The Unholy Trinity

Part 1: Inclusion for the Few

“Inclusion, equity, and diversity” seem to celebrate differences, promote more universal freedom, and call for a more accepting, multicultural society, all of which are good things. If only they did. Upon further investigation, however, it is painfully clear that those pushing for these values have radically different ideas on what these terms mean. This post is the first of a three-part series that explores what the terms of this unholy trinity actually mean and how they tend to be enacted in institutions that embrace them. 

Let’s start with inclusion. I think that it’s safe to assume that the “unwoke” would define inclusion as making sure that institutions, organizations, businesses, and other facets of society are open to all people regardless of their gender, sexuality identities or preferences, race, ethnicity, creed, etc. Under this definition, inclusion is about expansion with a focus on welcoming more cultures and identities into mainstream culture and fostering an environment of mutual respect. 

If only that were true. Those who push inclusivity are not interested in expanding institutions and society by recognizing more people as equal citizens. On the contrary, the woke believe that the entirety of western culture has been poisoned by hegemonic systems of power that oppress anyone who is not a white, straight, Christian man. In order to right this persistent wrong, inclusion to them means removing whiteness, straightness, Christianity, maleness, and all the things created like these historical hegemons and replacing all of this with all other identities. 

As a result, “inclusion” to the woke is a socially acceptable way to institute a new hegemony in which historically marginalized, ignored, or oppressed identities are empowered by divesting all of those who don’t belong to these groups of power, real or perceived. Keep in mind that these “people in power” include destitute white people living in trailer parks, young white men at the bottom of the social and economic strata, and white people working around the clock just to make ends meet or get a small business off the ground. Those “in power” aren’t just the Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerbergs of the world. 

So, how do the woke, social justice warriors divest these people of their “power?” They tell white people, men, and anyone else with “too much privilege” that they must feel guilt and shame because of their unearned position of power. I really have been in scholarly settings in which white people are told that they should feel shame for the color of their skin. I personally know straight white men who wouldn’t go for opportunities because white men have historically taken too many opportunities from women and people of color. And these sentiments and strategies are widely used to create a new system of power to make up for historical injustices. Individual guilt for specific crimes is no longer the basis of justice. The new standard of justice relies on collective guilt for past crimes or perceived crimes today, which demands collective punishment. If your family has been white and Christian, you will be punished for the sins of your fathers. 

The irony here is that this power divestment still relies on white people (and straight, white men in particular) to step down from both real and perceived positions of power and opt out of opportunities for advancement. Why? Is it because women, people of color, and other identity groups are unable to succeed on their own merits? Well, the woke would argue that the system of merit itself is rigged, racist, and misogynistic. I guess we better not tell them that numerous Nigerian immigrants, Asian Americans, Jewish Americans, women (who make up majorities in universities, among other accomplishments), and others who aren’t “fully privileged” have been able to thrive immensely in this “rigged system.” Not to mention that this “rigged system” has used policies like Affirmative Action and need-based scholarships to even out the playing field even more, but I digress. 

Inclusion is more about clearing seats at the table (as opposed to adding a larger, truly inclusive table); it is also a means of policing any hypothetical slight against historically marginalized, ignored, or oppressed identities. In order to be truly inclusive under wokeism, all references that could be construed as insensitive or offensive must be removed from our lexicon. What makes this challenging is that the acceptable terms and acronyms change so rapidly, and if you don’t use the right words (or if you use so-called outdated expressions like “low man on the totem pole”) you run the risk of being called a racist, white supremacist, etc. And to make this worse, the woke are conditioned to see everything in terms of race, gender, and sexuality, so even neutral remarks are seen as “hate speech.” 

There is also irony in this because many times those who engage in this “call out culture” are white people saying that a member of another racial group may find something offensive, even if members of that group do not (example: in one poll, almost 9 out of 10 Native Americans were not offended by names like “Redskins” in professional sports).

As a result, there is a growing trend in our society and its institutions to not only view most things as hyper-racialized and potentially offensive, but also to assume the worst intentions of those who say anything that could be misconstrued as insensitive and charge such people with “microaggressions.” Now obviously if someone is bullying or demeaning someone or some group based on race, gender, sexuality, etc., that is clearly wrong and needs be stopped. But that’s not what’s happening in a vast majority of these cases. Inclusivity as applied in this context trains people to be toxically fragile, to assume the worst of those who have “majority identities,” and to destroy anyone or anything that could possibly make those minority identities feel excluded. And to be clear, being excluded means not being explicitly represented.

In short, the ways in which the woke understand and apply “inclusion” is anything but. It creates new, divisive exclusions based on people’s identities and a new hegemony based on victimization and vilification. Don’t be fooled when the woke call for inclusion. That word does not mean what you think it means. It’s almost “Inconceivable!”