WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

1.2K

But the diversity grifters understood the psychology of their marks. They figured that guilt-ridden white leftists would fly into a moral panic when accused of racism and then pay dearly for absolution. Especially after the death of George Floyd, our higher-education leaders plunged headlong into the contrived “crisis” where, as Ridgley notes, “public handwringing was obligatory.”

How did this big con game work? Ridgley shows how in fascinating detail.

Crucial to the DEI con is what he calls idea laundering. You start with a highly dubious idea that supports the alleged need for DEI programs—say, that black students are relentlessly harmed by “microaggressions”—then get a research paper saying so published in what looks like an academic journal, run by allies. Once it has been published, sympathizers will cite it in other journals, articles, blog posts, and so on. Of course, no one ever critiques the original paper; the point is to repeat its “findings” so often that people will think it must be true. Anyone who dares to challenge it will be smeared as a racist. Since no one in the education establishment wants that, DEI ideas build momentum.

> But the diversity grifters understood the psychology of their marks. They figured that guilt-ridden white leftists would fly into a moral panic when accused of racism and then pay dearly for absolution. Especially after the death of George Floyd, our higher-education leaders plunged headlong into the contrived “crisis” where, as Ridgley notes, “public handwringing was obligatory.” > How did this big con game work? Ridgley shows how in fascinating detail. > Crucial to the DEI con is what he calls idea laundering. You start with a highly dubious idea that supports the alleged need for DEI programs—say, that black students are relentlessly harmed by “microaggressions”—then get a research paper saying so published in what looks like an academic journal, run by allies. Once it has been published, sympathizers will cite it in other journals, articles, blog posts, and so on. Of course, no one ever critiques the original paper; the point is to repeat its “findings” so often that people will think it must be true. Anyone who dares to challenge it will be smeared as a racist. Since no one in the education establishment wants that, DEI ideas build momentum.
[–] 1 pt

Yes it is. Its frustrating for all sides

[–] 1 pt