Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives have taken over the country, reaching into every aspect of our work, school, and lives. What is “DEI,” though? New Discourses founder James Lindsay explains the idea and its history in unprecedented depth in this new series from an in-person workshop in Miami, Florida, breaking down each of the three letters in detail. What we’ll find is that it’s a contemporary and managerial repackaging of socialism.
In this second episode of the series, following from his discussion of equity as (expanded) socialism, Lindsay articulates that “Diversity” initiatives are rooted in the goal of installing ideologically consistent political officers within organizations to effect and enforce policies directed toward achieving equity. These political officers, often called “Diversity Officers,” are in fact a rebranding of the older concept of commissars, who enforced socialism in the same way. Understanding Diversity in this regard is relatively easy, but how did we get here in America? The answer is bad judicial interpretation of Civil Rights laws that center “disparate impact” rather than intention as evidence of discrimination. Join James Lindsay as he walks you through the history and philosophy of the Diversity scam.
Session 1: Equity
Session 3: Inclusion
The audio version of this presentation is available on SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or by RSS.
6 comments
What the actual hell does any of this have to do with Karl Marx, and what’s wrong with the general concept of diversity, anyway? I’m tired of all the scapegoating. If you can’t properly analyze what’s going on you certainly can’t fix any of the stuff that’s gone actually wrong.
And James, I’ve seen how you behave on Twitter. You’re more about yanking chains than dealing with reality, in my general experience. Can we get some actual adults in here to discuss this stuff, please?
The answer to your question is epistemic exploitation. He discusses this about 33 minutes in. Maybe consider watching the entire lecture prior to criticism.
I’m going to take up just a piece of this, as I didn’t feel I hade the time for the whole thing: His point that Amazon seems to be the ultimate beneficiary of loosening the enforcement of shoplifting laws. I only wish to note that remote shopping using displays of sample goods with orders distributed via giant warehouses was proposed by Edwarb Bellamy, a Christian Socialist, in his very popular book Looking Backwards, written in the late 1800s. From a purely effciency point of view, the Amazon model (mimicked by eBay, Etsy and others) is the way of the future, as disruptive as it may be to existing practices. I personally would miss local shops, and don’t particularly advocate for this model, but realize that more and more people will come to rely on it, as transport, driving – even public transit – will become more and more expensive, turning local shops into a strictly upper class luxury.
Interesting. Thanks for the info.
I hate shopping, except for good, yummy food, but if I do shop I want to go into real stores. So, I hate shopping online, even more than shopping in real stores. And I like speaking to shop owners, workers.
I think we will always have stores, and I don’t think it will be only for the elite.
People need to go out, get around and talk to one another.
It might get harder with these WEF, UN agenda types trying to stuff us into their gulag 15 minute cities, and take away our cars, but, plenty of people like to get around, so we shall see.
You cover some information posited by that woke authoress if I can make up a word, early in the podcast. Writing on the Individual implying or regarding that the individual is problematic to society. Okay, this is beyond delusional. Its Absurd and Orwellian. If a reasonable, healthy minded person heard this, unless they feel like sheep they should react with utter shock and disbelief. She or them or they is so beyond the pale that you wonder if they have taken leave of their senses.
She has eliminated all background that has been woven into to our civil society with and foundations of Liberty, No person is without individual identity traits and character, those qualities are baked into our DNA and genes. There is some foundational illness at play here.
So here we have a case that an author is calmly advocating for our demise and spiritual, death.
So does she really believe all this??? The only reasonable question to ask. I say not. LIKELY it is propaganda. and scarier than anything from Lennin or Mao.
You are 100% correct. Your podcast is superb! Thank you 👍🏻