Marine Band Cancels Concert

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2025-02-26 9:48 p.m.

I am totally not surprised by this.

~~[url=https://wapo.st/4kjDr6C]~~Following executive orders, ‘The President’s Own’ Marine Band scraps concert

The canceled collaboration with Equity Arc was to feature high school musicians of color who competed for spots to perform with the U.S. Marine Band.

Why? Because he can!

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-26 10:12 p.m.

Oh, my... :shock: :? :( :roll:

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2025-02-26 11:20 p.m.

Jim Crow returns to the White House!

Have they segregated the drinking fountains yet?

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2025-02-27 1:20 a.m.

That might just be the saddest thing that I've heard in a month that has been full of sad things to hear.

Jim Scott

henrysa · by **henrysa** » 2025-02-27 4:45 p.m.

I just don't want to believe this. Can you forward the group the original notice of cancellation so that we can send our own executive responses?

AndrewMeronek · by **AndrewMeronek** » 2025-02-27 5:04 p.m.

I wouldn't be surprised if at some point Trump simply disbands some of those service bands and forces the enlisted personnel to go get other military jobs to fulfill their contracts. The bands have always been easy targets for politicians who have absolutely no clue of the value they add.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-02-27 5:07 p.m.

[quote="AndrewMeronek"]I wouldn't be surprised if at some point Trump simply disbands some of those service bands and forces the enlisted personnel to go get other military jobs to fulfill their contracts. The bands have always been easy targets for politicians who have absolutely no clue of the value they add.[/quote]

I'm surprised it hasn't happened already.

TomWest · by **TomWest** » 2025-02-27 5:31 p.m.

I’m stunned by this news. Unbelievable.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2025-02-27 5:55 p.m.

[quote="henrysa"]I just don't want to believe this. Can you forward the group the original notice of cancellation so that we can send our own executive responses?[/quote]

You can read all the available details in the linked-to above story. it should be free to read.

The cancellation is known publicly because it has been replaced on the Marine band calendar by a concert of movie music.

The orgs involved have been notified that the program is cancelled because of orders against any DEI involvement.

The Marine Band has confirmed to the press that the executive order against DEI is the reason for the cancellation.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2025-02-27 6:07 p.m.

<LINK_TEXT text="https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertai ... VWqrSbhf98">https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/music/2025/02/26/presidents-own-marine-band-cancels-concert/?pwapi_token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJyZWFzb24iOiJnaWZ0IiwibmJmIjoxNzQwNTQ2MDAwLCJpc3MiOiJzdWJzY3JpcHRpb25zIiwiZXhwIjoxNzQxOTI0Nzk5LCJpYXQiOjE3NDA1NDYwMDAsImp0aSI6ImMyYmY3YjQ5LTAwZTYtNGRhZC1iYTJkLTliYzRlYjJlYjk3YSIsInVybCI6Imh0dHBzOi8vd3d3Lndhc2hpbmd0b25wb3N0LmNvbS9lbnRlcnRhaW5tZW50L211c2ljLzIwMjUvMDIvMjYvcHJlc2lkZW50cy1vd24tbWFyaW5lLWJhbmQtY2FuY2Vscy1jb25jZXJ0LyJ9.3-iPvNc-8wKofNAAGc-hg4os4gjYXU_aKVWqrSbhf98</LINK_TEXT>

These people are very sick - even for bigots!

How in heaven's name can we respond to such attitudes? :idk:

Apparently nearly half of the (voting) population of our once-great country supports these actions! :horror:

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2025-02-27 8:19 p.m.

[quote="AndrewMeronek"]I wouldn't be surprised if at some point Trump simply disbands some of those service bands and forces the enlisted personnel to go get other military jobs to fulfill their contracts. The bands have always been easy targets for politicians who have absolutely no clue of the value they add.[/quote]

He cannot do that with The President's Own as about 98% of those musicians are not actual Marines. This is indicated by them not wearing chevrons on their performance uniforms, while everyday service uniforms have crossed rifles on their chevrons replaced with a music lyre.

A small number of the members of The President's Own are actual Marines from the regular band field such as Drum Major, Librarian, Instrument Repair Specialist, etc.

Doubler · by **Doubler** » 2025-02-27 8:26 p.m.

Getting a bit political, are we? Perhaps we should reflect upon what "The President's Own" means.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-02-27 8:29 p.m.

[quote="Doubler"]Getting a bit political, are we? Perhaps we should reflect upon what "The President's Own" means.[/quote]

…

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2025-02-27 11:26 p.m.

[quote="Doubler"]Getting a bit political, are we? Perhaps we should reflect upon what "The President's Own" means.[/quote]

No one had mentioned politics until you did. All Presidential actions are his own.

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2025-02-28 7:27 a.m.

Dear "Doubler"

And we now know how you voted. Of course since this forum allows people to post under anonymous pseudonyms, many of us don't know who you are, so, your opinion is worthless.

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2025-02-28 8:36 a.m.

So, I posted something a few years back concerning Covid about clarifying the political policy here, which I'll link: <LINK_TEXT text="viewtopic.php?p=133605#p133605">https://trombonechat.com/viewtopic.php?p=133605#p133605</LINK_TEXT>

While this isn't an identical situation, there are similarities, notably that this is a directly musical subject. Talking about whether the Marine Band should or should not exist, whether they should or should not perform a concert, whether an underrepresented group should or should not perform with them is clearly acceptable discourse, to me.

I'll just go ahead and quote myself from that link:

Remember, you attract more flies with honey than vinegar. There are probably few people in this country who have taken more precautions than my family has, and I too, wish that people would take this more seriously. I'm likewise in disagreement with the policies of the state I am in and the country I am in and believe there probably were things that could have been done differently, particularly with the benefit of hindsight, that would have resulted in fewer deaths. However, cutesy nicknames ("Ron Deathsantis", "Gretchen Whitchmer", etc.) and generalizations such as "politicians and their supporters are responsible for a lot of the misery" are obviously contentious statements, and it is impossible for me to see these types of statements in any other light. This type of language is woefully counterproductive, and no matter how angry you are, that anger will not convince anyone who doesn't already agree with you.

We are in unanimous agreement that this disease needs to be taken seriously, and so we feel the best thing we can do is keep well-reasoned arguments on-point and away from language that is going to polarize people away from taking all of the precautions that they can afford to take. We, frankly, have little influence on anybody but the people here. Nothing we do will make a governor, much less a president or prime minister have a change of heart, enact any policy, or otherwise be seen by anybody who is not already here. But we can change the minds of the people who are here and, in turn, maybe change the minds of people who are in their direct sphere.

As someone who, in hindsight, would certainly act very differently during that time period as I took excessive precautions that have actually turned out to hinder the development of my own child, I did at least have the humility to not cast aspersions to any of the extremes above to people who felt differently. Indeed, it turns out that I got a lot wrong.

Then, as now, casting aspersions on entire swaths of people for a decision like this one is just... strategically pointless, and off-topic here. They are intentionally and singularly contentious and do not fundamentally convince the very people who would need to be convinced that the policy is bad.

It is much more powerful to suggest that this is a negative outcome, not that the people who voted several months ago are inherently and wholly bad people. Whether we like it or not, we do not live in a system where every decision is something that is voted on. We vote for an amorphous collection of vague (and often contradictory) promises and then install that person in power for multiple years. Realistically, something like 25% of those people don't even vote FOR a person, they vote AGAINST the person or party in power at the time, reflexively. Even the people here who voted for Trump almost certainly do not support this specific action, and there are probably a sizable, non-zero number of people who did not vote for Trump who are either neutral or support this specific action.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 12:22 p.m.

Man, this just continues to fry me. I'm going to cast aspersions against a group of people.

First, these minority kids worked hard, took and passed auditions, and had this achievement and experience to look forward to. And it was scrapped in a way that is deeply insulting and injurious. This is going to tell these kids what their country really thinks of them, particularly the Marines. What an awful, petty, cruel, heartless, stupid thing to do. And it really sends a message to the youth of this country...and to me.

It's MUSIC[/u][/i] fer crissakes! What a bad look for The President's Own (and the president) and our country. Music is supposed to be a refuge from politics and racism.

I hope millions of minority kids take this as a message not to enlist in the military. The message is that they have utter disdain for you and do not value you, at all. I mean, to go out of their way to cancel a previously scheduled music performance. Music performance! That kids have auditioned for! And to cancel it because of who they are, man, that is a kick in the shins.

It's one thing to not schedule such a performance, but they think so little of you and your music that they will cancel a performance that has been on the books for quite a while, and for which you've practiced, auditioned, gotten filled with glee and patriotism when you are selected, made travel plans with your family, and probably bragged about to your friends. And why was it cancelled? Because it was about celebrating black kids. As if black musicians aren't the biggest driving force in American music for the last 100+ years.

I can't think of a more petty and insulting action to take...against KIDS. Good grief.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-02-28 12:53 p.m.

"Equity" is just one of the Orwellian terms removed from military & federal operations. It's in the EO: <LINK_TEXT text="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... ferencing/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-and-wasteful-government-dei-programs-and-preferencing/</LINK_TEXT>

Pursuant to Executive Order 13985 and follow-on orders, nearly every Federal agency and entity submitted “Equity Action Plans” to detail the ways that they have furthered DEIs infiltration of the Federal Government. The public release of these plans demonstrated immense public waste and shameful discrimination. That ends today. Americans deserve a government committed to serving every person with equal dignity and respect, and to expending precious taxpayer resources only on making America great.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-02-28 12:57 p.m.

Yup... we know the order. It's just stupid.

tbdana · 2025-02-28 1:06 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]"Equity" is just one of the Orwellian terms removed from military & federal operations. It's in the EO: <LINK_TEXT text="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential ... ferencing/">https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/ending-radical-and-wasteful-government-dei-programs-and-preferencing/</LINK_TEXT>

Pursuant to Executive Order 13985 and follow-on orders, nearly every Federal agency and entity submitted “Equity Action Plans” to detail the ways that they have furthered DEIs infiltration of the Federal Government. The public release of these plans demonstrated immense public waste and shameful discrimination. That ends today. Americans deserve a government committed to serving every person with equal dignity and respect, and to expending precious taxpayer resources only on making America great.[/quote]

Dude, it's a CONCERT that kids auditioned and prepared for. KIDS.

F-off with that political baloney about "DEIs infiltration of the Federal Government." Good grief. Kids. Concert. And you think this concert for children is "DEIs infiltration of the Federal Government?" Wow...

What I really want to say about that will violate the TOS, so I'll just stop here. But good grief this is some twisted nonsense.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-02-28 1:08 p.m.

Kids? Baby goats?

I think that while you are casting your aspersions unjustly, you are missing the point that exclusion does not mean inclusion.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 1:11 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]Kids? Baby goats?

