“We Live Here Together” – Comments?

Executive Order on Combating Race & Sex Stereotyping

A taste

Context: “From the battlefield of Gettysburg to the bus boycott in Montgomery and the Selma-to-Montgomery Marches, heroic Americans have valiantly risked their lives to ensure that their children would grow up in a Nation living out its creed, expressed in the Declaration of Independence.”

Descriptions of critical race theory workshops subsidized by the government.

Its position:

But training like that discussed above perpetuates racial stereotypes and division and can use subtle coercive pressure to ensure conformity of viewpoint. Such ideas may be fashionable in the academy, but they have no place in programs and activities supported by Federal taxpayer dollars. Research also suggests that blame-focused diversity training reinforces biases and decreases opportunities for minorities.

Our Federal civil service system is based on merit principles. These principles, codified at 5 U.S.C. 2301, call for all employees to “receive fair and equitable treatment in all aspects of personnel management without regard to” race or sex “and with proper regard for their . . . constitutional rights.” Instructing Federal employees that treating individuals on the basis of individual merit is racist or sexist directly undermines our Merit System Principles and impairs the efficiency of the Federal service. Similarly, our Uniformed Services should not teach our heroic men and women in uniform the lie that the country for which they are willing to die is fundamentally racist. Such teachings could directly threaten the cohesion and effectiveness of our Uniformed Services.

Such activities also promote division and inefficiency when carried out by Federal contractors. The Federal Government has long prohibited Federal contractors from engaging in race or sex discrimination and required contractors to take affirmative action to ensure that such discrimination does not occur. The participation of contractors’ employees in training that promotes race or sex stereotyping or scapegoating similarly undermines efficiency in Federal contracting. Such requirements promote divisiveness in the workplace and distract from the pursuit of excellence and collaborative achievements in public administration.

Therefore, it shall be the policy of the United States not to promote race or sex stereotyping or scapegoating in the Federal workforce or in the Uniformed Services, and not to allow grant funds to be used for these purposes. In addition, Federal contractors will not be permitted to inculcate such views in their employees.

Definitions: “Divisive Concepts,” “Race or sex stereotyping,” “Race or sex scapegoating,” “Senior political appointee.”
Requirements: United States Uniformed Services, Government Contractors, Government grants, Agencies
Effective Date: Immediately

This is a matter of what is subsidized. It

“Does not prevent agencies, the US Uniformed Services, or contractors from promoting racial, cultural, or ethnic diversity or inclusiveness, provided such efforts are consistent with the requirements of this order.”

Nor should it “be construed to prohibit discussing, as part of a larger course of academic instruction, the divisive concepts listed in section 2(a) of this order in an objective manner and without endorsement.”

Comment: This may lose Trump votes; it will certainly give Saturday and Sunday talk shows a topic other than Biden’s basement. Some, however, may feel it not only talks our language (which Bush often did) but is willing to expend credibility. (Sometimes Trump seems too willing to risk “niceness”- as in a tweet that punches down on a stray critic.) However, this seems a domestic gamble.

So, in these last weeks before the election: will this bring some to the polls that might have stayed home? To vote for which party? That seems more important than the number that will change – though I may be underestimating how many have drunk the kool-aid. I suspect some subjected to these “workshops” have simmered quietly and will find a relief in that vote. On the other hand, the workshop leaders were being paid.

Aside: The “We Live Here Together” is from Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron’s press conference on the Breonna Taylor case. The msm was quite critical and the usual bricks (Cameron isn’t authentic will become Trump is racist) will be thrown again. Still this is aligned with the awakened consciousness Frederick Douglass described so powerfully and the power of each unique individual Ralph Ellison asserts in The Invisible Man. The Order is in the tradition of African-American culture – just not the msm’s.

(Quite rough breakdown of lengthy presser: description of evidence and jury decision up to 17; 17-34 general remarks; then questions, with a conclusion in last minutes).

15 thoughts on ““We Live Here Together” – Comments?”

  1. I am extremely skeptical that this will change a single vote. Anyone who is outraged by this is someone who already has a dozen anti-Trump bumper stickers on their prius.

  2. If the language is selectively edited or absent in the MSM rants, it could be marginally, but importantly, negative to Trump. It may increase the virtue of actually bothering to vote against him by the social justice basement mob, the posters not the activists, as well as the younger liberal groups schooled in critical race theory. It could marginally increase minority voter turn out. Huge effect, doubt it.

    Will it gain him any additional support? It might in the minds of some traditional middle class democrat voters who are tired of being called racists because of their skin color.

    Net? Still to be determined.


  3. First, this policy is (has long been) the right thing to do. President Trump deserves praise for finally doing it.

    Second, media coverage — although typically biased — will not last long. Brian is right — it will not change any votes.

    Third, faced with the planned scale of Democrat vote-fixing, do any votes matter? To put that issue differently, if 3 or 4 weeks after the election, the final tally of all the late postal votes shows that Kamala & her sock puppet won the election in a landslide, will any of us believe that the vote was honest? And if we do not believe the vote was honest, then what?

