The Debacle of GA '19: This NEEDS to be Read by Everyone

Short post, going to let my "guest" speak for himself. I encountered this today, it's a perfect, heartfelt, sad and hopeful piece written by a current Unitarian Universalist. He brings up a lot.

What strikes me is the tone. This is written by someone who's been a committed Unitarian Universalist, he loves the faith, but wonders about the denomination. It's beautifully written and deserves to be read.

Here it is from Reddit: Some Musings on UU & Personal Theology

It is continued here as a downloadable pdf: HERE

Gives one much to think about.

Your Old Pal,
Devilhead

The Debacle of GA '19: It Ain't Over Yet... The UUMA Exec Censures Rev. Todd Eklof for Heresy and Blasphemy

I keep getting reports about what's going on with the publication of The Gadfly Papers [buy it and support Rev. Todd: HERE] and it's dissemination at GA '19 in Spokane, WA, and as predicted [HERE], the tempest in a teapot that Rev. Eklof unleashed by simply asking everyone to look at the direction things are going and asking if that's what we really want, ain't over yet. Not by a longshot.

[My predictions are copied here for those who don't want to dig through a long-ass piece.]

These predictions sound a lot like the shitstorm of which Rev. Todd is at the center.

A few readers of the blog have sent me the link UUMA Board and Executive Team Issues Public Letter of Censure against the Rev. Todd Eklof. This letter issued two months after the initial brouhaha at General Assembly is a perfect example of the hypocritical moral posturing of the creme de la creme of Unitarian Universalist ministry.

In essence, Rev. Todd Eklof has been excommunicated by his peers for holding heretical thoughts and for having the nerve to publish them thereby committing blasphemy. 

Here's the funny thing a censure from the UUMA means absolutely nothing... it also means everything.

This is what I mean, the Unitarian Universalist Minister's Association [UUMA] is one of the most utterly useless bodies to exist. It sucks up a couple of hundred dollars from ministers every year, and gives back nothing. Seriously, look at their website yourself and tell me if you see anything of value. 

Yeah, exactly, I don't either.

I would say the Unitarian Universalist Ministers Association offers a complete void of anything of value, but as this letter exhibits, the signers of the letter got an opportunity to make a safe moral grandstand that cost them nothing at all. By "safe" I mean this: two months have passed since the swirly-whirly of regurgitation and shit that calls itself General Assembly. Two months have passed to see that the issue is nice and safe to release a public statement of censure. Yup, the moral cowards exemplars at the UUMA Exec issued this rebuke when it was nice and safe for them to do so.

If you think I'm too harsh, remember I've been a UU minister. I've been to more UUMA meetings than I care to remember. I've seen the myopic political calculation that goes behind letters like this. I can guarantee that the signers of this letter all saw good political outcomes for themselves, after a two-month waiting period.

Before we go further, as these things tend to disappear from the internet once Devilhead points them out, here's the screenshot of those who signed this letter:

Devilhead's cheap advice is for anyone who's tired of this shit. If you are on a search committee, for a congregation, for a region, for a special committee, use this list along with the lists in the Special Pages section [right side of the blog] to eliminate poor candidates. These pages are a tool, feel free to use them.

Devilhead sez: "Use the Special Pages section as a blacklist if you're hiring!"

In Devilhead's opinion, this list above are the poorest of possible candidates. Not only are the ideologically hamstrung buffoons, but they are cowards to boot. 

And yet despite the utter incompetence and stupidity of those in leadership at the UUMA, it matters because there are some powerful cowards on this list. On this list we have Rev. Richard Speck [not this guy] who was a district executive for 14 years, now retired.

And we have Rev. Melissa Carvill Ziemer, who is currently the executive director of the UUMA:

She's another one who had a few years in the ministry, then jumped at the chance to work for a bureaucracy. You'll see that a lot at the higher levels of Unitarian Universalist professional ministry; people who prefer bureaucracy over parish ministry. Wonder why that is?

She could, of course, be mindful of the fate of her predecessor. The Rev. Don Southworth who was shitcanned from the UUMA Exec and is now unhirable in any Unitarian Universalist context because he simply questioned the direction of the Anti-Racist Psyop Initiative. Mind you, he never questioned the motives of the program and its handlers, which were/are far from pure.

It's entirely possible that she wouldn't want to face the same fate.

After all, the same thing happened to former UUA President Rev. Peter Morales. Unhirable. His crime? He simply questioned the speed and direction of the Anti-Racist Psyop Initiative. 