I think that while you are casting your aspersions unjustly, you are missing the point that exclusion does not mean inclusion.[/quote]

Good. Explain it to me. Tell me how canceling this concert is a good thing for the country. And make it specific because I'm going to try to follow your reasoning...and determine whether it is, in fact, reasoning or merely a rationalization. Please. I'm sincere. Teach me how canceling this concert helps the country. Show me where I've gone astray.

And even more importantly, explain how this is good and just for the kids (not baby goats, DF) who auditioned, were chosen, and made plans for this concert. Explain how it's good for these kids and others, and not merely unnecessarily cruel.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-02-28 1:15 p.m.

What if you were a student, or high schooler, but were not allowed to audition for that opportunity because of the color of your skin? Is that racism or not? Well, the federal govt is no longer playing that divisive game with resources that come from Tax payers. I think the EO explains it much more tactfully and succinctly...

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 1:19 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]What if you were a student, or high schooler, but were not allowed to audition for that opportunity because of the color of your skin? Is that racism or not? Well, the federal govt is no longer playing that divisive game with resources that come from Tax payers. I think the EO explains it much more tactfully and succinctly...[/quote]

That's your explanation? To ask an incomplete hypothetical rhetorical question and cite to the EO, and not respond to my questions about how this is good for the kids who worked so hard?

I guess you can't explain it, after all. Which just confirms what I thought.

henrysa · by **henrysa** » 2025-02-28 1:23 p.m.

A bully move by a bully and his like kind. Ashamed! At least we can still voice our opinions with no fear of reprisal as surely the TBC has some of the finest attorneys in the world on retainer....can Trombone slides be used as bayonets? Asking for a friend.

tbdana · 2025-02-28 1:30 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]What if you were a student, or high schooler, but were not allowed to audition for that opportunity because of the color of your skin? Is that racism or not?[/quote]

But let me answer your question directly, as you could not answer mine: NO. THAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN DEFINITION OF RACISM.

I don't know about you, but I was excluded from all sorts of celebrations as a kid. The Boy Scouts were for boys only. Deaf schools were for the hearing impaired. Senior competitions weren't for juniors. The military isn't for people younger than 18 or older than 41. Classical music competitions weren't for rock 'n roll guitarists. I could go on and on.

This was supposed to be a concert for minority kids who worked hard and passed an audition. It could have been for Irish kids, or kids under 15 years old, or high school pianists, or whatever. The point is, there was a concert to celebrate a group of kids. The kids worked hard and were chosen. And the ONLY reason it was cancelled was because of the color of their skin. THAT is racism.

I don't see you whining about trombonists not being allowed to compete in a bassoon competition. And I don't see you explaining how cancelling this concert is good for these kids or for the country.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-02-28 1:30 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="tromboneVan" post_id="268505" time="1740766548" user_id="6540">
What if you were a student, or high schooler, but were not allowed to audition for that opportunity because of the color of your skin? Is that racism or not? Well, the federal govt is no longer playing that divisive game with resources that come from Tax payers. I think the EO explains it much more tactfully and succinctly...[/quote]

That's your explanation? To ask a loaded hypothetical rhetorical question and cite to the EO, and not respond to my questions about how this is good for the kids who worked so hard?

I guess you can't explain it, after all.
</QUOTE>

I answered your question. What about the other "kids" that were not allowed to audition, because of the color of their skin? Besides, there are many other organizations that you can give your money to who only give opportunities to certain races, under the guise of "inclusion", but the federal govt. where tax dollars are concerned isn't the place, and that is what the majority voted for. The President, elected by the people, is representing the will of the people. That is democracy. As far as the President's Own being "scrapped" as was quipped about earlier, I would assume that they did not catch the inaugural ceremonies where they were featured prominently.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 1:37 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]

I answered your question. What about the other "kids" that were not allowed to audition, because of the color of their skin?[/quote]

You mean junior high kids or grade school kids? Because this concert was only for high school kids, you know. I'm sure you wouldn't whine about just the color of their skin when the discrimination is also based on age, would you? Because that, my friend, would be racist.

But to answer, I guess they'll have to find a different competition. Like I said above, senior competitions aren't for juniors, the military isn't for senior citizens, the KKK isn't for black people, and so forth. It's something nice for a group of disadvantaged kids. Where is the harm in that? Why should white kids get to infiltrate a celebration for minorities? I guess we're not going to let military bands march in St Patricks Day parades anymore (as I marched in when I was in the military)?

Besides, there are many other organizations that you can give your money to who only give opportunities to certain races, under the guise of "inclusion", but the federal govt. where tax dollars are concerned isn't the place, and that is what the majority voted for.

Sorry, show me where the money is in this. The band gets paid the same whether they play this concert or not. The military budget is the same whether the band plays this concert or not. You're not being taxed extra for this concert, nor do you get a refund for it being cancelled. Where's this money you speak of?

The President, elected by the people, is representing the will of the people. That is democracy.

So, you believe that it is the will of the people that this particular concert gets cancelled? What people would those be?

tbdana · 2025-02-28 1:53 p.m.

My last post on this fetid thread. Here's my takeway:

The Marine Band (The President's Own) was set to play a concert featuring a bunch of minority high school kids. These are kids who auditioned from all over the country for the honor of playing with the Marine Band in a concert. They prepared, they auditioned, they won, they bragged about it, they made travel plans. Then the concert was cancelled. Why?

It was cancelled because the kids are black, and thus the concert was deemed "DEI" and cancelled.

Even if you're a stone cold racist who thinks DEI is a dirty word, you can't think that this is good. These are kids who worked hard for the chance to play with the Marine Band. It's not political. It won't help the country to cancel it. All it does is send a terrifyingly bad message to these kids. (And if you can't figure out what that message is, you might be part of the problem, but I'll explain it if you can't).

I swear, being cruel to children because they are black is among the most despicable -- ne, deplorable -- and harmful things that can be done, IMHO.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2025-02-28 3:07 p.m.

This is just another example of how the chaotic White House operates. This concert was planned during the previous administration. It resulted in a lot of people working hard to make it happen. Why should it be cancelled because somebody (who shall remain nameless, but has two numbers next to his Presidency) suddenly decides that the Bakke case (remember that?) applies here. Why couldn't he just have kept his mouth shut and let the thing happen and if he really doesn't want this type of thing to happen, cancel or not plan for any future cases?

Incidentally, the choice of African-American kids was because the concert was to happen during Black History Month. We could have a similar concert with just Italian-American kids during a celebration of Italian contributions to America, or Hispanic-American kids during a celebration of Hispanic contributions to America. I don't think this is DEI at work.

No, it just doesn't make sense.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-02-28 3:14 p.m.

Chaotic is your interpretation, but in my opinion it is all very much much planned with precision. You are right that it was contracted during the prior administration. it's the President's Own after all they have to follow the Order. The group it was with had the E word in the name. Don't shoot the messenger. Maybe now that Trump 47 is the chair at the Kennedy Center they'll run an effective trombone audition, one can hope.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 3:34 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]The group it was with had the E word in the name. Don't shoot the messenger.[/quote]

What word is that?

Maybe now that Trump 47 is the chair at the Kennedy Center they'll run an effective trombone audition, one can hope.

What does "effective" mean in that sentence? Was that the "E word"?

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2025-02-28 4:01 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="tromboneVan" post_id="268528" time="1740773696" user_id="6540">
The group it was with had the E word in the name. Don't shoot the messenger.[/quote]
Was that the "E word"?
</QUOTE>

The "E" word is Equity - as in Equity Arc (a nonprofit organization that provides “specialized mentoring support for young BIPOC musicians and helps institutions take meaningful steps toward equity and inclusion.”)

That word (along with Diversity and Inclusion) are now swear words in Washington, that will get you fired if you utter them. Promises kept!

Redthunder · by **Redthunder** » 2025-02-28 4:20 p.m.

TromboneVan isn’t acknowledging there is an entirely different concerto competition held by the marine band every year open to all. They either don’t know about it, or don’t care. They’d rather sit on TC taking a shit on the black and brown kids doing this performance and pretend he’s fighting the good fight, again, against children.

TromboneVan also probably doesn’t know or care that Americans from minority groups serve in the US military at a disproportionately higher rate than their distribution in the general population, and that everything the military does that is public facing, music related or not, is all PR and recruitment, and that axing this stuff that targets that particular population during historic lows in enlistment across the branches shows that this decision has nothing to do with “fairness”, or saving tax dollars, and everything to do with retribution.

But sure, “precision”.

robcat2075 · by **robcat2075** » 2025-02-28 4:33 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]What if you were a student, or high schooler, but were not allowed to audition for that opportunity because of the color of your skin? Is that racism or not?[/quote]

That question probably doesn't frame the realities of how this event happened..

The partner org, "Equity Arc" is an org founded to promote and support classical music aspirations among "Black, Indigenous and People of Color" students.

I think some black and Hispanic musicians were sitting around saying, "This rap music is the work of the devil and we want our kids to have some other option." So they are out to encourage talented minority students in a field in which they not typically encouraged. It isn't just about the cost of lessons. There is every peer and social pressure in those circles to not pursue such a thing.

Really? I believe so.

I was at a college band reunion last fall. While talking to the current band director I made the statement,"It was probably hopeless for a pricey Swedish Lutheran college to ever think it was going to attract many minority students."

"Oh, no! We have LOTS of black students at Augustana now..." he replied.

(At this point I'll note that I saw no black faces among the 120+ band alumni at the event, most from his tenure of the last 30 years.)

"But, " he continued, "NONE OF THEM play band instruments!"

So I sense that Equity Arc is out to provide create encouragement for this worthy pursuit.

But can't a talented minority student pursue the same track as anyone else? Yeah, but it's up hill all the way.

Several years ago I was at a cello festival watching a notable white performer give a master class to a young black cello player. The distance and impatience she showed to the student was visible. It was like she was revolted at having to interact with a black student. She wasn't like that at all with other (white) students who were performing for her that day. She was welcoming and enthusiastic for them.

Ouch.

But your main outrage is... Why did these student "of color" get a chance to perform with the Marine Band and white kids didn't??

I bet it was simply because they asked! I would bet you that ZERO of the standard music programs for achieving high schoolers that cater to well-heeled white and Asian kids ever thought of lowering themselves to call up the Marine Band and ask, "Hey, we have some talented kids in our program, is there something we could do with the Marine band to expose them to your musicians?"

I'm just guessing the initial contact was something like that. And I'll note that "educational outreach activities" is one of the things the Marine Band promotes as a reason for its continued existence.

So why not do it? People who are interested in a concert band these days are rare. You have to get them where you can.

Well, the federal govt is no longer playing that divisive game with resources that come from Tax payers.

You're right about that. This concert that was not costing the US taxpayers any more money than what has replaced it on the schedule of concert appearances by the Marine Band that were always going to happen anyway... is gone!

