GitHub, fuck your name change

The american left is lagging behind in therms of political theory and this "identitarian ideology" is a symptom of that. The fact that this ideology now is being imported by leftists in other countries creates a really bad image of the whole political movement.

It is interesting that this innocuous terminological justice is now a thing in a lot of english speaking social environments (and internet), as far as I can tell, but is a joke for the majority of population (included left organizations and political parties) where I live. This is, for me, a clear sign of the elitist agenda that has minimal impact in the real life, but delight the middle-class left of american universities.

I consider myself a left minded person, and being from a third world country, I first was amused by this when this started since I do a general research of leftists movements around the world. But now that this evolved on a entire "ideology" (quoted because it has really poor political substance) and is now present, albeit not as much as in the USA and Europe, in my country, my take is that this is a dissuasive factor in the political development of the masses.

Sorry for my english.

Your entire theory ascribes a mysticism to language that is not evidence based at all.

Changes to language like removing the term master are absurd and performative. You have jumped onto a movement that is operating like a religion. Telltale signs are capitalization of certain words that aren't normally capitalized, and making a big deal about certain interchangeable words.

Growing up as an evangelical Christian I was not allowed to say the word lucky and was insisted that I would say blessed instead. The people who were a minority of my church that made a big deal this did so for personal gain in the social hierarchy.

You can sit here and moan all day long about stupid theories that came out of disciplines in universities where the practitioners are universally illiterate in statistics.

At the end of the day the entire theory is rooted around essays and very very shaky implicit bias science where the test which I have taken several times are not reproducible for a single individual. Depending on the day I take an implicit bias test I am either anti-black or anti-white.

Naturally there's no implicit bias test that has other races featured because these all came from US universities who have a myopic view on race driven by politics and title 9.

Enjoy your silly religion. The rest of us are going to set about building a better world for everyone while you ride along on the technical progress and its fruits.

Biden: 'If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black'

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/22/politics/biden-charlamagne-th...

I'm not entirely sure I can disagree with you more.

> Removing harms from how organizations execute their business operations is part of inclusivity. It's not cargo culting, it's not engaging in a self-pleasuring but pointless behavior, it's not a meaningless act that carries no value- it's ensuring that our organization does as little harm to folks as possible as we move forward doing business in the world.

Serious question - What harm are you removing here?

Let me ask again - Who is being harmed, how is this helping them?

Because to me... I see a giant company (MSFT) using political theatre as advertising.

Worse, as a developer in one of the areas that's actually fairly racially diverse (South Atlanta) I sure as fuck don't see any of my black co-workers doing anything other than roll their eyes at this.

This was a change engineered by white people, to appeal to white people's current sense of morality, so that a large company can continue its practices of fucking minority and non-white folks over, and yet here you are congratulating them on wasting billions of dollars on it.

Even when it's an overt master-controlling-slave analogy, what's the actual problem with that?

It's not like there's any 'har-har silly slave' value judgement attached, why is it any different to 'teacher and pupil', 'controller and controlled', 'leader and follower'?