Ah yes, the great civil rights movement of 2020 in which basement dwelling armchair racists rose up to speak out against the oppression of HR departments forcing them to watch a video of guidelines on how not to offend minorities.
History books will remember you in the highest terms.
I didn't rebut anything you said? Sure I did. I gave the example of Rosa Parks who did not "accept the consequences" but tried to fight those consequences in court. My example wasn't that she served jail time but that she contested the verdict that gave her jail time.
No, you didn't. You misunderstood what I meant by "accept the consequences," even after I clarified it for you. "Accept the consequences" doesn't mean they accepted the charges (or the verdict). It meant they accepted jail time and they accepted that they would have to argue their cases in court.
Sheesh.
He must be fired for being domb and cognitively rigid. Just play along dude even if you want to roll your eyes to it. You won't turn into a communist zombie by watching a video, and nobody forces you to sign it with your firsborn's blood but you show how stubborn, inflexible, uncooperative, and dogmatic you are by watching it
Are people really afraid that a badly made 15 minute video, which they can watch while doing busywork or streaming Netflix, is going to indoctrinate them?
People who believe this should solely be fired on the grounds of being too stoopiid to teach.
If you have tenure you have a contractual right to tell people to sit and spin, basically. If it’s not in the contract, I/you don’t have to do it. Forgets principles, it’s important to fight against the encroachment of meaningless gestures on time that could otherwise be spent productively.
This prof doesn’t have a great conceptual or moral argument, but he’s got a great contractual one.
He must be fired for being domb and cognitively rigid. Just play along dude even if you want to roll your eyes to it. You won't turn into a communist zombie by watching a video, and nobody forces you to sign it with your firsborn's blood but you show how stubborn, inflexible, uncooperative, and dogmatic you are by watching it
Are people really afraid that a badly made 15 minute video, which they can watch while doing busywork or streaming Netflix, is going to indoctrinate them?
People who believe this should solely be fired on the grounds of being too stoopiid to teach.
If you have tenure you have a contractual right to tell people to sit and spin, basically. If it’s not in the contract, I/you don’t have to do it. Forgets principles, it’s important to fight against the encroachment of meaningless gestures on time that could otherwise be spent productively.
This prof doesn’t have a great conceptual or moral argument, but he’s got a great contractual one.
Maybe; depends on the contract. Even if he does have a contractual claim, it seems dum/b to go to the mat over something so trivial. The admins are never going to forgive him for putting them through this. They have ways of getting even.
History books will remember you in the highest terms.If there are any people who go down well in history, it is intolerant people who try to brainwash others and who punish those who refuse it.
You get brainwashed by watching a short anti-discrimination video? You must be soft-minded to be brainwashed so easily.
If you have tenure you have a contractual right to tell people to sit and spin, basically. If it’s not in the contract, I/you don’t have to do it. Forgets principles, it’s important to fight against the encroachment of meaningless gestures on time that could otherwise be spent productively.
This prof doesn’t have a great conceptual or moral argument, but he’s got a great contractual one.Maybe; depends on the contract. Even if he does have a contractual claim, it seems dum/b to go to the mat over something so trivial. The admins are never going to forgive him for putting them through this. They have ways of getting even.
if there's anything academics are good at, it's sweating the small indignities of life /s
If you have tenure you have a contractual right to tell people to sit and spin, basically. If it’s not in the contract, I/you don’t have to do it. Forgets principles, it’s important to fight against the encroachment of meaningless gestures on time that could otherwise be spent productively.
This prof doesn’t have a great conceptual or moral argument, but he’s got a great contractual one.Maybe; depends on the contract. Even if he does have a contractual claim, it seems dum/b to go to the mat over something so trivial. The admins are never going to forgive him for putting them through this. They have ways of getting even.
We don't have anti discrimination training like this because the psych department went to the mat against it. I mean, that's a coherent argument and they have legitimate scientific and moral reasons to oppose these trainings (they make racist sentiments WORSE, actually). I'm not saying he's saying that, but it's a worthy thing to fight against if you have a reasonable position. This guy is just being a problem child, but that's academia.