Message received: High Schoolers from "Equity Arc" are not fit to share the stage with the US Marine Band! They're too divisive!

tromboneVan · 2025-02-28 4:38 p.m.

[quote="Redthunder"]TromboneVan isn’t acknowledging there is an entirely different concerto competition held by the marine band every year open to all. They either don’t know about it, or don’t care. They’d rather sit on TC taking a shit on the black and brown kids doing this performance and pretend he’s fighting the good fight, again, against children.

TromboneVan also probably doesn’t know or care that Americans from minority groups serve in the US military at a disproportionately higher rate than their distribution in the general population, and that everything the military does that is public facing, music related or not, is all PR and recruitment, and that axing this stuff that targets that particular population during historic lows in enlistment across the branches shows that this decision has nothing to do with “fairness”, or saving tax dollars, and everything to do with retribution.

But sure, “precision”.[/quote]

Excellent about the concerto competition, being that it In the spirit of "open to all"... how does that contradict anything I said? That is exactly what the purpose of the EO is, to end discriminatory practices. Pointing to fact that the EO that the President's Own Marine Band would be in direct conflict with if they did perform this concert, is not something that should offend you so.

Redthunder · by **Redthunder** » 2025-02-28 4:44 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]Excellent about the concerto competition, being that it In the spirit of "open to all" how does that contradict anything I said?[/quote]

You don’t actually give a shit about any of this, you’re arguing in bad faith, and you tell on yourself by ignoring the longer second half of my post.

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2025-02-28 4:54 p.m.

But if off topic going on here but I don’t have time to go through everything posted here today.

The original article here is paywalled and I don’t have much of a desire to subscribe to the Washington Post. Do we know the people who were going to perform with the Marine band? And were they literally going to play with the Preisents own or were they using that term generically to mean one subset of Marine musicians? Do we know what the program was going to be?

Does anyone here know any of the affected musicians? Or someone who would?

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-02-28 4:56 p.m.

[quote="Matt K"]But if off topic going on here but I don’t have time to go through everything posted here today.

The original article here is paywalled and I don’t have much of a desire to subscribe to the Washington Post. Do we know the people who were going to perform with the Marine band? And were they literally going to play with the Preisents own or were they using that term generically to mean one subset of Marine musicians? Do we know what the program was going to be?[/quote]

Here is the archived article link:

Following executive orders, ‘The President’s Own’ Marine Band scraps concert

https://archive.is/skx6D

Matt_K · by **Matt_K** » 2025-02-28 5:10 p.m.

Okay so it looks like this was going to be a side-by-side.

Does anyone here know Stanford Thompson or Magee Capsouto? Seems like all the work has been done to audition the 30 players who were going to participate. This seems like a very solvable problem. Be it just rebranding this a recruitment activity (thus falling outside the bounds of whatever has been restricted) or a private group doing a side by side but it’s hard to know the direction to solve w/o knowing what the instrumentation was etc. and one of those two can probably fill in those details.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 5:16 p.m.

[quote="Matt K"]Okay so it looks like this was going to be a side-by-side.

Does anyone here know Stanford Thompson or Magee Capsouto? Seems like all the work has been done to audition the 30 players who were going to participate. This seems like a very solvable problem. Be it just rebranding this a recruitment activity (thus falling outside the bounds of whatever has been restricted) or a private group doing a side by side but it’s hard to know the direction to solve w/o knowing what the instrumentation was etc. and one of those two can probably fill in those details.[/quote]

Stanford Thompson says:

As you can imagine, almost two years of planning went into this event and it's not so easy to line up hotels, travel, coaches, rehearsal/performance venues, and funding to change course by the first weekend in May.

glenp · by **glenp** » 2025-02-28 5:17 p.m.

There's so many things I want to say. And maybe I will later, but that will take time I don't have today.

But I really want to say this for now:

I really wish we would elevate this conversation above the party line inflammatory rhetoric. Can we look past the fact that we strongly disagree on how to solve our nations problems, and focus on the fact that we care about this country (for those who are US citizens or live here), people, and music?

I think DEI is the wrong solution, but to a real problem. I don't think this concert should have been canceled. It's not like the Presidents Own organized an event that excluded white people from participating. That was coordinated by Equity Arc from what I can tell. And don't they have the right to do that? They're an independent organization with their own mission. Can't we allow a government organization/group to do a collab with an independent organization like that?

Can we move beyond the relatively simplistic mindset that "if you disagree with me and my party, then you're evil and you hate us"? Or that because you think DEI is the wrong solution you must be racist? C'mon - aren't we smarter than that here?

Edited to add:

Can’t we agree with a policy in general, but have compassion for those who are negatively affected and are innocent? Like the kids in this case? Or the government workers who are losing their jobs but were not responsible for any wasteful spending?

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 6:53 p.m.

[quote="glenp"]

Can’t we agree with a policy in general, but have compassion for those who are negatively affected and are innocent? Like the kids in this case?[/quote]

This is my entire point. And no, apparently we cannot agree.

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2025-02-28 7:00 p.m.

This is the kind of concert that should offend no one - it was an opportunity for kids from a background that makes them less likely to have access to quality instruction get that access for a few days, and then get to play a concert next to great inspiring players. No one is getting a job out of this - no one is getting or missing an opportunity to study at a prestigious institution for 4 years out of this. It's a single concert with some intensive rehearsals before - a chance to maybe spark some dreams.

By the way, the Kennedy Center has run some pretty good trombone auditions, both in the National Symphony and in the Opera orchestra. Some very fine players working there now, and for many decades before.

Jim Scott

LeTromboniste · 2025-02-28 7:02 p.m.

I'm sorry, but anyone who complains about DEI has absolutely no understanding of what DEI is, why it exists or how it works. It's as simple as that. DEI is not, and has never, ever been about discriminating against white people or men. It's about giving opportunities to people who have historically been systematically de facto denied these opportunities. In hiring, it doesn't mean hiring less qualified but more diverse people, it means making sure you go out of your way to also get applicants outside of your traditional applicant pool, because your traditional applicant pool had been systematically excluding people who DO deserve to be there, in favour of less qualified, less competent white dudes.

For educational opportunities such as the one discussed here, it can take any number of forms, including these kind of projects trying to promote participation of communities that are traditionally not included and giving them opportunities to acquire the skill so that the playing field is level. White kids don't get fewer opportunities because there was one side-by-side concert organised by an organisation that gives opportunities to young BIPOC musicians. You maybe want to look at how many of these kind of opportunities are still available to white kids where historically-marginalize people are still de facto excluded.

This is good for everyone. It's good for the employer that actually gets better people working for them, it's good for other employees who get better colleagues, better supervisors, etc. It's good for society because we move towards true equality and a truly even playing field. If you're against the idea that we should look for the best available people including within groups that are not traditionally considered, then you're advocating in favour of precisely the thing you're complaining about: favouring lesser qualified candidates because of their gender (man) and skin colour (white).

DEI is not about adding discrimination, it's about actively working to remove discrimination that is already there, deeply entrenched. The exclusion and marginalization of people who are not straight, white, cis men is real. It's not just something that used to be, it's something that still happens every day. It doesn't mean you personally as a white person are racist, or you personally as a man are sexist, and aknowledging the problem is not an attack against you. It means the system overall has biases, and is excluding people. DEI is meant to help counteract that. "Letting people get things by merit alone" is what we've been doing for hundreds of years and it has consistantly proven that it doesn't work. The idea might look great on paper, but in the actual reality, it inevitably, systematically leads to richer, paler-skinned, more masculine people getting more opportunities than they actually deserve on merit alone, and having better qualified, more deserving people from marginalised groups (women, BIPOC LGBTQ+, you name it) left out with fewer opportunities than they deserve.

Posaunus · by **Posaunus** » 2025-02-28 7:15 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]Here is the archived article link:

Following executive orders, ‘The President’s Own’ Marine Band scraps concert

https://archive.is/skx6D[/quote]

Did the author of this informative Washington Post article get something wrong? Was he deceived? Biased? :idk:

Was there something about this concert and side-by-side opportunity for the participants that was a danger to our national security, way of life, or even the new "Executive Order" downgrading the importance of DEI policies (or eliminating them entirely) that justified yanking the rug from beneath the feet of all these children who had worked so hard to achieve their dreams (not to mention the Marine Band members who were probably really looking forward to this event)? :idk:

Is it really not possible for our government to implement policies and cuts without adversely affecting and disrupting the lives of literally hundreds of thousands (or is it millions) of hard-working, earnest U.S. citizens in such a precipitous manner? Or was that the whole point? :idk:

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-02-28 7:22 p.m.

[quote="Posaunus"]Or was that the whole point? :idk:[/quote]

It pretty transparently is, and always was, the whole point

glenp · by **glenp** » 2025-02-28 7:36 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="glenp" post_id="268547" time="1740781070" user_id="10493">

Can’t we agree with a policy in general, but have compassion for those who are negatively affected and are innocent? Like the kids in this case?[/quote]

This is my entire point. And no, apparently we cannot agree.
</QUOTE>

I won’t give in to that. And I think we need to expect more of each other. I think we can find a way to disagree about solutions, and still respect and care for each other as people who have value.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-02-28 7:52 p.m.

[quote="glenp"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="268560" time="1740786788" user_id="16498">

This is my entire point. And no, apparently we cannot agree.[/quote]

I won’t give in to that. And I think we need to expect more of each other. I think we can find a way to disagree about solutions, and still respect and care for each other as people who have value.
</QUOTE>

I think that's a tough sell, because the positions and policies in question are entirely predicated on a lack of respect (when not an outright hatred) for certain groups, and a denial of their value as people. We don't get to demand compassion and respect from the very people who are everyday denied these very things.

elmsandr · by **elmsandr** » 2025-02-28 8:03 p.m.

It is pretty clear that the authors of the EO and the practices that accompany it want the mere presence of any person of color or woman in a position of prominence or authority is read as “DEI” and must be removed.

When the existence and humanity of others is called in to question, no, we can’t just ignore it.

Andy

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2025-02-28 8:14 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]I'm sorry, but anyone who complains about DEI has absolutely no understanding of what DEI is, why it exists or how it works. It's as simple as that. DEI is not, and has never, ever been about discriminating against white people or men. It's about giving opportunities to people who have historically been systematically de facto denied these opportunities. In hiring, it doesn't mean hiring less qualified but more diverse people, it means making sure you go out of your way to also get applicants outside of your traditional applicant pool, because your traditional applicant pool had been systematically excluding people who DO deserve to be there, in favour of less qualified, less competent white dudes.[/quote]

Couldn't have said it any better myself.

