Lockheed’s white male executives attended a three-day seminar in order to learn how to be less white and less male.
· May 28, 2021 · NottheBee.com

It may be racist and sexist, but at least you're helping to pay for it through your defense dollars!

To truly appreciate how awful these programs are, we need to take a step back.

The firm conducting the reeducation camp for defense company Lockheed is called "White Men as Full Diversity Partners," or "WMFDP."

If there's something that bothers you about that name, beyond the fact that the acronym makes you think of WMDs, good, because WMFDP is something of a Weapon of Mass Destruction against individualism.

Identifying a group as "white men" is in and of itself based on a collectivist mindset. Right there in the name is the premise of their argument, the context from which everything else follows.

You are not an individual who happens to be white and a man. You are a "white man." That is your identity, and you are assumed to behave in certain ways because of that identity. That is why you were told to attend this program. It is the only reason why.

Further, that identity is flawed (otherwise you wouldn't need a consulting firm to explain what's wrong with you).

Finally, since they see "white men" as all the same, they must mean "diversity" in terms of immutable characteristics such as race, sex, ethnicity, etc., because of course they do. That's all they think about.

They can't be bargained with, they can't be reasoned with, and they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are woke.

You are not an individual. You are an intersectionality, and if you are a white man, a problematic intersectionality that needs to be reprogrammed.

By other white men, of course.

WMFDP sent a team to whitemansplain all this to Lockheed employees that consisted of Jim Morris, Michael Welp, (one of the co-founders) and Mark Havens.

Clearly this was a big, fat contract if a man named "Welp" was there.

The document Rufo got his hands on looks like an after-action report for the participants (and presumably other top executives). It begins with this cover page.

"White Men's Caucus."

Is that okay now?

The second page is a group shot (this was a virtual meeting).

This looks less like a group of people eager and happy to have their many shortcomings helpfully outlined for them, and more like a mass exit interview conducted by HR right after a downsizing.

Keep in mind, the people at WMFDP had hours of video from which to choose a frame to capture, and this is the absolute best image they could come up with.

Actually, there's one guy with a big old smile. That would be co-founder and chief race grifter, Michael Welp:

The document starts off with lists that were "generated by participants."

Keep in mind the context in which these lists were extracted from the participants and the fact that we are dealing with bureaucratic experts, including a three-star general.

These are people who know what they are expected to say and so went into DEFCON 5 suck-up mode:

This one did sneak through, however.

May not feel safe to talk about disagreement or confusion - wherever you are at.

I wonder why he feels that way?

In the "What's in it for White Men" struggle session the pablum gets laid on even thicker. (Highlights follow, if you don't want to wade through the whole thing.)

  • I have more permission to be in my heart not just in my head. I will be more accessible in eyes of others
  • I have more permission to say "I don't know" or be confused. Not have to fake it till I make it.
  • I see (White Males) as another support group to help me with my (Diversity & Inclusion) journey

These people are responsible for developing the weapons systems that keep us safe.

That brings us to "Free Association - 'White Men.'" These were also generated by the participants themselves.

Look at the first 6 things they said they associate with white men:

  • Old
  • Privileged
  • Reactionary
  • Racist
  • Golf
  • Conservative

"Golf?" I mean sure, I expected racist and reactionary, but golf?

I think there might have been some trolling going on here.

Here are a few more choice selections:

  • KKK
  • Aryan Nation
  • Anti-woman
  • Angry
  • Don't listen

The vast majority of entries are negative. Maybe that's why Welp was looking so cheerful!

There was this, though, so at least someone managed to retain a sense of humor.

Can‘t jump.

There were a handful of positive ones like, "work ethic," although it's not entirely clear anymore if that's considered a positive.

The next section, still generated by participants, is the "Assumptions About White Men and Diversity."

Either these executives are in full corporate pander mode, or they have some serious self-esteem issues. In any case, it's a typical stereotypical run down of white males, although I highlight one entry I found particularly interesting:

We don't want to give away our power or lose power

WMFDP touts their diverse team which they do by listing their entire staff alphabetically.

Looks "diverse" by their standards, but if you sift through the job titles you'll find that the very top staff is anything but.

The two acting co-founders are both white men, as is the Chief Operating Officer and the Chief Consulting Officer.

There was a third co-founder, a black woman, but she's retired. I guess the only person willing to "lose power" was a black woman.

In fairness, things open a bit below that tier, but slowly. There is a pattern in organizations like these in which top leadership almost always consists of white guys lecturing other white guys on how be more woke.

Another list generated by participants is called "Tools & Skills."

(This will be the last section I discuss, but you can find all the documents on Rufo's website here.)

1. Listening - and staying out of problem solving mode.

2. Show empathy for someone's perspective.

3. Ask questions vs. solve.

Listening is always a good idea, but there is this antipathy towards "solving" problems as further evidenced by this later in the document (an excerpt from Welps' book).

MINDSET #12: Notice, appreciate, and acknowledge what is working well. Our strong problem-solving muscle has us often looking to address what's wrong in order to solve it. Put your attention on what you want to grow.

This is nice and all, but when you're designing a lethal instrument of war, I kind of want you in problem-solving mode.

Trouble-shooting an issue with the weapons systems on an F-35 combat aircraft is not the time to be focusing on empathy.

Sharing feelings with a common (WM group).

WM = White Males. More collectivism, you are defined by your groups, white and male, that is the very definition of racism and sexism.

And can you imagine telling your supervisor, "Hey, I need to run this by some white males first."

You can do that now?

Let me leave you with these two additional tweets from Rufo.

First, it appears Lockheed has exposed literally thousands of it's executives to this poison for years:

Second, they have no intention of stopping:

If this were simply an effort to create better leaders by helping executives to see people as individuals, that would be something productive and useful.

But that's not what this is about. These programs have a collectivist mindset. These executives are not being encouraged to view people as individuals.

How could they be when they've had their own individuality stripped from them?


There are 54 comments on this article.

Ready to join the conversation? Start your free trial today.

Access comments and our fully-featured social platform, completely free of charge.

Sign up Now
App screenshot

You must signup or login to view or post comments on this article.