[Karl Lagos]

Originally Posted by kjm-1995

I have been working at my alma mater for ten years and generally believe people have the wrong idea about DEI. The professionals working in these positions work to ensure fair outcomes for minority students within environments where latent biases can go unchecked (leading to potential conflicts between students and university staff) and some cultural notions can be assumed to be universal (when they actually aren’t, which can lead to misunderstanding of class discussions & materials.)

The people who try to ensure diversity quotas in admissions are a separate group entirely, and while they exist under the umbrella of DEI, I don’t think treating both of these groups of employees in the same way makes any sense.

Universities are not quite as forward thinking and amenable to progress as one might think. Individual professors might be, sure, but they usually have limited decision making power in comparison to the real decision makers: Administration. In many ways, their operating procedures are still stuck in the dark ages. It’s difficult enough for white students to navigate this environment, but I imagine it’s hell for minority students. I don’t envy them one bit, and it’s kind of a major W that there even are services which are designed to bridge this gap at all.

Hogwash. Plenty of minorities, E. Asians, S. Asians, Jews, excel. Something like 47% of Nigerian Americans get graduate degrees. And the common denominator is high levels of intact nuclear families. Which Marxists and commies want to destroy of course.

[silverct9a]

Perfect segue to ask my previously ignored question…what’s your highest level of attained formal education?

You seemed to be so well informed of what’s going on at universities across America so surely you’ve spent quite some time there right?

Originally Posted by Karl Lagos

Hogwash. Plenty of minorities, E. Asians, S. Asians, Jews, excel. Something like 47% of Nigerian Americans get graduate degrees. And the common denominator is high levels of intact nuclear families. Which Marxists and commies want to destroy of course.

[Nonesuch]

Originally Posted by kjm-1995

I have been working at my alma mater for ten years and generally believe people have the wrong idea about DEI. The professionals working in these positions work to ensure fair outcomes for minority students within environments where latent biases can go unchecked (leading to potential conflicts between students and university staff) and some cultural notions can be assumed to be universal (when they actually aren’t, which can lead to misunderstanding of class discussions & materials.)

Here's the recruiting flyer from when University of Florida hired their Chief Diversity Officer. Interesting that it has more about "social justice" than about "fair outcomes for minority students", and their $5MM budget was focused more on spending money on consultants like the "Racists Anonymous" program and other anti-racist programming.

[kjm-1995]

Originally Posted by Nonesuch

Here's the recruiting flyer from when University of Florida hired their Chief Diversity Officer. Interesting that it has more about "social justice" than about "fair outcomes for minority students", and their $5MM budget was focused more on spending money on consultants like the "Racists Anonymous" program and other anti-racist programming.

I read the recruiting flyer, and I see no issue with it. The idea that this is perceived as a controversial, hot-button political topic is an indictment of those who believe it to be so.

[Nonesuch]

Originally Posted by kjm-1995

I read the recruiting flyer, and I see no issue with it. The idea that this is perceived as a controversial, hot-button political topic is an indictment of those who believe it to be so.

A significant chunk of UFL's $5 million dollar DEI budget was spent on "anti-racist" consultants and programs which labeled all white faculty as inherently racist, and $30K to the BLM founders Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal (now Ayo) Tometi.


DEI pays lip service to "equality' but is used for entryism and other more extreme tactics to gain control over organizations (and their budgets).

I've experienced first hand an attempt by a local activist group to take over the board of a non-profit, the group of young activists, funded by a local "charity" seemed to be following a playbook...

They started by insisting we fly a rainbow flag "or else" then moved on to insisting we add a DEI statement to our operational documents so they could "find" us grants. Later they attempted to blackmail us, insisting an officer step down because his private blog exposed his Catholic beliefs -- they thought this could get us to hand them seats on the board, under the same pretense of "DEI". In parallel they went as far as to contact our suppliers, managing to convince one to blacklist us (which was hilarious because we had been paying them market rate for their services, so we lost nothing).

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by Nonesuch

A significant chunk of UFL's $5 million dollar DEI budget was spent on "anti-racist" consultants and programs which labeled all white faculty as inherently racist, and $30K to the BLM founders Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal (now Ayo) Tometi.


DEI pays lip service to "equality' but is used for entryism and other more extreme tactics to gain control over organizations (and their budgets).

I've experienced first hand an attempt by a local activist group to take over the board of a non-profit, the group of young activists, funded by a local "charity" seemed to be following a playbook...

They started by insisting we fly a rainbow flag "or else" then moved on to insisting we add a DEI statement to our operational documents so they could "find" us grants. Later they attempted to blackmail us, insisting an officer step down because his private blog exposed his Catholic beliefs -- they thought this could get us to hand them seats on the board, under the same pretense of "DEI". In parallel they went as far as to contact our suppliers, managing to convince one to blacklist us (which was hilarious because we had been paying them market rate for their services, so we lost nothing).

Reminiscent of the old saying, "Actions speak louder than words", seems to me. The actions of these DEI activists certainly belies the flowery statements about "equality and fairness" for chosen "minority groups". Or maybe their true intention is hidden in those words.

[Dave_n_Tenn]

DEI is really a form of pseudo moral tyranny. Not only must we "believe" in DEI, but if we disagree, speak against it or enter into a dialoged... people are labeled racist-nazi white supremists who should be 'cancelled'.

[Ghaati]

Originally Posted by Nonesuch

A significant chunk of UFL's $5 million dollar DEI budget was spent on "anti-racist" consultants and programs which labeled all white faculty as inherently racist, and $30K to the BLM founders Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal (now Ayo) Tometi.


DEI pays lip service to "equality' but is used for entryism and other more extreme tactics to gain control over organizations (and their budgets).