  4. I too, can’t imagine it will change many votes. I note in passing that my imaginer might be overdue for service. Will it increase motivation on the left? Hard to tell.

    When we see stories about 98% of the contributions from this or that organization going to the Left, I wonder how many of them are from conviction and how many are just making sure their name is under the correct column of the list. We’re hearing whispers from the inmates that actual opinion might not be so monolithic. The privacy of the voting booth matters.

    It’s worth noting that these contribution lists didn’t take long to become a means of stifling descent. Another thing to thank McCain for. It’s also a reminder that any government activity WILL be used as a weapon by whichever side gains control against their enemies. The only true protection is limiting government to the absolute minimum.

    I don’t think that legislation is appropriate. I don’t really want to see what sort of hash would come out of that particular excretory orifice. It is perfectly appropriate for the Chief Executive to dictate the policy of the Executive Branch. Legislation against ideas has a rather poor history to recommend it.

  5. It’s the right thing to do– and may be a smart thing to do, in that it’s making inroads among gov’t workers.

    I have yet to hear ONE gov’t worker think it’s a bad thing to not have the Trendy Rant of the Month for required training.

  6. Foxfier
    I have yet to hear ONE gov’t worker think it’s a bad thing to not have the Trendy Rant of the Month for required training.

    Perhaps the gov’t worker is a true believer. An alternate explanation is that the training is seen as a day off. Like the song says: “Turn off your mind, relax and float downstream….Lay down all thoughts, surrender to the void.”

  7. So, in these last weeks before the election: will this bring some to the polls that might have stayed home?

    I suspect it might.

    One complaint I’ve heard many times over the years is that the gee ohh peee never does anything to stop or oppose- in any real way- the left’s slow motion takeover of American society.

    Trump just did something.

    Of course leftist bureaucrats who run the government will mostly ignore it, but now they’ve potentially got something to worry about, certainly if Trump can get reelected.

  8. Xannady-
    Of course leftist bureaucrats who run the government will mostly ignore it, but now they’ve potentially got something to worry about, certainly if Trump can get reelected.

    That’s the genius of it– this gives grounds for a formal complaint. And if a grant is used for it? Fraud, Waste and Abuse.

    Roll it back? “Hey, so and so instituted divisive, sexist, racist training.”

  9. Gringo-
    I know some folks who at least seem to be true believers; even they don’t think it’s a day off. Even if you agree, it’s obnoxious; when you don’t, well, you know you’re not allowed to respond, because they’ll use the system to destroy you… it burns.

  10. I realize I didn’t make my comment as strongly as I meant it:

    This seems to be the equivalent of several of the international moves under Trump, which took a new perspective. Why did several presidents say they would move the embassy to Jerusalem? Well, surely it was because that was a more popular stance than not doing so, but one that was considered politically risky and not worth the possible down side.

    Few politicians have thought critical race theory was a winner with their constituents as a whole, but it was easier to pretend not to notice how malign it really was than to face the fury criticizing it might incur.

    A lot of people have felt snookered – that politicians have said one thing but have not really thought it worth the hassle to follow through. They thought it was what we wanted to hear but it was really what we wanted done.

    Gambles, moral courage, quiet resistance – different personalities make choices in different ways. I’ve always deeply admired the courage Scott Walker had to walk into that insane capitol day after day, with the drums pounding and the teachers’ unions yelling.

    This is why people who back Trump don’t consider him a liar, much as he boasts and uses phrases like “of all time” when they clearly don’t apply. There is a certain honesty and follow through we haven’t seen often.

  11. An Executive Order is a piece of paper. It will be long after the election before we can see how or if it is enforced. The action by DeVos on Title IX is certainly encouraging.

    Does anybody not in the training-industrial complex enjoy it? I have yet to take a mandated class about something I know well that isn’t riddled with mistakes, some of them actually opposite of what would be safe. I’ve given up trying to fix them and just remember what answer they’ll expect and move on.

    All the harassment and such, I pay enough attention to get the answer “right” and promptly forget it.

    All of the mandated training I’ve ever taken is proof that there is a place for people with subnormal intelligence making these courses.

  12. }}} The action by DeVos on Title IX is certainly encouraging.

    Indeed. The Princeton leadership has got to be crapping itself at the idea of getting bitchslapped with a lawsuit grabbing Federal Grant money going back who know how far from the Princeton coffers… It would be even more fun if it started getting applied to actual research grants, unless the recipients denied that racism was at all a part of their research experiences.

    Waiting for them to scream “McCartyism!!” when that happens… LOLZ.

  13. A new high point in “get woke, go broke”. Could be applied to many cities who are publicly accusing themselves of “systemic racism.” I just love voluntary confessions. Civil actions as well? A new way to win the community lottery!


Comments are closed.