On a global level, I think DEI is most likely a net good, if only because most countries in the world have yet to implement even the bare basics thereof such as workplace policies to protect minorities from discrimination. The globally anomalous fixations of American politics, such as unbridled "freedom of speech" and racial nitpicking, mean little to nothing for many people in other parts of the world.

This is about capturing the hearts and minds of the people. We have to consider emotions of people in the population. It's not about logic or what's true (sadly). Think of this from a marketing perspective. The woke's marketing sucks, and folks like DeSantis - even though they're logically wrong - have better marketing. And marketing / advertising / propaganda cannot be ignored. It's why the dumpster fire is still a viable candidate.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This is about capturing the hearts and minds of the people. We have to consider emotions of people in the population. It's not about logic or what's true (sadly). Think of this from a marketing perspective. The woke's marketing sucks, and folks like DeSantis - even though they're logically wrong - have better marketing. And marketing / advertising / propaganda cannot be ignored. It's why the dumpster fire is still a viable candidate.

I suppose effective propaganda is a part of the issue, but I would focus more on why the propaganda resonated with so many people in the first place. What issues, if any, does DeSantis appeal to, even if he uses demagoguery and false promises, and what could a competitor do to address these and gain votes? What are the underlying cultural or social problems that have given rise to such a significantly dissatisfied and divided electorate?

These are the overarching questions, in my opinion. Trying to address propaganda in isolation of these questions seems to me an exercise in focusing on the symptoms without tackling the root causes.

 

[icehorse]

I suppose effective propaganda is a part of the issue, but I would focus more on why the propaganda resonated with so many people in the first place. What issues, if any, does DeSantis appeal to, even if he uses demagoguery and false promises, and what could a competitor do to address these and gain votes? What are the underlying cultural or social problems that have given rise to such a significantly dissatisfied and divided electorate?

These are the overarching questions, in my opinion. Trying to address propaganda in isolation of these questions seems to me an exercise in focusing on the symptoms without tackling the root causes.

My short answer remains the same: we've allowed an oligarchy /kleptocracy to take over our politics and our country. This causes an endless array of problems including a bad education system, widespread financial insecurities, a culture of fear and on and on.

Liberal messages ought to be truly positive and inclusive. Sure there are still huge DEI issues to tackle, but too often the DEI messages themselves are divisive.

Take CRT as an example. The woke / DEI folks never took the time to clearly and in detail document what ideas they think should be taught around CRT. With that poor effort in place, it's EASY for the right to cherry pick the most controversial ideas from CRT, and use those to terrorize their base.

And too often, if even a well known liberal criticizes CRT, folks from THE LEFT will brand that liberal as a racist or whatever - divisive.

To be clear, CRT is just an example, there are many similar topics we could use as examples: trans-sexuals, reparations, intersectionality theory, "socialism", and so on.

 

[AlexanderG]

I can't see how they're well intended. "Wokeism" is an undefined boogeyman that appeals to conservatives' inchoate racism and discomfort with changing demographics. Fear is the easiest way to gather political support, and the most corrosive to long term political stability. DeSantis' strategy is lazy, bigoted, and willfully ignorant, but so are the people who fall for it.

 

[Debater Slayer]

And too often, if even a well known liberal criticizes CRT, folks from THE LEFT will brand that liberal as a racist or whatever - divisive.

To be clear, CRT is just an example, there are many similar topics we could use as examples: trans-sexuals, reparations, intersectionality theory, "socialism", and so on.

Would you mind elaborating on these, at least the examples about trans people and socialism? And why do you have "socialism" in quotation marks?

 

[icehorse]

Would you mind elaborating on these, at least the examples about trans people and socialism? And why do you have "socialism" in quotation marks?

I'm not going to wade into the trans debate. So I'll say one thing and then back away: it's risky business to say biologists are wrong.

As for "socialism", it's a boogeyman term. I think that most of the people - on both sides of the fence - throw the term around mostly inaccurately. For instance, it strikes me that many countries are "somewhat" socialist, the US being one. But if a DEI person uses the term loosely, then a right winger can jump on that and generate fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

It's like liberals keep pitching softballs to the right, sigh.

