Diversity Is Dead, Dissent Is Dangerous

Diversity is dead. Dissent is dangerous.

Now former Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich came face to face with the consequences of coming down on the opposite side of the fence from the intolerant Tolerance Brigade, as he stepped down today following outcry over contributions he made six years ago towards California’s Proposition 8, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Heaven forbid.

This private contribution in accordance with a privately held belief–one shared by millions of other Californians who voted for Prop. 8–raised the ire of the Left wing of the gay lobby, who answers dissent not with robust debate, but by guillotining their opponents into silence.

This particular development is instructive on a couple levels. First, we know now that there seems to be an indefinite statute of limitations for the Left’s lynch mob to target those who dare to stray from their fold. Bill Clinton has been all but forgiven by the Left these days for using the power of his office to seduce interns into having an affair while he was president, but Eich’s transgression of giving $1,000 to support an initiative that failed to stick anyway six years ago has put a permanent bee in the collective bonnet of the Gaystapo. It’s easier to put adultery and public corruption to bed than to court a view on traditional marriage these days, which before approximately ten minutes ago was the dominant view on marriage held by most societies since time immemorial.

It’s also quite amusing–one can’t help but shake their head in disbelief anymore–just how little a sense of irony the Left has in regards to their stated goal of “diversity” and “inclusiveness”. Says Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker:

Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.

Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all.

We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public. This is meant to distinguish Mozilla from most organizations and hold us to a higher standard. But this time we failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community.

Get it? Mozilla espouses a mantra where their “culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public”, and just as soon as an employee–their CEO, no less–puts that creed into practice, the company who welcomes “freedom of speech” and “diversity” puts the kibosh on him and calls for his head. Such “inclusiveness” is a mile wide and an inch deep.

This episode may yet signal a paradigm shift in the culture war surrounding gay marriage and homosexuality in general, where the battlefield is the public discourse, and the weapon is the language. First, you win over a contingent to your side by wielding language that no one could possibly disagree with. Who would ever be opposed to “tolerance” and “inclusiveness”, after all? Once you’ve co-opted the feel-good language, you take to the battlefield and tar your philosophical opponent as the “intolerant” or “divisive” side. At this point, its more attractive to simply stay silent than to attempt to argue your corner fairly.

He who controls the language, controls the debate. As soon as traditional marriage proponents became “intolerant” or “divisive”, the relative strength of any argument they might have put up became irrelevant. Such “intolerance” must be put down, and when people are forced from their jobs for holding divergent views, it becomes an effort in futility to state that any idea of open debate is still possible.

The paradigm has shifted because the Left has won the all-important battle for the language. “Tolerance” and “diversity” became cudgels just long enough to gain a foothold over anyone holding a different–i.e. traditional–view on marriage or sexuality. That now being accomplished, all such presumption about being tolerant of people’s views can be abandoned, to the point where all that remains is to strangle those left bleeding from the initial barrage. Eich is just the latest. He will not be the last.

The initial goal of the gay lobby was actually quite reasonable: to be left alone, free to pursue happiness as anyone else does. In zero seconds flat, the roles have reversed. Now, it’s the traditionalist’s turn to be left alone. That may not be acceptable, however. Diversity of thought, previously the bellwether to gauge the health of any free society, won’t be tolerated. Those holding different ideas aren’t to be engaged, but relieved of employment. It’s all very ugly, and a shameful thought in a country in which robust debate ought be celebrated.

Not to belabor the point, but:

Diversity is dead. Dissent is dangerous.


About Michael Haugen

Michael Haugen is a full-spectrum conservative and recent graduate from Eastern Washington University (BS Biology). His main interests in politics and public policy center around health care, education and tax reform. He'll be returning to EWU in 2014 to complete a Master's degree in Public Administration. Follow him on Twitter: @HaugenTRA


  1. Banned For Life, Banned From Life | The Right Argument - April 29, 2014

    […] Brendan Eich met that fate. He was ousted as Mozilla CEO after a mere ten days for his years-old contribution to an ultimately failed initiative in California stating that marriage is between a man and a woman. No apology–as if he owed one–was sought. No explanation or commentary on his opinions was solicited. Nope. Just get out. […]

  2. Art Of The Illiberal | The Right Argument - May 3, 2014

    […] today, indoctrinated with such a poisonous mindset, are the sorts who tomorrow will deprive future Brendan Eich’s or Donald Sterling’s of employment or ban them from the public square simply for holding […]

  3. What’s In A Name? | The Right Argument - June 18, 2014

    […] this debate, and not even the most interesting one at that.  Free speech is always under attack, and this is merely another battle in the long slog of that […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

International Liberty

Restraining Government in America and Around the World

Watts Up With That?

The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

Political Fireball

Your Voice for Truth in New Mexico Politics


Who Said What


Jacques Delacroix' blog, Santa Cruz, CA, Facts Matter, Monterey Bay

Notes On Liberty

Spontaneous thoughts on a humble creed

%d bloggers like this: