According to the website “greatplacetowork.com” in answering the question of “What is the difference between diversity & inclusion?“ provides this answer:

Diversity and inclusion are two interconnected concepts—but they are far from interchangeable. Diversity is about representation or the make-up of an entity. Inclusion is about how well the contributions, presence and perspectives of different groups of people are valued and integrated into an environment.
An environment where many different genders, races, nationalities, and sexual orientations and identities are present but only the perspectives of certain groups are valued or carry any authority or influence, may be diverse, but it is not inclusive.

I have always thought any organization that has a “Great Place to Work” committee means they are desperately seeking to accomplish that goal, but that discussion can be set aside for another day.

The United States of America is a very diverse country and represents folks from all over the world with different backgrounds and ideas. The inclusive part appears to be the point that needs changing, but what perspectives from the not ‘certain groups’ are undervalued or fail to carry any authority or influence? That appears to be quite subjective, depending on the group you represent.

For instance, given a blanket statement that “everyone with white skin are oppressors and everyone else are their victims” castigates an entire race of people, yet we see it in social media and on the news almost every day. This isn’t being inclusive, this sounds like racist ideology and demonizes anyone who has white skin. If it is an attempt to undervalue the perspectives of people with white skin and remove any authority or influence from them, then obviously, it isn’t inclusive.

Another poke in the eye to inclusion is the attack on conservatives. Also parroted on social media and some media outlets is the concept that conservatives ideas are dangerous – all of them – and they are bent on seeking total and complete control under some form of dictatorship. Actually, most conservatives believe in the US constitution and the rights all citizens are accorded. The abolition of slavery was championed by conservatives who believed all citizens should be equal under the law, not like the other party who started a civil war to maintain their slaves. Most conservatives believe in the nuclear family, free speech, equal protection under the law and capitalism. These ideas are condemned by some of the cancel culture folks who believe a nuclear family or free speech is a threat to their absolute control of the American people. Equal protection under the law is also a threat since the people they want in office may have to break the law to further their agenda and everyone knows “the ends justifies the means.” And as far as capitalism, it has raised more people out of poverty than any other system; yet it doesn’t allow ‘them’ to own and control the means of production and force everyone to be dependent on the government for food, shelter and the rest of life’s necessities. This is obviously not inclusive behavior.

One more example of non-inclusiveness is the current vaccine mandate. Either you take the jab or you don’t work. They have permitted submittal of religious and medical exemptions, but we still have to see how many of those exemptions will be allowed, if any, by overzealous corporate operatives. Any mention of vaccines on social media is carefully controlled. Some posts are grounds for being kicked off the platform, others will gain you a ‘time-out’ where you are no longer allowed to post so as to atone for your ‘sins’, but every post containing the word ‘vaccine’ will always provide a link to ‘the Truth’ as passed down by ‘certain folks.’ And so we have circled back around to those ‘certain groups.’ The ‘certain folks’ who, through fearmongering and purposeful ignorance, deny natural immunity or that COVID-19 (China virus) has a very low rate of mortality among most people. People who believe in natural immunity and/or cite the low mortality rate of COVID-19 (China virus) are punished for their perspective because it undercuts the need for mandatory vaccine shots. Therefore, it is not inclusive when some people are sanctioned for having these beliefs.

If everyone is keen on “Diversity and Inclusiveness,” why are some opinions more important than others? All white people are not oppressors, yet when was the last time the host or guest of one of those cable programs attempted to refute the statement? When was the last time someone stood up and pushed back on the idea that Republicans are dangerous to the country or not deserving of existing? And when was the last time someone was not ridiculed or outright censored for ideas counter to GroupThink’s attitude towards COVID-19 (China virus) (where it originated, mortality rate, natural immunity, vaccine mandates)?

Apparently, inclusiveness can be quite subjective and some people believe they have the right to pick and choose what applies. As shown above, there is an unequal standard for inclusiveness which is one of the shortfalls of the concept as it is practiced today.

Fearmongering or scaremongering is a form of manipulation which causes fear by using exaggerated rumors of impending danger.

On a recent visit to social media, I noticed the following graphic posted from covidactnow.org:

I was wondering how this could be since Florida had been decreasing in cases, even from the same website as show in the following graphic:

Full disclosure Florida page for October 25, 2021 is Florida (FL) - COVID Vaccine & Risk Tracker - Covid Act Now.pdf.

Please note the admonishment at the bottom. Florida’s cases are decreasing as shown in the graphs above the “Vulnerability is very high” statement, yet someone in charge of this data still asserts Floridians are very highly vulnerable. Maybe they have not gotten around to changing it, or maybe they have computer models to figure out how “Communities with higher vulnerability have pre-existing economic, social, and physical conditions that may make it hard to respond to and recover from a COVID outbreak.” Don’t we feel safe.

Circling back around, the initial intent of the graphic posted to social media appears to be fearmongering. Making it seem as though the one of the Florida counties has no ICU beds, the poster envisioned (I suppose) striking a blow to the unjabbed masses, providing yet another reason to acquiesce to the Biden administration’s demand for 100% coverage. However, does the poster even know anything about Lafayette County, Florida? The second smallest county out of 67 in Florida. Does it even have a hospital with an ICU so the ‘data not available’ is actually ‘no such feature.’

I had to look at the data for Lafayette County, Florida to see what I was missing.

Then something else popped out, there was 37.3 cases per 100,000 in Lafayette County, Florida last week. Figuring the 8,400 folks that live in Lafayette county must be going though hell with people dropping dead in the streets may be a legitimate concern. Except for the little note that reads Lafayette county averaged 3 new cases a day over the previous week, I would think we should send in medical teams. After all, if the daily new cases are expressed as a percentage it would be ([3/8400]*100) = 0.0357%. (This doesn’t add up to the provided 37.3 except if you change the 8400 to 8040.)