 

[icehorse]

I can't see how they're well intended. "Wokeism" is an undefined boogeyman that appeals to conservatives' inchoate racism and discomfort with changing demographics. Fear is the easiest way to gather political support, and the most corrosive to long term political stability. DeSantis' strategy is lazy, bigoted, and willfully ignorant, but so are the people who fall for it.

Agreed. And we need to stop pitching them soft balls that make it easy for them to generate FUD.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'm not going to wade into the trans debate. So I'll say one thing and then back away: it's risky business to say biologists are wrong.

I have only seen few people say that biologists are wrong. More often, it's one anti-trans person or another saying that psychologists are wrong and denying that there's a difference between gender and sex. In fact, DeSantis is one of the ideologues capitalizing on this exact denial of psychology and current science.

As for "socialism", it's a boogeyman term. I think that most of the people - on both sides of the fence - throw the term around mostly inaccurately. For instance, it strikes me that many countries are "somewhat" socialist, the US being one. But if a DEI person uses the term loosely, then a right winger can jump on that and generate fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

It's like liberals keep pitching softballs to the right, sigh.

Even the most accurate and honest statements can be jumped on by ideologues for partisan reasons. This was especially clear during the pandemic, when many anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists took even the most basic medical advice about preventive measures out of context and tried to make it seem sinister and dystopian.

It's hard to know how to address your points when you don't specify what they are, but when it comes to socialism, I think the Red Scare has left an indelible mark on a lot of people's perception of the term in a way that many countries outside of the US don't experience. If anything, I think what some Democrats are doing by reclaiming the term and showing younger voters that it's not a boogeyman is a generally useful move, especially in the long term. According to some polls, younger people in the US already have a much more positive perception of socialism than older ones:

70% of millennials say they'd vote for a socialist

And half say they have an unfavorable view of capitalism.

www.axios.com

Socialism as Popular as Capitalism Among Young Adults in U.S.

Young adults' reaction to the term "capitalism" has grown less positive over the past decade, while their view of socialism has remained steady.

news.gallup.com

Young Americans Increasingly Prefer Socialism. Here’s How To Change Their Minds

Young Americans like socialism. That’s one finding of a new Axios/Momentive poll surveying American attitudes toward topics such as economic inequality, capitalism and socialism, and government’s role in the economy.

www.heritage.org

If you want to discuss marketing, I think the above examples demonstrate that some Democrats have managed at least some degree of success with their appeal to younger voters who didn't live through the peak of the Cold War.

 

[icehorse]

It's hard to know how to address your points when you don't specify what they are

Hmmm. I'm talking about trends, not a specific issue.

But I see your point, I'll collect a few more specific examples..

==

In the meantime, I'll reiterate one of DeSantis's points: He says he wants people to he judged by the "quality of their character". He's pushing back against those DEI folks who are railing against the idea of "quality of character". Usually this is done by strongly promoting the idea that the only true solutions require a dogmatic obedience to identity politics. E.g. "Quality of character cannot succeed because racism is embedded within every white person." of some such explanation. This "racism is embedded" sort of claim is extraordinary. Traditionally, such a claim would be met with skepticism and calls for extraordinarily good evidence, a al Carl Sagan. But lately such requests for evidence will often be denied with further extraordinary claims, e.g. "as a white person your bias is so strong you cannot hope to see the truth", or "as a member of the patriarchy...". So often we see dogma supported by more dogma, and no actual debate can happen.

I often hear the argument "oh, that's just a few extremists using those tactics". But extremists can shift the overton window.

Again, I'm making a "win the hearts and minds" argument here. When liberals acquiesce to ideas like "the patriarchy" or the "oppressed vs. oppressor" worldview, we're just pitching softballs to the right, who are handily using them to create FUD, win the hearts and minds of conservatives, and bolster the MAGA base.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Honestly, I don't think the issue is with the concept of DEI, but with the implementation. Speaking in general terms, it's too often an immature industry with poor accountability, and a belief that their mission is key to the business. I believe this will change over time, and they will become more accountable and measureable, but I do worry a little on how they'll be measured, and what sort of behaviours that will encourage.
That's not really unique to DEI...I've seen countless examples of poorly thought through KPIs driving simplistic behaviours aimed at achieving them, rather than actually adding value.