I've experienced first hand an attempt by a local activist group to take over the board of a non-profit, the group of young activists, funded by a local "charity" seemed to be following a playbook...

They started by insisting we fly a rainbow flag "or else" then moved on to insisting we add a DEI statement to our operational documents so they could "find" us grants. Later they attempted to blackmail us, insisting an officer step down because his private blog exposed his Catholic beliefs -- they thought this could get us to hand them seats on the board, under the same pretense of "DEI". In parallel they went as far as to contact our suppliers, managing to convince one to blacklist us (which was hilarious because we had been paying them market rate for their services, so we lost nothing).

Which local activist group, tried to take over the board of which non-profit, and which charity funded it? Link us to the memo or video showing that your non-profit was required to fly a rainbow flag "or else."

Since being Catholic isn't a crime, or something someone can be blackmailed for in the United States, I'd like to hear more details on that. Was it the fact that he was Catholic? or was it that he was making statements about policy that were in opposition to the group he officiated over?

I mean, I could've written the exact same thing you just did, and I'd be just making it all up because there's no way anyone could verify it.

And in which documents did UFL's $5B budgeted programs label "all white faculty as inherently racist?" Please link to those documents.

[Nonesuch]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

And in which documents did UFL's $5B budgeted programs label "all white faculty as inherently racist?" Please link to those documents.

Here you go: https://rufo.substack.com/api/v1/fil...2ce0c8ebdc.pdf

Originally Posted by Ghaati

Which local activist group, tried to take over the board of which non-profit, and which charity funded it?

Not going to name names (they're litigious). I can say they were funded by Kimball Jenkins.

Also won't name the board member-- he is a private person, ended up resigning from the board and moving back to his old hometown (in part due to the stress of being threatened simply for being "out" as a Catholic).

Originally Posted by Ghaati

Link us to the memo or video showing that your non-profit was required to fly a rainbow flag "or else."

Unfortunately the 501(c)3 didn't, at the time, record meetings (changed that policy immediately afterwards, but the activists weren't nearly as blatant about their threats once the cameras were on).

Getting him to resign from the board was one of their lesser goals, even had the gall to hand deliver (at the next meeting, which was recorded) a folder containing:

1. printouts from his blog where he quoted the pope.
2. a "Letter of intent to join the board" from the leader of the group of activists.
3. a signed paper letter from one of the 501(c)3's suppliers, stating they would no longer do business, and why.
4. a letter from Kimball Jenkins offering to "find" grant money if the 501(c)3 were to add a DEI statement and change the mission statement (authored by a now-former Kimball Jenkins staffer).

I've seen the originals of all of the above documents, and have scanned copies from when I thought there might be a lawsuit or three as an outcome of all of this.

Originally Posted by Ghaati

Since being Catholic isn't a crime, or something someone can be blackmailed for in the United States, I'd like to hear more details on that. Was it the fact that he was Catholic? or was it that he was making statements about policy that were in opposition to the group he officiated over?

Apparently holding Catholic beliefs is now something you can be blackmailed over. They weren't (directly) asking for money, they were demanding the non-profit kick him off the board and give his seat to their leader.

Nothing on his personal blog went against the 501(c)3's charter, rules, or stated goals -- they just didn't like his Catholic beliefs and specifically cited his quoting the pope (again, on his personal blog, hosted on his personal website). The group basically said "he holds beliefs that we don't like, so he steps down or we make a big stink about it to your donors, suppliers, and the media", and backed that up by getting one supplier to write a letter saying they are no longer willing to offer services to the non-profit because they found his (personal, unrelated to the org or mission) Catholic beliefs objectionable.

I pushed him to go a lawyer (or the state AG) about it, but he said that would be un-Christian...

[Dave_n_Tenn]

Originally Posted by Nonesuch

Here you go: https://rufo.substack.com/api/v1/fil...2ce0c8ebdc.pdf

Not going to name names (they're litigious). I can say they were funded by Kimball Jenkins.

Also won't name the board member-- he is a private person, ended up resigning from the board and moving back to his old hometown (in part due to the stress of being threatened simply for being "out" as a Catholic).


Unfortunately the 501(c)3 didn't, at the time, record meetings (changed that policy immediately afterwards, but the activists weren't nearly as blatant about their threats once the cameras were on).

Getting him to resign from the board was one of their lesser goals, even had the gall to hand deliver (at the next meeting, which was recorded) a folder containing:

1. printouts from his blog where he quoted the pope.
2. a "Letter of intent to join the board" from the leader of the group of activists.
3. a signed paper letter from one of the 501(c)3's suppliers, stating they would no longer do business, and why.
4. a letter from Kimball Jenkins offering to "find" grant money if the 501(c)3 were to add a DEI statement and change the mission statement (authored by a now-former Kimball Jenkins staffer).

I've seen the originals of all of the above documents, and have scanned copies from when I thought there might be a lawsuit or three as an outcome of all of this.





Apparently holding Catholic beliefs is now something you can be blackmailed over. They weren't (directly) asking for money, they were demanding the non-profit kick him off the board and give his seat to their leader.

Nothing on his personal blog went against the 501(c)3's charter, rules, or stated goals -- they just didn't like his Catholic beliefs and specifically cited his quoting the pope (again, on his personal blog, hosted on his personal website). The group basically said "he holds beliefs that we don't like, so he steps down or we make a big stink about it to your donors, suppliers, and the media", and backed that up by getting one supplier to write a letter saying they are no longer willing to offer services to the non-profit because they found his (personal, unrelated to the org or mission) Catholic beliefs objectionable.

I pushed him to go a lawyer (or the state AG) about it, but he said that would be un-Christian...

I expect crickets from Ghaati. Good post.