After a public relations fiasco, Coca-Cola has effectively conceded that some of its employees participated in a public LinkedIn Learning seminar that advocated that some of its employees be “less white.”
The training curriculum was first exposed on Friday by Dr. Karlyn Borysenko, an organizational psychologist who is working to end the racially divisive ideology of ‘critical race theory.’
Since then, mainstream media and left-wing outlets had largely avoided the hot topic. However, Blaze Public Relations’ Chris Pandolfo obtained a statement from Coca-Cola that concedes its employees were told to take the seminar in question.
“The video circulating on social media is from a publicly available LinkedIn Learning series and is not a focus of our company’s curriculum,” Coca-Cola responded.
“Our Better Together global learning curriculum is part of a learning plan to help build an inclusive workplace.”
“It is comprised of a number of short vignettes, each a few minutes long. The training includes access to LinkedIn Learning on a variety of topics, including on diversity, equity, and inclusion. We will continue to refine this curriculum.”
It is important to note this wording concedes it happened. Furthermore, it is not “inclusive” to attack particular individuals’ racial background; that is, by definition, “exclusive.”
The LinkedIn Learning class, called “Confronting Racism, with Robin DiAngelo,” is administered online. DiAngelo, who has become famous for her infamous book “White Fragility,” has become somewhat of a celebrity by holding corporate struggle sessions on critical race theory. This has entailed charging up to $40,000 for half-day indoctrination courses to lecture audiences on the imagined perils of “whiteness” and “white fragility.“
The prior description of the course included language that instructed people to be “less white.” We are not talking about a bug, but a feature of the lecture.
The course description said it will cover “understanding what it means to be white,” and “challenging what it means to be racist.” Students were instructed “to be less white is to: be less oppressive; be less arrogant; be less certain; be less defensive; be less ignorant; be more humble; listen; believe; break with apathy;” and “break with white solidarity.”
Author and pundit Candace Owens reacted to the revelation:
“If a corporate company sent around a training kit instructing black people to ‘be less black’, the world would implode and lawsuits would follow,” Owens tweeted. “I genuinely hope these employees sue Coca-Cola for blatant racism and discrimination.”
“Your job at Coca-Cola should not depend on whether or not you buy into the idea of being less white,” Borysenko remarked. “It should depend on whether or not you can go in and do your job.” The organizational psychologist also walked viewers through what it all means on a Youtube video.
Coca-Cola is undoubtedly not the only company that has tapped DiAngelo and similar speakers, such as Ta-Nehisi Coates, to lead such trainings. Corporate social re-engineering efforts like diversity trainings are themselves big business. As the Free Beacon noted, “the Diversity and Inclusion business was thought to be worth $8 billion as of 2003; by 2005, 65 percent of big companies offered diversity training.”
Even more strikingly, the Free Beacon points out, there is little-to-no evidence that anti-bias trainings work:
A review of nearly 1,000 studies of anti-bias tools found little evidence that they have any impact. In fact, recent studies suggest anti-bias training’s primary effect may be to encourage discrimination: Firms with diversity training end up with fewer minorities in management, and field research finds that training both reinforces stereotypes and increases animosity against minority groups.
It may be that these “inclusion” seminars actually work the opposite of how they are intended: Instead of bringing people together, they raise awareness of our superficial differences and drive us further apart.