Any era of philosophical thought is played out in at least two stages: the academic arena where ideas are hammered out and refined, and the societal level where they are tested and police cars and careers burn.

Part 2 requires that all of the lofty ideas, ivory-tower terms, and academic run-on sentences be distilled into a small handful of easily digestible, cause-oriented soundbites. That way the average disgruntled college student (or unemployed activist) can wrap his head around it and get behind a cause that gives his life some purpose.

We're 70 years deep into Part 2 of a philosophical social experiment called Post-Modernism. "Woke" is the pedestrian, popular name for it. That's history for another discussion, but that's where we are today.

The Readers' Digest Version

This is an over-simplification but for purposes of this discussion there are two primary tenets of this movement that you need to keep in mind.

One, that Individualism is dead, and with it Free Speech (and thought) and two, individualism has been replaced by social construct groups and the permanently fluid language that controls them. This opens up enormous errors in thinking that are inescapable once you've "bought into" their most basic proposals.

Like what?

Well, one of the major products of the post-modern distillation process is something currently labeled, "DEI": Diversity-Equity-Inclusion. It's had other names and manifestations since the '60's but let's focus on the current rendering of this shape-shifting hydra and see where it takes us.

"Diversity" to Give the Oppressed a Voice

“Oh, good! An effort to give voice to the marginalized. Sounds like a righteous goal to me, I'm in.”

Don't think for one second that the leaders of the post-modern movement believe in what you understand as free speech. They do not. In fact they have declared in their published works that it is a thing to be loathed, it's an oppressive tool used by the Oppressor Groups to keep the Victim Groups in their place (remember, Individualism is dead--the basic societal unit now is the Group(s) you belong to).

They believe free speech is dead and have replaced it with something called social linguistic construction. It's essentially how groups talk to each other and inescapably shape the thoughts of the members of each others groups. So words become weapons capable of physical harm. Being their own creation, this means they also get to make up the rules as to what's ok to say and what's not. Pretty convoluted stuff but, here we are.

Modernists believe in the Individual and his freedom to think for himself, as the basic unit of society and, of course, free speech. What I think or say affects who you are only to the extent that you allow it and incorporate it into your belief system. I can say whatever I want to, even if it's ugly. I have a right to do that. (Doesn't mean it's a good idea for me to do so, just that I have the right to. And so do you.)

You are free to process what I say as inaccurate, ugly, mean or hateful where necessary and decide not to let it affect you in the least. Doesn't sound like rainbows and unicorns, but free speech is absolutely necessary to the positive development of all aspects of our societies. You and your individual mind are the best and fairest speech censor you'll ever employ. Who needs misguided Twitter fact-checkers!

"Equity" to Level the Playing Field

Post-Modernists espouse an equality of outcome which necessarily eliminates an individualistic, merit-based approach to success. It lowers the bar for self-motivated personal development and begins a downward spiral, a race to the bottom of the barrel of competence. Remember, "everyone gets a participation trophy"? That was not just a bad parenting trend.

If you're old enough to remember the Affirmative Action attempts of the 60's-70's at legislating equality of outcomes you'll also remember its failure was finally acknowledged and most of that legislation was eliminated.

The "E" in DEI is the latest attempt to revive that forced social equality. If it doesn't work the first time, rename it and devise a new implementation strategy. And make it sound as altruistic as possible to improve adoption rates amongst the lost!

Another hot topic they like to focus on is "income inequality" but you'll rarely get the complete argument for their position, primarily because they don't know what it is. For example, there will always be relative disparities in wages paid. That means there will always be those making more money than others. Some professions simply pay better than others. Any argument on that point?

They like to redefine "income inequality" (and refocus your attention) as something other than that, specifically that it amounts to mean white men desiring to keep women, minorities and other non-white males oppressed and on the plantation. See how they're lumping all white male employers into a single group and attacking that group instead of identifying any individual employer out there, regardless of skin color or any other attribute, who may be utilizing less than ethical payment practices between two groups, male and female, for example?

In any nation of people, especially one as large as ours there will probably be tactics utilized by greedy souls in positions of power to advantage themselves, but that doesn't mean we should throw out the baby (individualism and our capitalistic free markets) with the bath water (the aforementioned greedy power brokers that make up a very small sliver of our employers). The post-modernists will scream that "relative income disparity", their redefined version of it, is reason enough to scrap the entire system.

But what about "absolute wealth"? This is the part of the argument they want you to ignore. Overall our population is better off today and has more than their parents did just 50 years ago. As Reagan pointed out, "a rising tide lifts all boats". We'll still have different sized boats (relative wealth-some professions make more than others; which one did you pick?) but they all rise together (absolute wealth; we'll all have more) when our society advances. That long-term trend is still continuing upward despite short-term economic non-sense.

Modernists believe in an "equality of opportunity". It's a logical abstract of individualism. That means everyone gets to line up squarely on the starting line at the beginning of their race and has every right to run that race. Whether you finish that race and how well you do is entirely up to you, the individual. You may not place in my race but you can win yours (Individualism). We're born with different talents, familial resources, physical and mental abilities, and no amount of legislation or surgery will change that. This is what our Founders (Modernists) had in mind when they drafted the Constitution. Let's first focus on fixing the issues in the greatest economic system the world has ever seen before we haul it to the scrap heap of history simply because a handful of failed academics are throwing a collective tantrum.

"Inclusion" to End Racism and Sexism

Sounds like a good thing, right? How could you possibly be for anything that promotes strife between races and the genders so, "heck, yeah, I'm on board! Where do we meet for the rally?" And that's a problem. It's just that simple to recruit converts who have never been trained to ask questions that matter.

Inclusion infers a cross-cultural representation of thought if only we can get a fair representation of melatonin and gender at the table. All Blacks think the same thing. All Browns think the same thing. All Women think the same thing. All Gays think the same thing. All Whites think the same things, especially those mean white men, and so on. You don't have to wear a jacket with patches on the sleeves to know that's not true.

No one in opposition to the post-modern movement believes that racism, sexism, or any other societal "-ism" in its' ugliest form is a thing to be grasped. The problem we have is the way in which the leaders of this philo-movement have determined these issues must be thought about, handled, and what you must be required to believe about it all.

Where to From Here?

The Modern era of philosophical thought has produced Reason and the rise of the Individual. That opened the door for the development of the arts, politics, science and medicine as we have lived them (good and bad) for the past half-millennia, with the lion's share of development happening within the past 150 years. What a time to be alive!

Everyone should have a voice at the table. Everyone has a Constitutional and/or God-given right to run their own race and everyone should treat everyone else with the same respect you want to be shown. It's as simple as that.

Is it perfect? Of course not. As long as fallen humans rule the day there will always be societal issues to address. But destroying the Reason, Individualism, and Free Speech that has produced the most prosperous, free nation this world has ever seen is not the way to go about addressing our very solvable issues.

The thinkers behind this rouse want you to believe that DEI is a noble pursuit and will change society for the better. Don't you believe it for one minute. They're an angry lot and destruction rules their playbook.

I'm out of space so next week we'll talk about what we think this has to do with the world of counseling. In the meantime, give me your thoughts on this in the Comments below.

We've got this...