 

[PureX]

For the sake of this discussion, I'm happy to grant that the woke / DEI folks are well intended. You know "diversity, equality, inclusion", those all sound like good ideas! But the devil is in the details. For example, there is a HUGE difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

But what I see is that there is a powerful, vocal group within the woke / DEI community who push their solutions quite dogmatically and often intolerantly. Further, part of their dogma asserts that many of us aren't even allowed into the conversation!! E.g., regardless of a cis-white-male's credentials or expertise, he's not allowed to have a voice in the conversation.

Where are you seeing this. Because honestly, I am not seeing this at all, except as an accusation coming from the very people who most want to slander and demonize their imagined liberal "enemy".

Please give some examples of "DEI folks" that are "pushing their solution" on some way that you are finding "intolerant". I mean, we can't hardly condemn them for "pushing their solutions", can we? Shouldn't we be welcoming solutions intended to increase diversity, equality and inclusion?

And where are you seeng "cis-white-males" being denied a voice in ANY conversation? Seems to me they are speaking their minds everywhere, all the time. And pretty much always have been.

This dogmatic approach is hurting ALL liberals.

What dogmatic approach? I saddened that liberals have mostly no approach at all. Let alone a dogmatic one. Where are all these dogmatic liberals? What are they trying to achieve? I'd like to JOIN THEM! And support their efforts!

I've linked to a portion of a speech that DeSantis gave recently. IMO, because of the extraordinary claims and proposals of the woke / DEI crowd, someone like DeSantis can push back quite reasonably.

Why on Earth are you going to DiSantis for ANY information about "woke liberals"??? He is the single most likely human on the planet to lie and slander as visciously as he possoibly can this trumped up nonsensical delusion of the "woke demon horde". He is the single least likely human on Earth to be "reasonable" about this whole subject.

He talks about "quality of character". As a liberal, I have to agree with that idea.

What does "quality of character" have to do with being a liberal? What does it even mean? Does it mean we all get to stand in judgment of each other's "character"? Sort of like we are the moral standard of "good character" and so we have the right to stand in judgment of everyone else's? Because that's a distinctly UN-liberal idea. That's exactly the kind of thing that liberals are trying to keep away from the halls of governmental power.

He talks (indirectly), about problems with identity politics. Again, as a liberal, I have to agree.

Why does he talk "indirectly"? Why can't he just say what he means? And why are you OK with a presidential candidate that can't talk directly to the American people?

And didn't you just identify yourself, politically, as a "liberal"? So what about that are you objecting to. I know why DiSantis is objecting to it (he's up against the Trump Cult).

So we need to be suspicious of all dogma, and especially post-truth, extraordinary, fuzzy-on-the-details, no discussions allowed dogma.

Is seeking an equal right to life, liberty, and opportunity a "dogma"? Or is it the idealized ethical imperative upon which we should be basing the function and purpose of our government?

 

[icehorse]

Where are you seeing this. Because honestly, I am not seeing this at all, except as an accusation coming from the very people who most want to slander and demonize their imagined liberal "enemy".

Please give some examples of "DEI folks" that are "pushing their solution" on some way that you are finding "intolerant". I mean, we can't hardly condemn them for "pushing their solutions", can we? Shouldn't we be welcoming solutions intended to increase diversity, equality and inclusion?

And where are you seeng "cis-white-males" being denied a voice in ANY conversation? Seems to me they are speaking their minds everywhere, all the time. And pretty much always have been.

It's a big world. Just because you're not seeing it, doesn't mean it's not happening. But I'll get you started. If you do an internet search on "intolerance from DEI" you can find many examples of the sorts of behaviors I'm concerned about. Another suggestion, watch a few episodes of Bill Maher.

As for while males not having a voice.. Of course they speak their minds everywhere. That's not the point. The point is that some folks in the DEI community want to exclude them from the discussion. For example you can search on the phrase "lived experience" to see examples of DEIers saying "you can't know because you don't have any 'lived experience' ".