But, as we know, to a group that has always been at the apex of privilege, being treated equally to others (rather than much better than others, at the others' direct expense) is a downgrade. Can't have that!

glenp · by **glenp** » 2025-02-28 8:21 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]I'm sorry, but anyone who complains about DEI has absolutely no understanding of what DEI is, why it exists or how it works. It's as simple as that.[/quote]

First, I appreciate you taking the time to articulate your understanding of the merits of DEI. While the concepts are not new to me personally, I recognize that they might be for others.

The only part I take issue with is the statement I quoted. It seems to be an example of the Begging the Question fallacy. It assumes its own conclusion - that anyone who opposes DEI must not understand it.

That said, you have no burden to defend DEI to me, because I’ve not made a well reasoned charge against DEI, nor do I have any intention of doing so.

glenp · by **glenp** » 2025-02-28 8:39 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]I think that's a tough sell, because the positions and policies in question are entirely predicated on a lack of respect (when not an outright hatred) for certain groups, and a denial of their value as people. We don't get to demand compassion and respect from the very people who are everyday denied these very things.[/quote]

I hear what you’re saying.

To be clear though, the compassion I am calling for is for us all to have compassion toward those who are negatively affected by these changes. You already have that in this case. As do I.

And the respect I think we should all aim for, is to approach each other with the goal of understanding before we jump to conclusions and argue. Don’t assume that we have the only good solution and that anyone who disagrees with our solution must deny that there is a problem and that they must be evil. There’s not nearly enough effort being put into truly understanding each other. Instead I see people being very spring loaded and jumping at the opportunity to argue.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-02-28 8:52 p.m.

[quote="glenp"]<QUOTE author="LeTromboniste" post_id="268563" time="1740787329" user_id="3038">
I'm sorry, but anyone who complains about DEI has absolutely no understanding of what DEI is, why it exists or how it works. It's as simple as that.[/quote]

First, I appreciate you taking the time to articulate your understanding of the merits of DEI. While the concepts are not new to me personally, I recognize that they might be for others.

The only part I take issue with is the statement I quoted. It seems to be an example of the Begging the Question fallacy. It assumes its own conclusion - that anyone who opposes DEI must not understand it.

That said, you have no burden to defend DEI to me, because I’ve not made a well reasoned charge against DEI, nor do I have any intention of doing so.
</QUOTE>

Well I have yet to meet anyone strongly opposed to DEI who actually understands what it means and how it works in reality (that is, when they even recognize there is a problem in with the status quo in the first place). I'd be glad to be proven wrong, but I have a really hard time processing how one could truly understand the reasons for, and the actual mechanisms of DEI policies, and also think it's wrong (unless they DO want white men to have a leg up, in which case they're overtly racist and I don't see why their opinion on the matter should count). We have an existing system that is overwhelmingly discriminatory. Any measure that mitigates that, helps remove discrimination, and helps giving opportunities to deserving people who so far were denied these opportunities is a positive change compared to the status quo. I simply don't see a possible logically sound rationale for being against discrimination while also being against progress in mitigating discrimination.

Could we find better solutions, or refine the solutions we're already applying? I'm sure we can. Are there incompetent HR people and managers out there who are misapplying DEI policies and hiring lesser-qualified people in favour of diversity? I'm sure there are some, but so are there countless HR people and managers who are bad at their jobs or have deep biases and hire (or fail to fire) incompetent and undeserving white men. Just looking at the number of white male sexual predators with music university teaching jobs is a pretty clear sign that ill-qualified white dudes are not exactly struggling to land jobs as it is (let alone well-qualified ones). But returning to the so-called "meritocracy" (a complete misnomer as it does not actually involve merit – and it's also very debatable how far from it we had come) is not an improvement, and not a valid solution to the very small proportion or times where DEI might have been misapplied. Going back to the previous status quo means actively returning to wholesale discrimination and bias. There's no world where that is progress.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 9:27 p.m.

I keep thinking that there are fewer opportunities for women trombone players, and I imagine a group that created more opportunities for girls in music, which I think is laudable. And one thing they might do is hold an audition for the winners to play alongside the Marine Band, and what a wonderful opportunity that might be for girls who want to be trombonists or music educators. And I think that would be pretty cool and an important thing in their lives.

But then I think about it being cancelled because the Marines determined that such a concert would be construed as forbidden DEI. And I think about men coming in here to complain that it needed to be cancelled because the auditions weren't open to men. And I think about how such a thing would make those girls feel; these girls who worked for two years for the opportunity to play with The President's Own for one night, and who were filled with patriotic excitement about winning the chance to do that, only to have their spirits dashed because men weren't allowed to compete and take those spots, so they selfishly took away the opportunity those girls earned. Because, by god, if a man can't do it then nobody can do it.

Man, I still can't understand those white men who are against it. It just doesn't compute with me.

glenp · by **glenp** » 2025-02-28 9:33 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]And I think about men coming in here to complain that it needed to be cancelled because the auditions weren't open to men.[/quote]

Editing because I might have been wrong. I originally said that the only person who spoke in favor of canceling the concert was TromboneVan. They did not actually state that.

Apparently nobody has said in the forum that they support the cancellation of the concert.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-02-28 11:26 p.m.

[quote="glenp"]

Editing because I might have been wrong. I originally said that the only person who spoke in favor of canceling the concert was TromboneVan. They did not actually state that.

Apparently nobody has said in the forum that they support the cancellation of the concert.[/quote]

I stand corrected. Thank you.

Doubler · by **Doubler** » 2025-02-28 11:34 p.m.

I have no problem with diversity; it shows us that there can be a commonality of thought and aspiration among people of differing backgrounds. I have no problem with inclusion; going out of our way to reach out to and encourage those who may have wanted to participate but have previously been discouraged from doing so is a positive thing.

Equity, especially in the context and execution of DEI, is problematic. When groups previously excluded for whatever reason are given priority over others without regard to ability, fairness is not only ignored, but prohibited. This harms those with ability, as they would rightly conclude that their efforts are disregarded in favor of those with less qualification. This also harms the recipients of this misplaced desire to make things right by punishing people who had no part in their perceived inequality, in that it fosters a belief that social situation matters more than the results of effort. In a truly equitable scenario, accomplishment is rewarded, and we all are better for it, as it encourages everyone to improve themselves and the world around them.

How does this relate to the cancellation of the concert? Well, the concert could have proceeded as planned, giving the impression, however slight, that this is an acknowledgement that DEI is OK in some instances. On the other hand, cancelling the performance shows, to a similarly small degree, that there is no tolerance for unfairness. Neither choice is without flaws. A compromise, such as allowing this concert to proceed, and making a point of not continuing further performances involving bias toward perceived minorities, may have been a better, but still not entirely satisfactory, choice. A harsh reality, however, is that life's not always fair, and what one hopes for and expects doesn't always come to pass. This is a lesson we all learn at some stage of our lives, often at a young age. As painful as it may be, it gives us the opportunity to learn and to devise ways to overcome the disappointments life inflicts upon us.

WilliamLang · by **WilliamLang** » 2025-03-01 12:28 a.m.

DEI initiatives are great. I've been happy and proud to be a part of a few and will continue to participate in them in the future. This concert should have never been cancelled, and the cancellation is an admission of fear and cowardice.

Finetales · by **Finetales** » 2025-03-01 1:19 a.m.

[quote="Doubler"]When groups previously excluded for whatever reason are given priority over others without regard to ability, fairness is not only ignored, but prohibited.[/quote]

That's not DEI. That's what everyone who objects to DEI claims it is, and it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what DEI is.

As Maximilien has already explained beautifully, the whole point of DEI is to ensure that more qualified people of marginalized groups are not passed over for less qualified white men, which has been the norm in this country (and elsewhere) for centuries.

People arguing against DEI always claim that DEI is unnecessary because "if you're qualified (regardless of race/gender/sexuality/etc.), you'll get hired", but that's just not the reality. It is in fact exactly the reality that DEI is attempting to create.

Digidog · by **Digidog** » 2025-03-01 2:41 a.m.

[quote="glenp"]I won’t give in to that. And I think we need to expect more of each other. I think we can find a way to disagree about solutions, and still respect and care for each other as people who have value.[/quote]

.....but some values are either intact and upheld with no ambiguity, or else they are completely denied and refuted. Like the value of life; you cannot half value another person's life. You either admit that a person has a right to their life, or not.

This is why a binary division gets created when individuals or groups get denied their rights to a complete and worthy opportunity for a complete and worthy life, since even partial restrictions to those rights in the end actually means a total dismissal of their right to live.

Since life is either live or dead, the denial of conditions for a life in all its aspects and whatever it may be, is actually a binary statement of denial of life as a whole. Hence the expression "living dead".

....and yes: The opportunity to take part in an audition for a public performance, is very much a part of a worthy and complete life. This has nothing to do with the event per se, rather than the theoretical guidlines of whom gets access to all aspects of life in a society, and not.

The example of this concert, is almost an exact copy of how it started in Germany in the -30's.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-03-01 4:23 a.m.

[quote="Doubler"]Equity, especially in the context and execution of DEI, is problematic. When groups previously excluded for whatever reason are given priority over others without regard to ability, fairness is not only ignored, but prohibited. This harms those with ability, as they would rightly conclude that their efforts are disregarded in favor of those with less qualification.[/quote]

Again, that's not what Equity is, and that's not how DEI works. And even if it might be true that is has in some instances been misapplied that way, that happens a fraction of the the times where the exact opposite priority is still given. People being excluded didn't happen in a vacuum. They were excluded because white men were systematically prioritized, and to a large extent they still are, despite DEI efforts.

Also, do you realize how ironic it is that you follow your plee for fairness highlighted above with this?

[quote="Doubler"]A harsh reality, however, is that life's not always fair, and what one hopes for and expects doesn't always come to pass. This is a lesson we all learn at some stage of our lives, often at a young age. As painful as it may be, it gives us the opportunity to learn and to devise ways to overcome the disappointments life inflicts upon us.[/quote]

So marginalized communities need to accept that "life's not always fair", and this unfairness is good because it gives them opportunities to "learn and devise ways to overcome disappointments". Yet fairness towards white men is sacred and must be absolute. DEI gives the impression of "prohibiting fairness" at the expense of white men, so it must go. Heaven forbid that white men also realize that life's not always fair to them either, and have to deal with disappointments...or that they might have to face the hard truth that as hard as they legitimately have it in life, they're still overall more privileged than any other group and overwhelmingly prioritized.

I'm sure this bias you put on paper so plainly and clearly is not conscious, and that your intentions are good and you want fairness, and consider yourself a fair person. The fact that you have that unconscious bias, and that similarly, a lot of people in positions of power – bosses, HR, legislators, judges, cops, admissions officers, teachers, etc etc also have such biases, conscious or not – is precisely the reason why DEI is needed. Seriously, I couldn't have given a better illustration of it if I had tried.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-01 11:10 a.m.

DEI is dead on a federal level based on the stance the 47 administration has taken, that was the point of why the concert was cancelled, and what I think many are failing to understand just yet... That isn't my opinion, that is the fact of the matter under our current government.