When these statistics are reported to the public, some of the data might seem extreme when examined. For instance, Miami-Dade county has a population of 2,700,000 showing 11 new cases per 100K day, but the actual new cases are 298 per day. This percentage looks like 11/100K = 0.00011% for the daily rate of new cases in Miami-Dade county. I think they should add another column to the table shown above to indicate the mortality rate over the past week. Then it might give a better idea as to the real threat posed to the public – for instance there were zero COVID deaths in the past week in Lafayette county and 15.4 deaths per seven day average for Miami-Dade or about 5.2% mortality.

Don’t be fooled by the shiny stuff or quoted figures until you dig a little deeper.

I saw a meme on social media about the supposed link between what happened in the US Capitol in 1954 vs. 2021.

The author of the meme indicates all the Capitol protesters from 2021 should be punished with sentences from 50-75 years. Obviously a death sentence for anyone over 30.

But the meme lies.
In 1954, the Puerto Rican nationalists did not storm the capital. They casually walked to the visitor’s gallery and watched the immigration debate. They said the Lord’s Prayer together, unfurled the Puerto Rico flag, and then the four of them stood up and opened fire with semi-automatic weapons wounding five representatives. (1954 United States Capital Shooting-wikipedia)

In 2021, citizens charged through the doors of the Capitol and walked around. Some of the people committed acts of vandalism and others stole property; however the majority of people just walked around. Certainly, justice must be served on lawbreakers, but this is meme is suggesting an over-the-top extreme punishment, especially when the four Puerto Rican nationalists had their sentence commuted by President Jimmy Carter after 25 years.

Should every person who stepped foot in the Capitol on January 6th be treated in the same manner as people who actually pulled out guns and shot people? If President Carter believed the sentence was too harsh (and commuted their sentences,) why would today’s Democrats advocate for the same harsh sentences?

And what should be done to the lawbreakers that planned and carried out nightly riots during the summer of 2020? People were threatened, beaten and killed. Businesses were looted and torched. Government buildings were attacked and damaged and yet there is no cry for justice for months of rioting, vandalism, and looting. There is no commission to investigate those who planned and organized these riots and mayhem.

Unequal justice is not justice. Everyone is supposed to be equal under the law, but obviously some are ‘more equal.’

ANTIFA is a political movement with supposedly decentralized leadership working with autonomous groups to effect political change in the United States. Wikipedia describes them as a “left-wing, anti-fascist and anti-racist political movement.” Unfortunately, the fascists they are against are anyone who disagrees with them. Their both peaceful and violent protest demonstrations are attempts to silence their opponents which is just a form of fascism. They are against the free flow of ideas and open discussions – it is either their way or they will show up to shut you up. First, they were against conservatives and demonized them as fascists, next the movement expanded to be anti-racist as well. I guess they wanted to be up-to-date with all their Social Justice Warrior and Woke comrades.

The ‘first’ Anti-Fascists named themselves “Antifaschistische Aktion“ and was started by members of the Communist Party of Germany funded by Moscow’s Comintern. After Hitler’s seizure of power in 1933, they were forced underground.

World War II veterans were not ANTIFA
“World War II veterans were ANTIFA because they fought Fascism” is a logical fallacy. World War II veterans fought for freedom and to liberate Europe and Asia from power hungry megalomaniacs; they did not support the ideals of the Communist Party of Germany/ANTIFA. To associate World War II veterans with ANTIFA is insulting to their contribution to World War II.

• For one, the Communist Party of Germany/ANTIFA considered all the other parties in Germany’s political system to be fascists, not just the political machine under the direction of Adolf Hitler. Those brave men and women from America fought as citizens of the United States, regardless of the political affiliation.
• Secondly, none of the American veterans went to war because they were solely against Fascists – they went in ships and planes to liberate our allies.

Anyone who is against Fascism is NOT ANTIFA
“Anyone who is against fascism is ANTIFA” is a logical fallacy.
I am against fascism and I will never be a member of ANTIFA, nor will I participate in their actions. I am only one example, but there are plenty of folks that feel the same way so as to render the statement false.

Of course there are no membership cards. Their plan is to copy the underground organizational model with decentralized leadership and independent cells forming action groups to avoid prosecution for the illegal acts they commit.

Anyone can’t be ANTIFA
“Anyone can be ANTIFA” is another logical fallacy. There are already lists drawn up with their ideological opponents, none of them can be members unless they start their own cells.

Everyone should NOT be ANTIFA
“Everyone should be ANTIFA” is still another logical fallacy and implies Groupthink or that ‘everyone’ believe the same as ANTIFA – if you don’t believe the same, you are a fascist.

Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome.

This is a Communist inspired meme glossing over the radical aspects of ANTIFA while appealing to Social Justice Warriors and the Woke folks to help them embrace ANTIFA as new virtue signalling to prove their moral superiority.

The constant refrain citing ANTIFA as a non-threatening, disorganized group of dysfunctional characters is a charade. Who pays these folks to spend weeks and months protesting every night, all night? Who drops off and hides the assortment of materials used later in the evening to pelt law enforcement and break store windows or the incendiary devices used to burn down business?
Why are these folks allowed to continue their violence and destruction?

What I do not understand are these memes posting historical atrocities as if they are not taught in school.
Is that an admission they didn’t pay attention in class and forgot?

Did they just now develop a conscience and experience the same thoughts as the millions who did pay attention?
Are these virtue-signalling memes their way to catch up?

On top of all that they try to imply the atrocities are still happening and nothing has changed.
They must have slept through those classes as well.