We don't have anti discrimination training like this because the psych department went to the mat against it. I mean, that's a coherent argument and they have legitimate scientific and moral reasons to oppose these trainings (they make racist sentiments WORSE, actually). I'm not saying he's saying that, but it's a worthy thing to fight against if you have a reasonable position. This guy is just being a problem child, but that's academia.
Well good for your psych dept. I wish I worked with them instead of the SJ/Ws we have in psych at my school. But this guy apparently doesn't have coalition-building skills, much less a sense of the historical moment:
Q: Grampa, what did you do to help the movement back in 2020, when people were rising up against extrajudicial police mur/ders?
A: I refused to watch a short video about how not to discriminate against minorities and got myself fired over it.
You get brainwashed by watching a short anti-discrimination video? You must be soft-minded to be brainwashed so easily.
^The usual ad hominem from the guy who whines about being insulted.
Two points: Principles and externalities.
Principles: People shouldn't be forced to go through indoctrination just as they shouldn't be forced to go to church.
Externalities: Even if a given person is clear headed and sees the bs, that doesn't mean that everyone else who has to undergo the training will see through it.
Even if everyone does see through it, it could still affect society bc people might not realize that everyone sees through it. They might think that everyone believes it.
We don't have anti discrimination training like this because the psych department went to the mat against it. I mean, that's a coherent argument and they have legitimate scientific and moral reasons to oppose these trainings (they make racist sentiments WORSE, actually). I'm not saying he's saying that, but it's a worthy thing to fight against if you have a reasonable position. This guy is just being a problem child, but that's academia.
So, it is reasonable to oppose it bc it makes raysism worse -- correct -- but it is unreasonable to oppose it bc it is wrong for universities and corporations to try to politically indoctrinate their employees?
People who think that coerced indoctrination is wrong are "problem children?"
What a putz.
You get brainwashed by watching a short anti-discrimination video? You must be soft-minded to be brainwashed so easily.^The usual ad hominem from the guy who whines about being insulted.
Two points: Principles and externalities.
Principles: People shouldn't be forced to go through indoctrination just as they shouldn't be forced to go to church.
Externalities: Even if a given person is clear headed and sees the bs, that doesn't mean that everyone else who has to undergo the training will see through it.
Even if everyone does see through it, it could still affect society bc people might not realize that everyone sees through it. They might think that everyone believes it.
What's your solution? Prevent private enterprises from training their employees on their business's anti-discriminatory values? Give every employee sufficient workers' rights so that they can refuse anti-discrimination training without being terminated?
What's your solution? Prevent private enterprises from training their employees on their business's anti-discriminatory values? Give every employee sufficient workers' rights so that they can refuse anti-discrimination training without being terminated?
We are arguing that compulsory political indoctrination is morally wrong. We are not arguing on which policy to remedy that.
It is interesting how you try to always change focus in order to defend woke training.
You get brainwashed by watching a short anti-discrimination video? You must be soft-minded to be brainwashed so easily.
Who said anything about me?
I'm saying that woke people try to brainwash others and that they try to punish those who refuse it.
Your reaction to this is just some insult. Which I will give back to you: you are dishonest.
If you want to defend the behavior of woke people, do so honestly. Show that they are not forcing their stuff down on people's throat. Or at least that what they are doing is good, even if forceful.
But stop with this dishonesty of trying to change the focus of the thread.
Wrong. I'm from communist China and don't like it but I can guarantee you nobody needs to watch whatever diversity video to keep their jobs.
I didn't want to pay the price and did these re-education seminars. We are becoming like China very fast.
WTF are you talking about?
There are lots and lots and lots of places where this sort of indoctrination is mandatory. They fire people who don't go to training.
Yes, the training is probably pointless at best.
Yes, colleges should tread more lightly around political or controversial issues.
But the posts about this being worse than the Cultural Revolution are completely ignorant of history. You would not say anything like that if you had the first clue about the Cultural Revolution.