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-03-01 11:13 a.m.

Yup, we know. And it’s stupid and short sighted and a bit evil.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-01 11:41 a.m.

[quote="Burgerbob"]Yup, we know. And it’s stupid and short sighted and a bit evil.[/quote]

There is a short sightedness that ignores the fact that the USA has been through a period of racial injustice. To do the same, but in reverse still sets the same precedent, which ultimately leads to more racial discrimination. I suggest that many re-examine these words of Martin Luther King jr. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character,”. Are you sure that you speak for all minorities, in espousing how great you think DEI is? It is a form of mental slavery to tell people that they need special treatment that excludes particular people in order that they are not over looked... actually the audition process is fair, and Americans of all races actually voted against these policies, in voting for Trump. That simply put does not mean Americans are bigots. That keeps the many minority members of society, who voted for Trump shackled to the woke-mental plantation, that the left is on, and assume that minorities in large believe in. I do not think that minorities really think they need that to succeed, and many are not for it... the majority of our country voted to end DEI, in voting for President Trump. He has a huge amount of support from both the black and hispanic community... What about their perspective, or do you speak for them? That is the point of a representative democracy, the point of voting. Yes you can bemoan the tyranny of the majority, but this is part of the challenge of the American system.

There is less of a minority presence in orchestras, and in classical music in general, because there is a smaller pool of applicants within that demographic. I do not disagree with the need for there to be more diversity, but that means creating a larger applicant pool to begin with, and many organizations are doing that. We can all agree that is a great thing. But it's dead as far as something the federal government is involved with funding, or even being attached to, and that is what the people voted for.

Kdanielsen · by **Kdanielsen** » 2025-03-01 11:56 a.m.

I stopped reading when you called diversity, equity, and inclusion “mental slavery.” I just can’t believe someone could write that and not understand how offensive that is. The lack of perspective is shocking.

NotSkilledHere · by **NotSkilledHere** » 2025-03-01 12:09 p.m.

Im not going to participate in arguing one way or another because frankly this can continue forever as finger pointing and everyone hating each other, but i will state what I have seen. Im Asian so take what I say however you decide to if you feel that has an impact on things for whatever reason.

On the ORIGINAL principles and intent and purpose of DEI, I do agree wholeheartedly on things. Everyone should be hired based on ability and qualifications and not race, gender, orientation, or whatever else might be used to discriminate against people.

However, like every movement, I think there are many instances where it has been taken advantage of by bad actors and abused in ways not originally intended. Does that mean I think the people acting properly with DEI should suffer from it? no. Do I think bad actors are abusing it everywhere? Absolutely

I think when DEI is implemented correctly, it's fine and works well. However, I have personally seen a couple bad actors cause my friend's company to go up in flames because those bad actors made hires of their personal friends with the excuse of DEI, when it was obvious to everyone that the person hired is more than unfit for the job and has no intention of actually putting in their work to complete their deliverables. and he couldn't just fire them and when he DID finally have cause to fire them because of more than 1 repeated offense of failed deliverables and workplace harassments and general disrespect based on complaints, it was too late and their failures had caused the company to lose customers and go under. and I think there are more instances of that than people are giving credit for.

Was that the fault of DEI? You can say no because the original principles and purpose of DEI were not meant to be used in that way. It was the fault of the people using it in the wrong way. You can also say yes because the way those bad actors acted was because DEI was used improperly to hire and KEEP PEOPLE HIRED that shouldn't have. So was it the fault of DEI? yes and no.

Do I think there are people claiming a business went up in flames because of DEI when it's definitely not? absolutely! no questions. Just like how I mentioned bad actors can abuse DEI to hire people, I think people can abuse those cases as precedent to claim DEI is the reason for something it didn't directly or indirectly cause.

Truth is DEI's fundamentals and idealogy is GOOD, but there are many cases of how it was implemented and used was BAD....and there are lots of people who have genuinely been on the bad end of that...and some genuinely had a bad taste directly about DEI because of that.

I'm not here to pour fuel on a fire or put out someone else's flame, but that's the truth.

I get it when people say DEI is necessary. I also get it when people feel that DEI is bad because of something they experienced. Both can be true at the same time simply based on the idea that the people implementing DEI may or may not be bad actors or misinterpreters of the intention and purpose of DEI.

I will now exit this thread return to browsing this forum for trombone content

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-03-01 12:18 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]To do the same, but in reverse still sets the same precedent, which ultimately leads to more racial discrimination.

...

It is a form of mental slavery to tell people that they need special treatment that excludes particular people in order that they are not over looked...[/quote]

Again, this is not what DEI is or how it works. It simply isn't. Stop listening to or reading whatever information sources convinced you it is, because it's not. And it's not like a better solution is being offered, to further improve things. The only solution proposed land currently enacted in your country) is to go back to the discrimination that's clearly proven itself over centuries to be rampant and debilitating.

Elections are not a single-issue vote. A majority of votes for a candidate or party doesn't mean the majority supports every single proposal or position of that candidate or party.

Beyond that, there's also such a thing as people not being well informed, or actually being misinformed. There is a worldwide crisis of information literacy, and the US in particular is suffering from that tremendously. The quality of information being fed to your people is absolutely abysmal, with a race to the lowest common denominator and appeals to everyone's lowest instincts. It's difficult and boring to explain how DEI works and why it's needed, and it requires humility a willingness to examine their bias on the part of the listener that many if not most leople don't have. Meanwhile, it's incredibly easy to spin it the other way, and use demagoguery to demonize it, and capitalize on the average person's wish to feel good about themselves and their natural tendency to think in individual terms first and not in terms of community or society.

[quote="NotSkilledHere"]Im not going to participate in arguing one way or another because frankly this can continue forever as finger pointing and everyone hating each other, but i will state what I have seen. Im Asian so take what I say however you decide to if you feel that has an impact on things for whatever reason.

On the ORIGINAL principles and intent and purpose of DEI, I do agree wholeheartedly on things. Everyone should be hired based on ability and qualifications and not race, gender, orientation, or whatever else might be used to discriminate against people.

However, like every movement, I think there are many instances where it has been taken advantage of by bad actors and abused in ways not originally intended. Does that mean I think the people acting properly with DEI should suffer from it? no. Do I think bad actors are abusing it everywhere? Absolutely

I think when DEI is implemented correctly, it's fine and works well. However, I have personally seen a couple bad actors cause my friend's company to go up in flames because those bad actors made hires of their personal friends with the excuse of DEI, when it was obvious to everyone that the person hired is more than unfit for the job and has no intention of actually putting in their work to complete their deliverables. and he couldn't just fire them and when he DID finally have cause to fire them because of more than 1 repeated offense of failed deliverables and workplace harassments and general disrespect based on complaints, it was too late and their failures had caused the company to lose customers and go under. and I think there are more instances of that than people are giving credit for.

Was that the fault of DEI? You can say no because the original principles and purpose of DEI were not meant to be used in that way. It was the fault of the people using it in the wrong way. You can also say yes because the way those bad actors acted was because DEI was used improperly to hire and KEEP PEOPLE HIRED that shouldn't have. So was it the fault of DEI? yes and no.

Do I think there are people claiming a business went up in flames because of DEI when it's definitely not? absolutely! no questions. Just like how I mentioned bad actors can abuse DEI to hire people, I think people can abuse those cases as precedent to claim DEI is the reason for something it didn't directly or indirectly cause.

Truth is DEI's fundamentals and idealogy is GOOD, but there are many cases of how it was implemented and used was BAD....and there are lots of people who have genuinely been on the bad end of that...and some genuinely had a bad taste directly about DEI because of that.

I'm not here to pour fuel on a fire or put out someone else's flame, but that's the truth.

I get it when people say DEI is necessary. I also get it when people feel that DEI is bad because of something they experienced. Both can be true at the same time simply based on the idea that the people implementing DEI may or may not be bad actors or misinterpreters of the intention and purpose of DEI.

I will now exit this thread return to browsing this forum for trombone content[/quote]

Yes, there is incompetence and/or malice everywhere. Is DEI being wrongly used in many places? I'm sure it is. Nepotism is a thing, whether it's being done with the cover of DEI or not. But when white people hire their white friends, we call it nepotism (rightly), and not a problem with DEI. When white men in general are being unduly prioritized over more qualified people, it's not a problem with DEI, it's business as usual, it's the overwhelmingly normal state of affairs.

Cmillar · 2025-03-01 1:44 p.m.

It's certainly sad that the 'President's Own' had to succumb to such evil, backwards, inhumane policy.

So...it's come down to these facts: (this IS the Tangents Forum)

- the Trump/Musk/Vance/Project 2025/Stephen Miller/GOP regime is built on an inherently racist view of the world. That's obvious by now and unquestionable. Unquestionable.

- they don't want to see people of color around them. That's obvious by now too. So...no DEI anywhere.

- Trump is wholly indebted to the Russians for the last 40 or more years of his 'business' life. They have the goods on him.

- the cowards and sycophants in the GOP Senate and Congress and even Judges/Lawyers are having their lives threatened if they don't go along with what the regime wants. Who's threatening them? Logically it's Putin/Russian mob henchmen.

(the facts are there...diligent reporters have done their homework....the dots are there to be followed....the trail is there....too many 'accidental deaths' over the last few decades and many, many instances of politicians just totally doing a '180 degree spin' overnight.) It may seem like a thriller/movie plot, but it's real life shit happening)

- only half the voters in the country bothered to vote. And only 24% of them voted for Trump. So, they don't have a mandate. They're attempting a complete coup and hoping to get away with it.

- ANYONE that voted for any GOP/Trump has to look at themselves in the mirror. THEY are part of the problem. THEY helped create the problem. That's not even open for debate.

- the regime is trying to make as many disruptions as they can right now, because the American people are catching on to what's really happening. Democrats and everybody is getting organized and laying low for awhile, which is smart. The tide will turn. There will be more chaos, but the tide will turn.

- if I was a military musician, I would expect complete chaos for a couple of years. And base closures. They've had a good run up until now. Musk won't want to see any tax payer dollars going to something as 'superfluous' as musicians, right? Do people think he'll do anything otherwise? Really?

- youth programs of any kind (music, sports, etc. ) will be treated like semi-Musk/nazi/tech youth training centers in the very close foreseeable future. Oh...and totally privatized if the GOP can get away with it. No tax payer dollars going anywhere to help America's youth. They sure as hell don't want to see any kids of color succeeding at anything.

- people have to wake up to the fact that Musk is an evil mother fricker. Pure evil. (well... so is Trump). That's not even debatable. He's certifiably nuts. (probably has syphilus or something too)

- this is the first real chaos the USA has ever experienced in it's history. It'll survive Trump. Other country's have gone through much worse in their own histories. It's going to be a rough couple of years though. Some storm before the calm.

