If the DEI bunch is so radicalized that riots can already be predicted, maybe "rooting" it out is a good idea. If you are so entitled to your opinion that you are predictably going for violence, you are the problem.
Signed: A person with a disability, unable to support DEI as it stands.
> If the DEI bunch is so radicalized that riots can already be predicted
Are the DEI bunch radicalized? I’m not sure I get that vibe. The people who riot and are radicalized probably aren’t out there understanding nuance, being level headed and campaigning for an even playing field.
If you can also expound on why you can’t support DEI as it stands I’m open to your thoughts. I have my own reservations about DEI because as a model minority it does me no favors. But it hasn’t harmed me either, or if it has I don’t know any better.
We're "radicalized" in that we still have living members of the community who have indeed fought over their right to exist. And those tales are passed down orally. If you include any LGBT rallies this kind of protest is still in recent history.
In comparison, it seems like we're almost at a point where all WW2 vets (the last time "white men" had to confront fascist behavior) have passed away. When's the last time America as a general unit has had to properly protest authority? The Boomers didn't seem to take the right lessons about Vietnam into account when they started taking the reigns.
In my opinion, you need to properly define ambiguous terms, one person's radicalized is another person's principle. The same as one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter (i.e. in Venezuela, and its losing fight against communism).
That said, what people call DEI today is just a reformation of Maoism based in Marxism, and its goals follow hopes, and patterns that seek to engender social collectivist indoctrination in those subjected to it; following principles of thought reform/torture unironically also coming out of mainland China during Mao (1950s).
Its particularly effective against the habitually complacent.
The big trick of communism is to induce hope in people to narrow their focus to a circular but undefined viewpoint which can be falsely claimed as truth later, but which in reality lacks a property of what's called metaphysical objectivity in philosophy; an identity you need to prove anything through logic/critical thinking. This is how double-speak and double-think work.
It also takes advantage of a lot of psychological blindspots we all have (by purposeful design), just like any other cult programming.
Its important to note: Equity isn't equality, and its not properly defined.
If you want to learn more about blindspots, I'd suggest starting with Robert Cialdini (Influence). Robert Lifton covers case studies of actual torture mechanics which can be derived (elements, structuring, clustering), which use these blindspots (albeit this material came before Cialdini published back in the 1950s).
New Discourses covers the progression of DEI in damning detail albeit he sometimes becomes too wordy.
With any regime change playbook you inherently have two roles being played simultaneously by a single cohort. You have a subgroup of antagonists, who perform and carry out acts to inflame which then are used by the other role to create a unifying narrative/platform for influence and insurgency.
The fact that violence and rioting are occurring fairly often is sufficient evidence that DEI and its other forms have had some success as a memetic contagion.
The harm always comes at you sideways without any visibility or attribution being possible. Are you better off today than you were a decade ago? Could you imagine a decade ago police firing teargas and rubber bullets indiscriminately into a peaceful assembly, or people firebombing cars with molotov cocktails? Which came first?, none of the news is saying and all the public narratives lean towards omitted lies in one form or another.
No objective signals can be discernible or come out of channels jammed to the Shannon Limit.
People go absolutely insane when they cannot maintain an internal consistent narrative/mental state and this happens without them realizing it (subliminally), and its been known for quite a long time going all the way back to the 1800s with Gustave Le Bon's The Crowd.
I don't have any overall statistics, probably because they don't exist. But I can anecdotally report that I have heard radical "we need to force them if they dont listen" rhetoric from the LGBTQ-Circles several times already in the past years.
To your other question: I perceive DEI, and most other "inclusion" efforts I've seen so far, mostly as a strawman. We basically failed with digital accessibility and more inclusion in the workplace for people with disabilities. If I am not mistaken, the US and EU still stand somewhere around 80% unemployment for people with disabilities. To me, DEI is an attempt to hide that failure by including a lot more marginalized groups, which at the end of the day do not need so much adaptation as people with disabilities do. So IMO, DEI is trying to hide the fact that inclusion of people with disabilities has already failed. And its mixing up too many groups with different needs. I have absolutely nothing in common with a LGBTQ-person when it comes to my needs as a blind guy. There is no overlap, and I dont feel represented when they have their pride month. But they are so loud that the needs of my community have been silenced by now. Which confirms my intuition with DEI. Meanwhile, teachers are telling me they are working with their classes to find a new word for "disability". If that is the outcome of DEI, people endlessly engaging in wordgames, instead of working on the actual hard problems, I don't need anything from it. Its useless waste of time and dumbing down of the actual problems at hand.
> I don't have any overall statistics, probably because they don't exist. But I can anecdotally report that I have heard radical "we need to force them if they dont listen" rhetoric from the LGBTQ-Circles several times already in the past years.
Damn those extremists - don't they know how women got the vote, how racial segregation was ended and how persecution of gays by the police was addressed? They really need some civics lesson!
So in the end, the (conservative) governement restricts the means available to help people, and now you are fighting against other "different" people to get your share of the meager scraps they toss your way.
Congratulations, you are being played. In the end, the Conservatives will destroy DEI and repress LGBTQ - and you won't have any more help as a blind person, because they never really cared and just manipulated you into hating "the gays" instead of hating them. Trump HATES you deeply, you know? He despises you, as a loser, a cripple, someone less-than-human. It is just that gay people are more politically active and visible, so they are more useful as a foe for his "two minutes of hate" - for now.
“Those people . . . ” Donald said, trailing off. “The shape they’re in, all the expenses, maybe those kinds of people should just die.”
Meanwhile while you froth at the mouth against the "DEI bunch", disabled people are ending unemployed en masse right this very moment, thanks to the crazy cuts to Federal Workforce - the only big employer who tried to do things right.
Ahh, using my disability in a subtle derogatory way. That is really nice of you! Are you really so full of hate that you couldn't refrain from doing that? Anyway, thanks for the ad-hominum, and thanks for confirming why I don't want to support "your bunch".
Signed: A person with a disability, unable to support DEI as it stands.