Sunday, October 3, 2010

The Left's incomplete definition of diversity

Reading about the "One Nation" march yesterday, watching clips of the speeches, and watching the talking heads discuss it afterward, made me realize the sad state of the word "diversity" among many of those on the left side of the spectrum.

Al Sharpton and just about every other speaker and promoter of the event, including attendees interviewed at the event, sounded like a cd that was skipping. The point they all kept making was, "look at how diverse our crowd is." They continuously spoke about how there were so many different colors of people represented in the crowd. That's nice, but diversity is so much more than skin color - so incredibly much more. I believe that the "professional left" has forgotten that. They seem to think that diversity only means that we look different.

The professional left, time and time again, has shown that diversity of thought and opinion is not so welcome. Case in gruesome point, the 10:10 mini-movie that aired last week. Another example: education theory is rife with examples of groupthink and expectations of "consensus" or ideological litmus tests. As an educator myself, I can tell you right now that "collaborative learning" and "promoting community" are just code words for groupthink. For instance, I listened to a program on NPR last week about solutions to bullying, that by itself is a very worthy topic. However, the two guests, both professors of education, went well beyond solutions to bullying.

The language they used, in combination with many of their ideas, betrayed their fixation on ideological consensus and purity, displaying that their real goal is groupthink. They wanted to make sure that schools prioritized,
...a commitment to kindness, to putting the needs of other people first and a sense that a community – a shared identity – is as important as anything achieved by individuals within the community. [Emphasis mine]
These women want to teach kids that being part of the group - a "shared identity" (what does that even mean??) - is as important as individual achievement. They went so far as to lament the fact that in traditional education, more weight is placed on math, science, and reading, rather than on "collaborative learning" and "kindness." Um... sorry? And you wonder why American children rank 25th in math and science but 1st in self-confidence? This reminds me of a blog entry I accidentally stumbled across the other day, about a Kindergarten class here in Seattle where the teachers used legos to teach socialism and indoctrinate the kids against capitalism. Groupthink!

These women, like many others on the left, talk a great game when it comes to diversity, but just try being a young conservative in a place like Seattle. You learn very quickly that diversity does not mean diversity of thought. It means that someone's pigmentation varies from someone else's. And here I thought we had moved past judging people based on the color of their skin. The reason so many liberal journalists freak out when they see that I have piercings and tattoos, and that I am hispanic is because they have a preconceived notion about how a person that looks like me should think. I look a certain way and therefore I must think a certain way. Black conservative get this all the time. They are called race-traitors, Uncle Tom's, House n*****s, etc. because they have the right look, but they don't fall into line ideologically.

Racism and other beliefs that separate people based on their skin color are all founded in collectivism. You cannot lump all black people together, for any reason, other than a belief in collectivism. Is it a coincidence that socialism and communism are also founded in collectivism?

On the other side are people like me who are considered individualists, who view each person as an individual, regardless of what they look like. When I meet someone, I am never surprised by their beliefs because I don't prejudge them based on their looks. I have a friend who looks like the biggest redneck you've ever seen, and he is a total progressive, almost a socialist. Am I surprised? No, because I don't believe in collectivism and I don't group people based on their looks.

Al Sharpton was so proud of his "diverse" crowd, but I can guarantee that my friend circle is waaaay more diverse than any crowd that Al Sharpton has ever been around because my friends aren't afraid to disagree and challenge each other about their beliefs and ideas. It's what inside that counts, who cares about the packaging?


  1. The U.S. is going to be balkanized and people who think like we do are going to be pushed out of the left coast. I used to be part of the brain washed left and it was only by a miracle that I have been able to see other points of view as having value.
    I think things are going to start moving quicker now. We can't afford to continue to give such a huge share of our resources to the victimhood left. Who needs reparations when you control the media and the government.

  2. I'm going to surprise you by largely agreeing with you again. While it is true that there does exist a segment of Americans who believe that only white, church-going Protestants count as "real Americans, this is not the way most Americans, or even most tea partiers believe, despite the efforts of some on the Left to stereotype them that way.

    It is also true that there exists a segment of on the left, who in the name of "diversity," does not consider the views of white people to be legitimate. These are the views of the extreme, who by definition do not reflect the views of the majority, and that includes those who support progressive policies.

    Can't we have a national dialogue which does not treat extreme views as the only views out there? I think Jon Stewart is on to something in his March to Restore Sanity.


I believe in free speech, including offensive speech, and especially political speech. Comments that are left on my blog do not necessarily represent my views nor do I necessarily endorse them. I am not responsible for other people's views or comments. That is how the 1st Amendment works.