- people won't just 'roll over' in the US. The tide will turn on Trump/Putin and their henchmen.

I'm a White Male. None of us has ever had to experience what people of color (any color) have had to go through during the history of the USA. And nothing has changed for African Americans...nothing. (If you don't have any black friends, then you have a lot to learn). Racism is rampant in the US. Always has been, and it's much worse in the southern states too.

If I was European or from somewhere else in the world, I'd advise against moving to the US for a few years. Why? You won't have any health care, job, place to live, etc.

OH... maybe you have $5 million to buy a Trump Gold Card that gives you an entry path? And then what?

May the Universal Creator look kindly upon this planet. Evil humans are trying to do evil things right now more than ever. Things will change, but not overnight.

WGWTR180 · by **WGWTR180** » 2025-03-01 1:44 p.m.

[quote="Kdanielsen"]I stopped reading when you called diversity, equity, and inclusion “mental slavery.” I just can’t believe someone could write that and not understand how offensive that is. The lack of perspective is shocking.[/quote]

I agree with you completely.

Kbiggs · by **Kbiggs** » 2025-03-01 2:18 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]There is a short sightedness that ignores the fact that the USA has been through a period of racial injustice. To do the same, but in reverse still sets the same precedent, which ultimately leads to more racial discrimination.[/quote]

There is so much in these two sentences, and in your posts above, that is (a) disingenuous, (b) logically flawed, and (c) inconsistent with the facts of history that I really don’t know where to begin. But I’ll try… Just wait a minute while I doff my political scientist’s hat… (Yes, in case you were wondering, I have a graduate degree in political science.)

To begin, the USA has not “been through” a period of racial injustice. It continues to experience racial injustice, and—some argue—was founded on the idea of exclusion and injustice. The so-called Pilgrims—Puritans, as they were known in England—came to America to found their own colony of like-minded believers. Another way to say it: they moved to a place they thought was deserted so they could be just as intolerant of others as people in England were intolerant of them.

As the country grew, large parts were founded on and relied upon systematic racial injustice. Fast-forward a few years, and the League of Confederate States lost the war. Despite that, the US South continued to deliberately and systematically exclude Black Americans from participating in government: sharecropping, Jim Crow laws, poll tax, literacy tests, red-lined housing districts, destruction of minority neighborhoods in the name of progress... At one time, Plessy v Ferguson was the law of the land despite the end of the Civil War.

The efforts of MLK, Malcom X, the Civil Rights Movement, etc., have not succeeded—yet. We have not been through a period of racial injustice. We continue to experience racial, gender, and faith-based injustice. DEI initiatives are not “racial discrimination in reverse.” They are an effort to help people who have been systematically excluded from political, financial, and social opportunities in this country. Ending DEI initiatives based on the whims of the privileged few does not mean that race-based injustice has ended. If anything, it will increase.

[quote="tromboneVan"]I suggest that many re-examine these words of Martin Luther King jr. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character,”. Are you sure that you speak for all minorities, in espousing how great you think DEI is? It is a form of mental slavery to tell people that they need special treatment that excludes particular people in order that they are not over looked…[/quote]

It takes a willfully blind eye to state that people of different races, colors, religions, genders, etc., are on equal footing in America, never mind in Trump’s America. As examples, in pay and hiring, non-white people and non-male people on the whole continue to receive pay lower than white males, given the same jobs and performance evaluations. If they have a last name that is perceived to be not-White, people with white-looking names are considered over them in a pool of candidates with similar work histories and credentials.

Another example: Think of the continued efforts of many so-called red states to gerrymander political districts to under-represent non-white voters, thus diluting their political power.

King also stated, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice." That is simply an acknowledgement of the length that such battles—which have been and will continue to be fought throughout history—will take. It is also, along with his “I have a dream” speech, a statement of hope.

Ah, the old “mental slavery” argument. That’s simply a red herring. In this particular case, it’s a red herring that is spoiled and stinks. No one who advocates for DEI initiatives specifically, or who has worked for justice in general, has suggested that non-white people are in any way inferior, and that they need to be promoted because they are in any way “less than” white Americans. That turns the argument on its head. People who are against racial, religious, and gender equality put forth that fallacy that to level the playing field is to give preferential treatment. If anything, the history of the US demonstrates that white Christian males have an unfair advantage in life—period. They receive preferential treatment based largely upon the fact that they are white. (And yes, in case you are wondering, they are many psychological and sociological studies that demonstrate this.)

Yes, in some cases, governments in America have put policies in place that have incorrectly promoted non-white, non-Christian, non-male candidates over white, Christian, male candidates. The proper—and just—way to address inequalities like this is in court. To eliminate an entire a program that has helped so many people who have fewer opportunities is, to use yet another metaphor, throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[quote="tromboneVan"]I do not think that minorities really think they need that to succeed, and many are not for it... the majority of our country voted to end DEI, in voting for President Trump.

He has a huge amount of support from both the black and hispanic community... What about their perspective, or do you speak for them? That is the point of a representative democracy, the point of voting. Yes you can bemoan the tyranny of the majority, but this is part of the challenge of the American system.[/quote]

“Many are not for it.” I would be very interested to see how many you believe is “many.” “He has a huge amount of support from both the black and hispanic community...” I would also be very interested to see how many you believe is “a huge amount of support.”

The majority of the US did not vote to end DEI, even though Trump’s agenda was plain to see for anyone who cared open their eyes (See “Project 2025” in general.) Trump did not win the popular vote, although he did win the Electoral College vote, which is all that matters these days. (As an aside, the Electoral College, as initially put in place, was actually quite fair and in keeping with The Founder’s idea of diluting power and frustrating factions [read: political parties], but the machinations of Thomas Jefferson put an end to it.)

A minority of Americans—less than 50%—voted for Trump because they believed what he said despite facts. (Did Trump tell the truth? No. Did he lie? Yes. Did he do so in order to win the presidency? Yes.)

We currently do not have a tyranny of the majority. What we have in America is a tyranny of the minority: a small and vocal minority has managed to seize power through lies and deception and are now re-writing the rules in their own favor. It’s a familiar historical ploy: create an emergency, present yourself as The One to Save America (or Athens, or Rome, or Weimar Germany, or 1968 Hungary), exert influence to gain power, and then use the trappings of legitimate government to end it.

[quote="tromboneVan"]There is less of a minority presence in orchestras, and in classical music in general, because there is a smaller pool of applicants within that demographic. I do not disagree with the need for there to be more diversity, but that means creating a larger applicant pool to begin with, and many organizations are doing that. We can all agree that is a great thing. But it's dead as far as something the federal government is involved with funding, or even being attached to, and that is what the people voted for.[/quote]

“…many organizations are doing that.” Just because some organizations have started to do such things does not mean that many are doing that.

“…it's dead as far as something the federal government is involved with funding.” It was killed through executive fiat, not through legislative action. And as we all know, Congress makes and passes laws. The President is charged with executing the law. I, for one, would argue that Trump is not executing the law of the land in good faith. He is picking and choosing in an arbitrary and capricious manner those laws he likes and wants (those that will help him and his followers gain more wealth and power), and illegally ending those he doesn’t want (those he dislikes or hates).

“..and that is what the people voted for.” Again: no.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-01 2:31 p.m.

There's a lot of assumptions, ad hominem attacks, casual use of terms like "bigots" when speaking to the majority of your fellow country... some are analyzing America from overseas as if they know better than what you observe and see on your own soil with your own eyes, not to mention their shallow understanding of history. What is disingenuous is to say that it isn't a major majority that support & elected a president, and thus also were voting in favor of those policies. There are many black and hispanic and minority voters who support Trump, so it gets tiresome hearing the same unfounded tropes tossed around so casually, thus discounted and lumping individuals together by race, as if there isn't anything but White people that support Trump. . The majority of people are not so ignorant and stupid, and see the truth for what it is, rather than the divisive lies and tactics designed to divide people, rather than unite.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-03-01 3:16 p.m.

Honestly, it's a very white movement.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2025-03-01 4:12 p.m.

I should point out that many Blacks and especially Hispanics voted for Trump not so much because of his program but because of the gender of his opponent. We saw this in both elections he won. Note that when he ran against a male opponent he lost.

Sorry, I know no politics but this has degenerated into a political discussion.

If in fact there was no discrimination against races or genders in this country we would not need DEI. But there is, so we still do.

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2025-03-01 4:26 p.m.

It's shocking and fascinating at the same time to watch this mess from Europe.

Zero morals, pure opportunistic behavior. Old rich men trying to be even more powerful and a huge amount of voters who wanted it that way and another probably bigger group who didn't understand it before.

Also, as a dad of a heavily disabled kid I am very happy that I have just today seen her being part of an inclusive musical production and getting the support and acceptance that she needs every day.

Glad NOT to live in the US. I hope this takes max a few years until it sorts itself out again.

Cmillar · by **Cmillar** » 2025-03-01 4:48 p.m.

[quote="Kbiggs"]<QUOTE author="tromboneVan" post_id="268621" time="1740847309" user_id="6540">
There is a short sightedness that ignores the fact that the USA has been through a period of racial injustice. To do the same, but in reverse still sets the same precedent, which ultimately leads to more racial discrimination.[/quote]

There is so much in these two sentences, and in your posts above, that is (a) disingenuous, (b) logically flawed, and (c) inconsistent with the facts of history that I really don’t know where to begin. But I’ll try… Just wait a minute while I doff my political scientist’s hat… (Yes, in case you were wondering, I have a graduate degree in political science.)

To begin, the USA has not “been through” a period of racial injustice. It continues to experience racial injustice, ..........

</QUOTE>

Yes, on everything you say. You know.

People that try to 'toss off' racial discrimination as some kind of 'temporary glitch' or something like that are beyond arguing with. They're too far gone at this point.

Or, they've lead extremely sheltered lives. Maybe never been out of their home town.

Pretty sad.

This moment in time...right now... is showing people's 'true colors'.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-01 5:13 p.m.

Pretty sad how some treat others on here, not much diversity of ideas on this forum. Your mentality is because someone disagrees with you, they aren't entitled to an opinion. Just screeching ideologues with no facts to back up their rhetoric. You act like the President's Own was going to disobey EO 13985 obviously are very naive about how the military operates... that isn't my opinion, that is the obvious fact of the matter as to why the concert was cancelled.. see to what extremes that you stretch the conversation to morph it into some form of attack against wrong think?

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-03-01 5:32 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]You act like the President's Own was going to disobey EO 13985[/quote]

Let's just emphatically add that no one[/u][/i] blames the band. They were just following the president's order the best they knew how. You have completely misunderstood what people are saying. So, that's yet another thing you've gotten wrong, here.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-01 6:16 p.m.

I haven't misunderstood anything, I do regret answering your questions so you could twist my words around. You expect people to jump when you say jump, but nobody owes you that.

<LINK_TEXT text="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E ... ger_effect">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect</LINK_TEXT>

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2025-03-01 6:58 p.m.

It was not a "major majority" that elected the current occupant of the White House. I'll leave it up to someone else to google the popular vote stats (I have to leave for work soon - don't have the time), but Trump received somewhere just a couple of points shy of 50%, Harris was a couple of percentage points behind him, and the remaining small percentage left went to 3rd party candidates. The Electoral College results makes it seem like a larger win for him, than it was in terms of actual votes. I will not dispute that he won, and that the Electoral College is the system we use - so there is no one crying "rigged election" as was falsely claimed in 2020.

Of the people that voted for him, a significant portion were Independants hoping for lower egg prices, etc. They don't seem to be getting that, and the polling suggests that they too are not very fond of the way things are going. I would guess that many of them are also saddened to see some high-achieving kids from some marginalized communities miss out on an inspiring event like this for no justifiable reason.

I read your Wikipedia attachment - you might wish to take a look in the mirror and read back your own words from your numerous posts - it might strike you as being ironic if you actually use some reasoning.

Jim Scott

bitbckt · by **bitbckt** » 2025-03-01 7:07 p.m.

49.8% of voters who showed up (63.9% of eligible) is the number you’re looking for, Jim. No “major majority” to be found.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-03-01 7:13 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]Pretty sad how some treat others on here, not much diversity of ideas on this forum. Your mentality is because someone disagrees with you, they aren't entitled to an opinion.[/quote]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Nobody, however, is entitled to not have their opinion challenged after they express it. Freedom of speech is not freedom to say anything you want without anyone responding; it's freedom to say what you want and for anybody to say what they want in return. Nobody called you names, nobody threatened you. Merely disagreeing with you and challenging the opinions you expressed is not treating you badly, it's called having a discussion, which is what an online forum is for.

Moreover, everyone is indeed entitled to any opinion, but that's not to say all opinions have equal validity. I'd be entitled to the opinion that the universe orbits around the earth, or that the oceans are filled with monsters that will swallow any ship that ventures beyond the horizon from land, but that doesn't mean those opinions have any validity to them, or that you'd be doing something wrong when you'd tell me my opinions have no basis in fact.

elmsandr · by **elmsandr** » 2025-03-01 9:20 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]Pretty sad how some treat others on here, not much diversity of ideas on this forum. Your mentality is because someone disagrees with you, they aren't entitled to an opinion. Just screeching ideologues with no facts to back up their rhetoric. You act like the President's Own was going to disobey EO 13985 obviously are very naive about how the military operates... that isn't my opinion, that is the obvious fact of the matter as to why the concert was cancelled.. see to what extremes that you stretch the conversation to morph it into some form of attack against wrong think?[/quote]
I love the invocation of ‘wrong think’ when the actual targeting group is the one that is purging things based on wording.

~~[url]~~<LINK_TEXT text=" https://www.military.com/daily-news/20 ... roops.html"> https://www.military.com/daily-news/2025/02/28/respect-among-key-words-army-using-delete-online-content-related-women-minority-troops.html</LINK_TEXT>

And yes, when you stand up to defend these actions, this is openly inviting bigots to the table. And you know what? When you sit with the bigots and empower them… that makes your actions those of a bigot… I don’t care what you believe in your heart or how you want to talk about it later; actions matter. You have a choice, and it is your choices that are earning you feedback.

May you have the day you deserve,

Andy

Doubler · by **Doubler** » 2025-03-01 10:15 p.m.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]<QUOTE author="Doubler" post_id="268588" time="1740803673" user_id="4261">
Equity, especially in the context and execution of DEI, is problematic. When groups previously excluded for whatever reason are given priority over others without regard to ability, fairness is not only ignored, but prohibited. This harms those with ability, as they would rightly conclude that their efforts are disregarded in favor of those with less qualification.[/quote]

Again, that's not what Equity is, and that's not how DEI works. And even if it might be true that is has in some instances been misapplied that way, that happens a fraction of the the times where the exact opposite priority is still given. People being excluded didn't happen in a vacuum. They were excluded because white men were systematically prioritized, and to a large extent they still are, despite DEI efforts.</QUOTE>

I hope we can agree that equity has to do with the fairness of treating people equally, regardless of race, religion, or creed. In the context of DEI, this ideal has at times become revenge for past wrongs, for example, by disqualifying the best or equally capable candidates for a position in favor of ones whose demographic has been treated unfairly in the past and whose abilities may or may not be equal to that of the members of a perceived favored group, such as your example of those whom you call white men.

Also, we must be careful when categorizing people into groups, that we do not assume that all members of that group share all characteristics assigned to that group. For example, you could say that a particular ethnic group votes for a particular political party, when in fact 80% do, and 20% vote for the opposite party. It is lazy, misleading, prejudicial, and dishonest to treat all members of that group as if they vote in a bloc, instead of individually.

[quote="LeTromboniste"]Also, do you realize how ironic it is that you follow your plee for fairness highlighted above with this?

<QUOTE author="Doubler" post_id="268588" time="1740803673" user_id="4261">
A harsh reality, however, is that life's not always fair, and what one hopes for and expects doesn't always come to pass. This is a lesson we all learn at some stage of our lives, often at a young age. As painful as it may be, it gives us the opportunity to learn and to devise ways to overcome the disappointments life inflicts upon us.[/quote]

So marginalized communities need to accept that "life's not always fair", and this unfairness is good because it gives them opportunities to "learn and devise ways to overcome disappointments". Yet fairness towards white men is sacred and must be absolute. DEI gives the impression of "prohibiting fairness" at the expense of white men, so it must go. Heaven forbid that white men also realize that life's not always fair to them either, and have to deal with disappointments...or that they might have to face the hard truth that as hard as they legitimately have it in life, they're still overall more privileged than any other group and overwhelmingly prioritized.

I'm sure this bias you put on paper so plainly and clearly is not conscious, and that your intentions are good and you want fairness, and consider yourself a fair person. The fact that you have that unconscious bias, and that similarly, a lot of people in positions of power – bosses, HR, legislators, judges, cops, admissions officers, teachers, etc etc also have such biases, conscious or not – is precisely the reason why DEI is needed. Seriously, I couldn't have given a better illustration of it if I had tried.
</QUOTE>

Please don't misinterpret my comments. When I say that life's not always fair, I mean that life's not always fair, universally, and unfairness is never good. We nevertheless fare better when we find ways to cope with injustice than when we adopt a victim mentality that closes off the possibility of overcoming adversity. Clearly many people of all backgrounds have faced and overcome unfairness, sometimes in spectacularly positive ways. And please don't accuse me of having harmful bias, unconscious or otherwise; I am aware of the effects of privilege and lack of privilege, and I am aware of who has been associated with both, and imposing unfairness under the guise of "Equity" will not produce the desired outcome.

hornbuilder · by **hornbuilder** » 2025-03-01 10:55 p.m.

Thank you Cmiller and Kbiggs!!!

Digidog · by **Digidog** » 2025-03-02 3:16 a.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]There's a lot of assumptions, ad hominem attacks, casual use of terms like "bigots" when speaking to the majority of your fellow country... some are analyzing America from overseas as if they know better than what you observe and see on your own soil with your own eyes, not to mention their shallow understanding of history. [/quote]

During my years as a student of music, I happened to have three teachers whom all one way or the other escaped the Holocaust. Two managed to flee with parts of their families before they could be arrested, and one was actually sent to Auschwitz with her whole family. Sadly, but naturally, they are all passed now. The last only a couple of years ago.

They all said that cancellations exactly like this, and the denial of rights to pursue their studies and practise on equal terms and in the same spaces of society, was how the slide towards the ultimate disaster began.

[quote="tromboneVan"]What is disingenuous is to say that it isn't a major majority that support & elected a president, and thus also were voting in favor of those policies. There are many black and hispanic and minority voters who support Trump, so it gets tiresome hearing the same unfounded tropes tossed around so casually, thus discounted and lumping individuals together by race, as if there isn't anything but White people that support Trump. . The majority of people are not so ignorant and stupid, and see the truth for what it is, rather than the divisive lies and tactics designed to divide people, rather than unite.[/quote]

Lying to voters and false pretenses, are as old as politics itself. It cannot come as a surprise to anyone, that propaganda, silencing of criticism and outright buying of votes are some of the tools of a totalitarian fascist and corrupt admirer of violence and coercion.

For me, as a bystander looking at it from Europe, the whole process is so similar to the slide towards the nazi dictatorship and the subsequent Holocaust, that it's genuinely frightening. Even some terms and phrasings are almost the exact same, not to mention that rabid tech bro's onstage heiling.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-02 3:35 a.m.

[quote="tbdana"]Honestly, it's a very white movement.

[/quote]

claf · by **claf** » 2025-03-02 4:19 a.m.

[quote="BGuttman"]I should point out that many Blacks and especially Hispanics voted for Trump not so much because of his program but because of the gender of his opponent. We saw this in both elections he won. Note that when he ran against a male opponent he lost.[/quote]

From my European point of view, that's exactly what happened.

People didn't vote for Trump, they voted against a woman (not to mention she also was of mixed origins).

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-03-02 5:01 a.m.

[quote="Doubler"]

I hope we can agree that equity has to do with the fairness of treating people equally, regardless of race, religion, or creed. In the context of DEI, this ideal has at times become revenge for past wrongs, for example, by disqualifying the best or equally capable candidates for a position in favor of ones whose demographic has been treated unfairly in the past and whose abilities may or may not be equal to that of the members of a perceived favored group, such as your example of those whom you call white men.[/quote]

For the umpteenth time, it's not what DEI is, does, how it works or what it aims for. Y'all need to stop drinking the Kool Aid.

[quote="Doubler"]Please don't misinterpret my comments. When I say that life's not always fair, I mean that life's not always fair, universally, and unfairness is never good.[/quote]
Except its not been the case "universally", has it? Life is more unfair to some than it is to others, is the whole point of this. White men, on average, face way less "unfairness" than anybody else. And I'm saying that as one of them. When they have it better than everyone else, you can bet it's because they're having better at everybody else's expense. Trying to prevent that is not creating more injustice, it's removing injustice that's already there, imbedded in the system.

[quote="Doubler"]And please don't accuse me of having harmful bias, unconscious or otherwise;[/quote]
Everyone has harmful biases, conscious or not. Everyone. You never fully get rid of them, there's always one more buried a little deeper. You just reiterated, in essence that "it's good for them to face unfairness, that's how they'll fare better and stop having a victim mentality", while victimizing white men for supposedly being discriminated against (which they're simply not). That's bias. It's plainly obvious to the reader and jumps off the screen.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-02 8:48 a.m.