The point here is that such utterances are like pitching softballs to the right. As you know, an effective propaganda technique is to take your opponents words, and twist them so that there is some truth in your response, but you've also strawmanned your opponent. Which leads to...

Why on Earth are you going to DiSantis for ANY information about "woke liberals"??? He is the single most likely human on the planet to lie and slander as visciously as he possoibly can this trumped up nonsensical delusion of the "woke demon horde". He is the single least likely human on Earth to be "reasonable" about this whole subject.

Again, you're missing the point! I'M NOT GOING TO DESANTIS !! But lots of people are!! And the DEI crowd is giving him lots of easy targets with which to spin propaganda.

What does "quality of character" have to do with being a liberal? What does it even mean? Does it mean we all get to stand in judgment of each other's "character"? Sort of like we are the moral standard of "good character" and so we have the right to stand in judgment of everyone else's? Because that's a distinctly UN-liberal idea. That's exactly the kind of thing that liberals are trying to keep away from the halls of governmental power.

We all judge each other's characters all the time. That's just society. Does this plumber do good work? Does that carpenter charge fairly? Is "Bob" known to be a liar? And on and on...

What the DEI folks often do is use identity politics instead of character, e.g. "blacks get shot by police", "the patriarchy oppresses women", "we need to give reparations", and so on.

There are many important issues we should be addressing and fixing. But using identity politics is simply a bad way to go about it.

 

[PureX]

It's a big world. Just because you're not seeing it, doesn't mean it's not happening.

What else does it mean, then? Should I believe it without seeing or experiencing it? Would you? Especially in a climate that is so rife with lies and false social-political accusations?

But I'll get you started. If you do an internet search on "intolerance from DEI" you can find many examples of the sorts of behaviors I'm concerned about.

If I do a search of "flat Earth proof" I will also find lots of sites with many texts espousing all the overwhelming evidence that the Earth is flat. You know this is so. And it's gonna be that times a 100 when it comes to a subject like "liberal intolerance" or anything "woke" or "critical race theory" or "DEI". The outright lies and hyperbole will be mind-numbing, and impossible to examine rationally.

Another suggestion, watch a few episodes of Bill Maher.

I wouldn't watch that fool when he was a liberal. And I'm sure not going to watch him now that he's become just another paid media antagonist.

As for while males not having a voice.. Of course they speak their minds everywhere. That's not the point. The point is that some folks in the DEI community want to exclude them from the discussion.

Well, if the discussion is about women's health, for example, I see little reason why men should be included. Even though some men seem to think they ought to be the almighty arbiters of all things, including women's heath. I also have to recognize that centuries of a complete failure on the part of white males to recognize and appreciate the suffering and subjugation of non-white peoples under their social and economic control should probably disqualify them from presuming to know a damn thing about how to change their situation for the better in this regard. So yeah, in such instances I would agreethat they (I am a cis-white-male) ought to shut up and learn to listen.

For example you can search on the phrase "lived experience" to see examples of DEIers saying "you can't know because you don't have any 'lived experience' ".

And rightly so. One of the wisest and most useful things my AA sponsor ever explained to me was that I should not expect people that have never experienced addiction to understand what it's like. And I have found that he was absolutely right. And not just about addiction, but about anything we have no actual experience of. Lots of people really like to imagine that they understand all kinds of things. But the truth is that most of us actually understand very little or nothing at all about anything that we have no actual experience of, ourselves. Like a white man pretending he understand what it's like to be black in a white male dominated society, or a woman. He doesn't, because he CAN'T. He just thinks he does.

Again, it's time for him to shut up, stop giving orders, and listen for a change.

The point here is that such utterances are like pitching softballs to the right.

The pro-right media is going to swing at everything whether it there or real or not. They'll just make it up or lie about it, anyway. It's all they've been doing for decades, now. So it's time for the progressives to start speaking up, and speaking out, and yes, telling white-cis-man to sit down and shut up and start listening. Because he has had his chance to fix things a hundred times over, and he blew it a hundred times successively. Time for him to step aside and let someone else, try.

As you know, an effective propaganda technique is to take your opponents words, and twist them so that there is some truth in your response, but you've also strawmanned your opponent. Which leads to...