Devilhead would like to end this rather rambling rant with a question that is seldom asked. 

When did the meaning of racism change from being actively against people of color, to meaning simply disagreeing with or questioning a person of color? 

When did that happen?

In all cases, these people, Rev. Todd Eklof, Rev. Don Southworth, and Rev. Peter Morales, simply disagreed or questioned the current establishment paradigm.  

When did the simple act of questioning make one a racist?

When indeed?

Your Ol' Pal,
Devilhead

Calling Bullshit on the UUA: Why only 40%?

Has it struck any of the readers of this blog as odd that an institution that has given itself completely and wholly to the psyop work of anti-racism, and has decried the white supremacy psyop culture that it finds in its midst, that the UUA Board has set the goal of UUA staffing at only 40%?

Reddit, as always, has something interesting to say about this whole thing. Goal: 40% of UUA Leadership and Management to be People of Color. It's a worthwhile read.

And here's the UUA World's gushing piece, here.

I keep coming away feeling like the whole thing is playing out like a psyop. Seriously, just look for yourself:

If the goal is truly to dismantle the perceived "White Supremacy Culture" from the UUA, will piecemeal efforts truly achieve their goals?

It seems to me that a lowly goal of 40% is designed to drag this whole thing out for a decade or more. Because once the "revolutionary, groundbreaking" goal of 40% is reached, they will discover that 40% isn't a majority. 

Here's the problem, having a goal of only 40% maintains "white supremacy." 

I know that basic math is not the forte of anyone on the UUA Board, or of the UUA Staff for that matter, but here it is: 100% - 40% = 60%. So, if the goal is actually reached and 40% of people working at the UUA are people of color, that still leaves 60% non-people of color.

So, again, I have to ask myself if the goal of 40% people of color at the UUA isn't just something cosmetic? It seems designed to stretch out the problem and keep white supremacy in play at the UUA.

"White Supremacy" makes a great devil hand-puppet in the yarn the UUA likes to spin. It keeps everyone in line. But what would happen if they actually took care of the problem?

If the UUA were to actually take care of the boogyman of white supremacy culture, for instance by instituting a goal of 51% or greater people of color at the UUA, they would have to find something else to use as a bogeyman when they want to frighten their "stakeholders" into doing their bidding.

However, in setting the goal at a ridiculously low 40%, one wonders if the goal is not so much to appease "stakeholders" as to mollify slaves. Could this be the case? If it is, what does that say about the validity of "white supremacy" culture at the UUA? Maybe it really does need to be dismantled.

40% isn't a majority, it isn't even close. To present 40% as some revolutionary act, when the reality is that it still keeps people of color in the minority and oppressed, is verbal sleight-of-hand. In other words, it's complete bullshit made to look like something worthwhile. How much gold spray paint did it take to cover that turd? The whole thing nevertheless smells like hypocrisy. 

Maybe we need to ask Rev. Rob Eller-Issacs. Wasn't he on the UUA Board when the whole 40% thing was instituted? 

Or maybe we need to ask Rev. William Sinkford, who was used by the UUA's propaganda arm to sell the bullshit here in the article and photo published by the world. [Article Here]

Seems to be selling more white supremacy to me.

For those who want to make this hypocrisy seem like a bargain, please remember that 40% is people of color... all people of color. Not just black people, or latin people, or native people, or (whatever) people... no, it's everyone, absolutely everyone. All People of Color at 40% compared to Non-People of Color at 60%. 

Still seem like a bargain?

Now, divide up the 40% into the various identity groups, and each shareholders' stake gets smaller, much smaller. It's conceivable that with four different stakeholder groups, that each identity group would only get 10%. More stakeholder identities and we're looking at less.

Stakeholders, or slaves? Is this a revolutionary gesture, or, are your murmurings merely being quelled? You tell me.

Have the shit-peddlers sold you more shit? And did you buy it? At what cost?

Cheap Advice That Will be Ignored Because of Institutional Hubris:

My cheap advice to the hoo-hahs at the Unitarian Universalist Association is really this simple, shit or get off the pot.

Institute a revised goal of 51% or greater people-of-color.

That would show you're actually serious about dismantling systems of oppression and white supremacy culture at the UUA. 

Everything else appears cosmetic.

Or, maybe that's the fucking point and has been the whole time.

Your Old Pal,
Devilhead

By the way, I'm aware that the fires surrounding Rev. Todd Eklof have been fanned. We'll be examining this further. 'Til then.