4 ms·
As far as I've seen, The Free Press' major crime is not necessarily what they cover but that they are egregiously tactless and their bias doesn't convey "good f
by the-printer 3y ago
As far as I've seen, The Free Press' major crime is not necessarily what they cover but that they are egregiously tactless and their bias doesn't convey "good faith". With that being said, this article actually isn't that bad (if bad at all).
The "diversity" training described here sounds bizarre. I've yet to find any rational defense for it aside for the fact that the the people most vocally against it are supposed to be the cause of it on paper. Oddly, I'm steadily coming across instances where this training seems to target people who likely didn't hold problematic beliefs toward other races prior to this sort of DEI training. The whole practice reeks of sabotage from a more powerful establishment and lacks the polish possessed by Black Civil Rights activists of the past.
- raxxorraxor 3y agoThey are at least guilty in increasing and stoking racial tensions. Not only because the reproduce non-replicable and bad social science theories whose quality lies soly in the controversial part of their tenets. There is no rationality here, it bunks on vanity. The women here doesn't hold qualifications because she is black. She doesn't have the facilities to teach anything in my opinion. It isn't just unlikely he was a racist. He thought disadvantaged kids. The people accusing him are scammers. The vanity of accusing a poor black women, real racism, is a cover here.