Liars gonna lie. It's what they do. So stop believing them.

Again, you're missing the point! I'M NOT GOING TO DESANTIS !! But lots of people are!! And the DEI crowd is giving him lots of easy targets with which to spin propaganda.

You "went to DiSantis" to get this information. You went to a professional liar with a HUGE ax to grind to get information about the very people and issues that his ax is grinding for. That was foolish. He filled your ears full of his lies and now you think maybe he had a point.

We all judge each other's characters all the time. That's just society. Does this plumber do good work? Does that carpenter charge fairly? Is "Bob" known to be a liar? And on and on...

None of those assessments have anything to do with anyone's character. All we can know is what people do. We can't know why they do it unless they tell us, and even then, half the time they're either lying or they don't even know themselves why they do what they do. DiSantis lies, A LOT! About a lot of things. Especially about the subject you currently have on your mind. So stop believing his lies.

Problem solved.

 

[icehorse]

What else does it mean, then? Should I believe it without seeing or experiencing it? Would you? Especially in a climate that is so rife with lies and false social-political accusations?
If I do a search of "flat Earth proof" I will also find lots of sites with many texts espousing all the overwhelming evidence that the Earth is flat. You know this is so. And it's gonna be that times a 100 when it comes to a subject like "liberal intolerance" or anything "woke" or "critical race theory" or "DEI". The outright lies and hyperbole will be mind-numbing, and impossible to examine rationally.

You believe MANY things based only on what you've read or been told. The whole "standing in the shoulders of giants" idea. And of course, there is a lot of bad information out in the world. So of course you have to use your powers of assessment

When you say "impossible to examine rationally" I think you're contradicting yourself, no? How can you know enough to know there's a lot of bad information, but also say it's un-examinable? Do you just metaphorically stick your head in the sand?

Well, if the discussion is about women's health, for example, I see little reason why men should be included. Even though some men seem to think they ought to be the almighty arbiters of all things, including women's heath. I also have to recognize that centuries of a complete failure on the part of white males to recognize and appreciate the suffering and subjugation of non-white peoples under their social and economic control should probably disqualify them from presuming to know a damn thing about how to change their situation for the better in this regard. So yeah, in such instances I would agreethat they (I am a cis-white-male) ought to shut up and learn to listen.

When it comes to women's healthy or anyone's health I think we should leverage the knowledge, wisdom, and experience of the best possible experts - regardless of the biological sex of the expert. Notice that this means that we probably agree that politicians are not health experts!!

Ah, white guilt... I wouldn't argue that all of our ancestors are equally culpable on the topic of subjugation. That said, ancestors of ALL "races" perpetrated activities like slavery. Similar could be said of conquest and colonialism. These are not - by any means - exclusively executed by "the whites".

Just stop believing them.

Once more (with jazz hands?), it's not about me - it's about winning the hearts and minds of the people.

None of those assessments have anything to do with anyone's character. All we can know is what people do. We can't know why they do it unless they tell us, and even then, half the time they're either lying or they don't even know themselves why they do what they do. DiSantis lies, A LOT! About a lot of things. Especially about the subject you currently have on your mind. So stop believing his lies.

I said that things like fair play and honesty are examples of character. We know these things based on what people do.

As for believing his lies, I DO NOT. Please take the time to read what I've written. I know he's a liar!! I do not believe him!! But he's clever, and DEI types make it easier than necessary to spin his clever lies and convince a far-too-credulous population.

 

[Father Heathen]

I can't see how they're well intended. "Wokeism" is an undefined boogeyman that appeals to conservatives' inchoate racism and discomfort with changing demographics. Fear is the easiest way to gather political support, and the most corrosive to long term political stability. DeSantis' strategy is lazy, bigoted, and willfully ignorant, but so are the people who fall for it.

Whenever the term "woke" is used, the vast majority of the time it's by a conservative to denote something they either don't like or don't understand, be it LGBT rights, solar panels, or cauliflower sandwiches.

 

[Estro Felino]

I could suggest DeSantis a new slogan for his campaign: Make America Proud Again.

Focusing on values. American values.
I hope he wins.