Thursday, November 21, 2013

Diversity Thursday

For this DivThu, let's have a little fun laughing at the (D)iversity Bullies - then a little naming and shaming.

They are at their most funny when they start to second guess themselves, yet as they have their jobs to justify and protect, they still need to keep things going.

When they are doing their best to stay under the radar, one of the first tricks they like to play is, "Let's change our name!"

Add a few syllables along with some incredibly vague title ... and there you go!
From: [redacted], Andrew S CDR [redacted]
Date: Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:56 PM
Subject: Engineering Duty Officer Guiding Coalition
"compadres?" - so I guess that is a group email? OK. Maybe comrade would be better? I digress.
IDE teammates,
The email below from RDML Whitney is provided for your awareness regarding the Engineering Duty Officer Guiding Coalition (EDGC). If you are interested in being a member of the EDGC, please complete the attached application and copy me on your email submission to the EDGC members listed in the attachment. Your application is due by 29 November 2013. V/r [redacted]
Ahhh, EDOGC. "Awareness" - another of their favorite words.

We must define our terms. What are we "guiding?" What is our path? What is our goal?
ED Community:

If you would like to make a difference for our community by being part of an exciting change effort, we need you.
Change? What change, pray tell?
The CNO recognizes that the perspectives of a diverse force are critical to meeting the challenges of Navy's highly technical service. To achieve this, the ED Community needs to continue our focus on recruiting, mentoring, developing, and retaining personnel. In addition, because of our expertise and training, we are also uniquely qualified to lead the Navy in outreach, mentoring, and youth programs that support Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM).
Use the CNO's name in vain in order to justify your vile discrimination. Nice.

And, as we have documented in many DivThu prior, we know what they mean about "diversity." It is what their metrics track; race and ethnicity. It isn't academic background, that is for sure.

So, where does that get us right now? We have a group whose goal is to "guide" the EDO community through a "change" focused on race and ethnicity. Of course. 

Can we speak about what they want to do? Well, their metrics and PPT told the story  already. 

Instead of "their" perhaps we should use "our" - as they are acting in the Navy's name. OK, I can do that. I'll say it.

Our goal is to get rid of as many white men as possible so to make our group pictures look better. That is our goal. That is our change.
A guiding coalition is a group of people empowered to create a vision, decide on what actions to take and measure, and start building the "wins" that generate the sustaining energy to learn, adapt, and change. The intention is to create an Engineering Duty Officer Guiding Coalition (EDGC) which is an evolution of the Diversity Working Group (DWG).
There's your tell. The DWG, you remember them! They had to change their name to get rid of the "Diversity" so as to not bring attention to their actions by the speed readers. 
The EDGC will be made up of approximately 25 volunteers at all levels, qualified and unqualified, from the entire ED Community. The EDGC will create a vision to address the priorities of the ED Community and the personnel in it. Sub-groups will be chartered as necessary to go work on specific actions aligned to the EDGC vision.
Address the priorities of the ED Community aligned with the EDGC vision. So, notsomuch engineering excellence, but making sure we have favored and unfavored races and ethnicities.

How progressive! How post racial! How 21st Century!
An EDGC application is attached to this e-mail. A panel comprised of RDML Whitney, CAPT Scofield, CAPT Brown, CAPT Kalowsky, and CAPT(S) Hanson will select the members of the EDGC with a term of one year, after which we will re-solicit for volunteers (we will determine later if we want term limits). The EDGC will meet for an offsite sometime in Jan/Feb (face-to-face or VTC also to be determined). To set expectations, the amount of time spent on EDGC and/or sub-groups would be some number of hours a week, is not full time, and will be supported by the chain of command.
Oh, to be a fly on the wall .... but please, let us see those work hour numbers.

I think it would be very enlightening to add those up, with cost per hour, next time the ED community claims they are short of money and manpower. It seems that they have plenty of time and money to support the active discrimination based on race, creed, color, and national origin. An institutionalized racialist policy and structures to find ways to promote the most divisive and base human vice; ethnic tribalism.
R/RDML Mark Whitney
Well, there's front office support.

Let us talk in clear language as adults. Should the Navy support discriminatory action where your Sailors and civilian employees are categorized and prioritized based on self identified race and ethnicity? If not, then why support such an exclusionary activity as this effort? 

This is not focused on finding the best engineers. This isn't focused on bringing in the best problem solvers. This isn't driven for a pursuit of excellence. No, this is driven primarily to justify the jobs and Cultural Marxist goals of the employees of Diversity Inc.  Secondarily it is to make the metrics, PPT, and pictures look a certain way. 

Because the reasons are so obvious though can't be spoken, we have people such as the CO of the EDO school say things earlier this year about it not just, "improving demographics" - but he protesteth too much. Of course it it. Anyone who has prepared the briefs knows that. Heck, we have USNR CDR/CAPT using ADSW whose job is to do one thing; make (d)iversity PPT slides. Encouraging sectarianism and division; that is the primary focus. Why not just be upfront about it? Is it because when looked at clearly, it isn't a defendable position? 

Of course it isn't. In 2013? No, it isn't - and it brings shame on anyone with "USN" associated with their name. 

If we do support it, then, really? Is that something to be proud of half way through the second decade of the 21st Century? If we are recruiting out of college, about that 22 year old that your cadre from the (d)iversity industry is putting in their little Rassenpolitik charts - we do realize that they were born in 1991?

No comments: