I'm replying to the article and the comment below. What's missing is a dialectic. We could argue that people are determined by their circumstances or we could argue that people are determined (or repressed) by their own lack of agency. I would argue that this is not either/or but that there is a relationship between these things. We can also look at how the historical relationship between these things evolved and at the material reality or conflicts underlying them. I suspect that for Americans this might sound like Marxism and best not go there, this is true in the UK too. Historical materialism or dialectical materialism has been buried with Marx. We are left with a psychological critique from both left and right, and a psychological re-branding of Marxism as identity politics. From the right this is the politics of victimhood and the the need for recognition. For the left this is politics of oppression, white privilege and racial pathology. Both left and right are using the language of psychology. Right wing racists might blame black people for their own failures, but black critics do so too, albeit coming from a different place, tough love perhaps. But middle class tough love often resembles paternalism, snobbery and moralism, 'why aren't they more like me?'
I work in DEI. Have done so across three decades because I believe that creating the conditions for everyone to thrive, is smart business and needs prioritization.
Agency/internal locus of control is also how I was raised. Yes, the ways of white folx were discussed. But, not as an immovable impediment but as a reality that at times required creative navigation, and over time, greater levels of mastery, to transcend.
My practice holds agency as a core tenet.
Many of my colleagues who consider themselves “expert” in DEI spend considerable energy on blaming and shaming white folx as a de facto category with all people considered “white” being lumped together as many reduce those of African descent too often are.
It isn’t serving anyone. It especially isn’t serving Black folx in the USA.
And, the way forward with creating the conditions for people to thrive in organizational life is to go inside more than spending valuable energy outside on a so-called other.
I'm replying to the article and the comment below. What's missing is a dialectic. We could argue that people are determined by their circumstances or we could argue that people are determined (or repressed) by their own lack of agency. I would argue that this is not either/or but that there is a relationship between these things. We can also look at how the historical relationship between these things evolved and at the material reality or conflicts underlying them. I suspect that for Americans this might sound like Marxism and best not go there, this is true in the UK too. Historical materialism or dialectical materialism has been buried with Marx. We are left with a psychological critique from both left and right, and a psychological re-branding of Marxism as identity politics. From the right this is the politics of victimhood and the the need for recognition. For the left this is politics of oppression, white privilege and racial pathology. Both left and right are using the language of psychology. Right wing racists might blame black people for their own failures, but black critics do so too, albeit coming from a different place, tough love perhaps. But middle class tough love often resembles paternalism, snobbery and moralism, 'why aren't they more like me?'
I work in DEI. Have done so across three decades because I believe that creating the conditions for everyone to thrive, is smart business and needs prioritization.
Agency/internal locus of control is also how I was raised. Yes, the ways of white folx were discussed. But, not as an immovable impediment but as a reality that at times required creative navigation, and over time, greater levels of mastery, to transcend.
My practice holds agency as a core tenet.
Many of my colleagues who consider themselves “expert” in DEI spend considerable energy on blaming and shaming white folx as a de facto category with all people considered “white” being lumped together as many reduce those of African descent too often are.
It isn’t serving anyone. It especially isn’t serving Black folx in the USA.
And, the way forward with creating the conditions for people to thrive in organizational life is to go inside more than spending valuable energy outside on a so-called other.