I have increasingly noticed people categorize competing political or social opinions as racist or disparaging. Many of my co-workers label support for enforcing

I have increasingly noticed people categorize competing political or social opinions as racist or disparaging. Many of my co-workers label support for enforcing existing border controls as racist, opposition to affirmative action or racial reparations as white supremacist. This memo seems to do the same: > “These protestors aren’t going to solve anything, ” she said. ”Like, what are those people even trying to do? Seriously. What are they trying to do? Make people mad about getting stuck in traffic? Piss people off because they can’t get to Grand Central? It’s annoying . I just can’t stand it.” She rattled off a couple of other disparaging comments about the peaceful protestors I was preparing to join, repeatedly referring to them as those people before a chorus of my team’s nodding heads, each bobbing affirmingly behind their desks. With each nod, my co-workers validated my irate teammate’s frustration — and her disgust. How could the team I’d grown to trust and respect care so little about an innocent man who’d lost his life? The fact that one's co-worker does not approve of protestor and thinks their tactics are ineffective or counterproductive is not disparagement. Diversity means there is going to be a diversity of viewpoints and opinions on controversial topics. Lack of diversity is not the root of this employee's distress. Quite the opposite, the fact that the author encountered people with different viewpoints is the cause of this. The author later states that, "Over the last 5 years, I’ve heard co-workers spew hateful words about immigrants, boast unabashedly about gentrifying neighborhoods, mockingly imitate people who speak different languages, reject candidates of color without evidence because of 'fit,' and so much more." But in the absence of sharing the details of those events, we're left to wonder whether this "hateful words" about immigrants and "boasting unabashedly about gentrification" amount to genuine harassment or differences of opinion that the author finds intolerable. I think it's great that the industry is making efforts to become more diverse. But that comes with creating an environment in which people are going to come into contact with co-workers with very different views on controversial topics. It seems to me that the solution isn't more diversity (although more diversity is welcome in its own right), it's either curtailing discussions of these topics in the office or establishing a set of approved viewpoints and forbidding espousing or sharing views outside this set. The last solution is to cultivate an environment where people respect each other regardless of differences and do not treat encountering an opinion they find harmful or bad as a personal attack - but this last solution seems increasingly difficult to achieve.