Weaponized DEI
Is DEI A Sociological Weapon Of Unrestricted Warfare?
It seems the the USA is under attack on many levels by powerful forces, presumably to amass all power for themselves, and the US is in their way. What if DEI, or diversity, equity and inclusion, isn't just the product of the virtue signalers wishing to feel the warm glow of moral and intellectual superiority, but rather a weapon in the arsenal of the forces of darkness?
Though it may seem counterintuitive, DEI is the opposite of Martin Luther King's thoughts about being a color blind society. If we are to be color blind we cannot do the DEI thing.
A point of view that's been around a bit is that you can somewhat categorize workers in an organization as A, B, C and D, with A being the most accomplished in their area of expertise, be it a technical skill or perhaps leadership qualities. There is a danger that, if B type people end up in positions of leadership they will be in fear of being replaced by those under them with abilities superior to themselves, so they will hire B, C and D type people, and try to avoid hiring even Bs. Boeing and the LA fire department come to mind.
Others may believe that DEI is simply fighting racism and all the other isms, but experience indicates otherwise.
If one were inclined to bring about the downfall of the economy of an entire nation, how would one proceed? One way might be to bring in a system that would ensure sub par people being put into high level positions in both private and public organizations. DEI would seem to fit the bill perfectly, and the DEI types being in top positions will have cover for doing what they want to do anyway, bring in C and D types to work for them. Just imagine the chaos they might ensue if this were to be the case in the fire department of a major city.
Unrestricted warfare is the idea of using any and all means possible to effect the downfall of a foreign country, so is DEI actually a component thereof? The idea was popularized in a 1999 book by two Chinese Air Force colonels, but I think the basic ideas have been around for a much longer time.
If your organization is headed by an A type of individual he or she will want to hire A types for all of the leadership positions. Since there aren't enough A types to go around, assembly line workers and others would be hired for for there various skills, but it's important to stick to A types in leadership rolls for the compelling reason that B types in leadership positions will hire C or D types so that they don't threaten their position.
Consider the hypothetical case of an ordinary, moderate sized manufacturing company. It might be started by a small group of exceptional engineers and entrepreneurs, or even a single one. It has a reward/punishment curve that favors accomplishment; one is richly rewarded for making a great improvement, an unexceptional worker is rewarded for doing a competent job, and you are only punished for doing really bad things. Over time the company becomes more successful, and tends to move away from innovation in favor of increasing production and maintaining it's status quo, and the reward/punishment curve moves in the direction of less reward and more punishment. The company may go bankrupt or be bought out, making way for a new startup.
Does this decay happen because of an infusion into management of B type people? It would seem to be a consequence of success since once they move into routine production the top people start going away. You get more and more people at the top who are careful not to hire people of sufficient ability that they could be a threat, hence the “over qualified” designation.
Recently many major corporations have realized the dangers and have ditched their DEI practices into which they had been coerced. Boeing seems to have gotten tired of being the butt of jokes and wants to regain their sterling reputation.
One cannot help but wonder if the point of DEI is the destruction of the organizations it infests, or at least it's crippling. It's a system guaranteed to put second tier B type people in charge, where they will put less qualified people throughout the organization. They pretend to fight racism by making sure there are no white males in charge, thereby eliminating a major pool of possible candidates.
Giving up ones fear of being called a racist would help, that fear is used as a control lever, and if people simply refused to play that game much would change.
If you read up on DEI you will be told that basically it's about hiring without reference to things such as race, sexual orientation, political belief and etc., but we somehow find a notable lack of this in DEI infused organizations. The link below gives glowing view of DEI, which sadly doesn't seem to reflect reality. The authors can't seem to understand why people are not on board.
“Diversity, equity, and inclusion are three closely linked values held by many organizations that are working to be supportive of different groups of individuals, including people of different races, ethnicities, religions, abilities, genders, and sexual orientations.”
Would that it were so. Is it actually a weapon?
"All virtue is summed up in dealing justly." ~ Aristotle
Stay Brave, Stay Free
David, there are those who premeditatively plan to overthrow the current "racist" regime, like George Soros and Saul Alinski - Rules for Radicals. Sixties leftists like Students for a Democratic Society, crazies like Antifa, and cynical race hustler's like BLM and Al Sharpton. Along with the useful idiots who tag along. (Kamal gave Sharpton $500,000 because he is such a fine, upstanding citizen). I'm suspect that the vast numbers of people adhering to DEI, see themselves as good people with good intentions. You can always tell who they are by the tarnished halos above their heads. I feel reasonably certain that enough people now recognize the nonsense, not to mention DEI is unconstitutional. The left went too far, the country has turned a corner. I'm feeling optimistic.
A few thoughts:
- We must PUSH BACK when referred to as racistrs, etc. Do not fear it, becuase it is not the truth, but counter-attack (verbally and politely) with the truth that this is a long-used tool to subvert culture and to silence people.
- I have to wonder if DEI may have been methodically used to give cover (of "incompetency") to the evil sociopaths hellbent on destroying our country? To hide their malicious intent and blame the destruction on DEI hires.
Great essay - thank you, David.