You are the most dismissive person on the forum, who has drank the most of the kool-aid, yet, look at the representation of minorities in your ensembles. Are they represented or not? Is it simply that you don't have a large demographic of minorities in your country, in early music even less, right? See you can't make people out of thin air, they have to exist in the fist place to be taking the auditions to be in the audition pool to be considered.. in the same audition as everyone else. People want to be treated equally. It's actually a form of abuse to coddle. Do you not see how your bias jumps off the screen? You come off as a screeching ideologue, and a hypocrite because you don't walk the walk with your own ensembles. I see less than 50% female representation in your groups, too. That is another topic you were very vocal about. But are you just a theorist or do you ever practice your racial / gender theory? It's very clear who the real racists and sexists are, because all you focus on in every forum conversation is race and gender. You don't just get to say "you're wrong, I'm right" all the time, and have that mean anything for people with multiple braincells, who think for themselves. No matter how many times you take mine and others thoughts out of context, mince people's statements, and say Im right you're wrong, you are still in a very small vocal minority that things in such an ignorant way. Hence, why people in America love Trump,... because you are not a representative or even part of the sample group, or a voting member of our society. It's again, Dunning-Kruger. You simply do not know what you do not know. This is a problem with the more arrogant you are, and the more you think you know.. when in fact you know less and less the more arrogant and lacking of humility you are as a person. You may not, but I see my black and brown MAGA family and I am glad that their voice was heard, and that we have a true representative government, working for the people. It really doesn't matter what you Swiss-Canadians and German people think because you don't vote in American elections.... keep screeching to the 10 people that will listen to you here, because it is going to be a long couple years without slamming that ignore button.

hornbuilder · 2025-03-02 9:14 a.m.

musicofnote · by **musicofnote** » 2025-03-02 9:32 a.m.

It's really rather amusing that almost everyone posting on this thread simply accepts either actively or passively the Trumpian & Co. definition of what DEI is and how it operates

EXCEPT

the dude from Germany, who tried to explain what it's really for and what it's not, how and why it really was applied and how it wasn't, what separates the facts from the political hyperbole. But that doesn't really matter in today's non-fact world.

As for me, as a refugee who had to pay ransom to obtain his freedom from Uncle Sam, I look at all this, in all it's layers, and similar to what Berthold Brecht wrote after he was forced out of Germany in 1935, and feel an intense feeling of Schadenfreude, as he did at the time.

From a friend:

„What is DEI? When we don’t have full knowledge of things we tend to make judgements on what others say it is

So in case you don’t know really what DEI means here’s some info to help you see -

Some of what DEI is:

-ramps and sidewalk curb cuts

-subtitles & captions (TV & phone)

-family restrooms

-changing tables in men’s restrooms

-breast feeding/pumping stations & accommodations

-floating paid holidays

-pay equity & transparency

-parental leave (time & pay)

-coming back to a job after birthing a child

-not having to just accept workplace harassment

-work accommodations for a variety of disabilities

-flexible work arrangements

-size inclusive chairs and beds in medical facilities

-belt extenders on planes

-various food options for vegetarians/vegans/kosher/gluten-free/etc at medical facilities

-non smoking areas/end of smoking indoors

-being able to have medical professionals and your coworkers use your preferred name (not just queer people have those)

-wellness programs and incentives

-more relaxed & inclusive dress code policies

-rooms to pray/meditate at work & other public places

-employee recognition programs

-employee/network resource groups

-large print materials

-materials in different languages

-multiple religious options at hospitals

-accessible bikes and public transit accommodations

-businesses not becoming fully cashless

-company-covered mental/behavioral health resources

Some of What DEI isn’t:

-hiring an under qualified person for a job just because they’re a person of color

-hiring based on race just to meet diversity goals (this is illegal)

-a new fad or buzz word. DEI work has been going on for many many years, under different names“

officermayo · by **officermayo** » 2025-03-02 11:48 a.m.

[quote="claf"]<QUOTE author="BGuttman" post_id="268648" time="1740863531" user_id="53">
I should point out that many Blacks and especially Hispanics voted for Trump not so much because of his program but because of the gender of his opponent. We saw this in both elections he won. Note that when he ran against a male opponent he lost.[/quote]

From my European point of view, that's exactly what happened.

People didn't vote for Trump, they voted against a woman (not to mention she also was of mixed origins).
</QUOTE>

They voted against an idiot puppet put in place by the same machine that pushed out Biden.

ghmerrill · by **ghmerrill** » 2025-03-02 12:00 p.m.

[quote="musicofnote"]-hiring based on race just to meet diversity goals (this is illegal)[/quote]

I really don't want to get involved in the broader discussion here for several different reasons, but I would at this point like to offer the observation that I in fact have been subjected to this as a manager, hiring for a fairly high-level technical position. Is it illegal? Yes. But so what? I was still pressured very heavily, and directly by the head of HR, in a very well-known company (long known for its workplace improvements and benefits to, and care of, employees), to make a specific hiring decision (between two very qualified candidates) purely on the basis of race and sex (that ticked two boxes at once) and despite my very detailed arguments that the other candidate was more qualified for the job. By happenstance, the other candidate was in fact a member of a different minority which has often been subjected to prejudice, but that one doesn't seem to count nowadays. When I pointed that out, it was quickly tossed aside as irrelevant; and any question of a "dueling minorities" situation was dodged. The goals were clear.

In a private phone conversation with the head of HR (an intelligent and otherwise reasonable and very nice man) I pointed out that what he was asking me to do (and he was asking me in no uncertain language to make the decision based on race and sex) violated federal law, in addition to being of at least questionable morality. He did not deny that it was a violation of federal law, but tried to circumvent that by offering the argument that the "minority candidate" was in fact "more qualified" for the position in this case precisely because she was a minority candidate. Reflect on that for a moment, but please don't try to take the tack that this attitude and argument is independent of the original motivations and justifications regarding hiring minority candidates in such situations. In such circumstances, there are various reasons why imposing prejudice in favor of minority candidates may be of significant benefit to a company. If you don't know that, you haven't spent much time over the past 30 years in business or industry, or you haven't paid attention.

There is in fact a straightforward argument here that in such circumstances the minority candidate (while not as qualified in any objective sense for the position as advertised) is in fact "better" for the company (in terms of its compliance statistics and criteria for awarding federal sales contracts -- or even contracts with private companies which impose various preferences). I reject the ultimate cogency of such arguments, but won't delve further into that. Anyone should be able to work it out.

This got to the point where I was becoming fairly confident that I was risking my job and might well be fired, for something pertaining to violation of company policy or some such -- although, as in many jobs, continuation of employment is "at will" (again, yes, commensurate with law, but ...). I said to my wife "I may actually get fired over this." Her response was "Yeah, whatever." I was actually taking home with me printed records, should I need them in order to press my case with other management. Independent of that, however, my immediate (director level) manager stood behind me and HR grudgingly backed off. But they gave it the best try they could, and from their highest levels.

So yeah, hiring based on race just to meet diversity goals is illegal. But so what? That doesn't mean it isn't tried, and it doesn't mean it isn't (and hasn't been) done. If you don't know that this sort of thing has gone on for decades, you just haven't been part of much going on in business and industry at a management level.

-a new fad or buzz word. DEI work has been going on for many many years, under different names“

Indeed it has. The new fad and buzz word have just made certain things more visible, and called more attention to them.

Kbiggs · by **Kbiggs** » 2025-03-02 12:43 p.m.

tromboneVan’s most recent post:

<ATTACHMENT filename="IMG_0401.png" index="1">~~[attachment=1]~~IMG_0401.png</ATTACHMENT>

One picture does not tell the whole story. This picture, like other similar pics, is the exception that proves the rule.

Look to the demographics here: <LINK_TEXT text="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Unit ... mographics">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election#Voter_demographics</LINK_TEXT>

The Clif’s Notes version:

<ATTACHMENT filename="IMG_0400.jpeg" index="0">~~[attachment=0]~~IMG_0400.jpeg</ATTACHMENT>

Kbiggs · by **Kbiggs** » 2025-03-02 1:05 p.m.

And here, tromboneVan resorts to ad hominem attacks, switching the subject, and attempting to paint his opponent with the same brush he himself has been painted:

[quote="tromboneVan"]You are the most dismissive person on the forum, who has drank the most of the kool-aid, yet, look at the representation of minorities in your ensembles. Are they represented or not? Is it simply that you don't have a large demographic of minorities in your country, in early music even less, right? See you can't make people out of thin air, they have to exist in the fist place to be taking the auditions to be in the audition pool to be considered.. in the same audition as everyone else. People want to be treated equally. It's actually a form of abuse to coddle. Do you not see how your bias jumps off the screen? You come off as a screeching ideologue, and a hypocrite because you don't walk the walk with your own ensembles. I see less than 50% female representation in your groups, too. That is another topic you were very vocal about. But are you just a theorist or do you ever practice your racial / gender theory? It's very clear who the real racists and sexists are, because all you focus on in every forum conversation is race and gender. You don't just get to say "you're wrong, I'm right" all the time, and have that mean anything for people with multiple braincells, who think for themselves. No matter how many times you take mine and others thoughts out of context, mince people's statements, and say Im right you're wrong, you are still in a very small vocal minority that things in such an ignorant way. Hence, why people in America love Trump,... because you are not a representative or even part of the sample group, or a voting member of our society. It's again, Dunning-Kruger. You simply do not know what you do not know. This is a problem with the more arrogant you are, and the more you think you know.. when in fact you know less and less the more arrogant and lacking of humility you are as a person. You may not, but I see my black and brown MAGA family and I am glad that their voice was heard, and that we have a true representative government, working for the people. It really doesn't matter what you Swiss-Canadians and German people think because you don't vote in American elections.... keep screeching to the 10 people that will listen to you here, because it is going to be a long couple years without slamming that ignore button.[/quote]

I will grant you that some people in America love Trump. Certainly, not all people in America love Trump.

And no, America is not a “true representative government, working for the people.” No form of representation is perfect or ideal. They all have flaws. At the moment, I would venture to say that the current administration is not “working for the people.” I might argue that the current administration’s slash-and-burn tactics have harmed far more people in one month than almost any governmental action (or inaction) since the Great Depression… but I do not have facts or figures to back that up.

If I were to summarize the current state of affairs in the US and predict its trajectory, I might say something like this:

“The current administration is making a sincere attempt to overthrow the US government from within. They are consolidating power amongst the few aligned with their politics and the even fewer who are among the most wealthy individuals in the world. From all appearances, they are motivated by greed, selfishness, acquisitiveness, cupidity, wealth, and accumulation of power.”

But again, I do not have facts or figures in front of me. Being a student of history and politics, though, I can say that if it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, then it’s a duck.

Kbiggs · by **Kbiggs** » 2025-03-02 1:07 p.m.

[quote="musicofnote"]It's really rather amusing that almost everyone posting on this thread simply accepts either actively or passively the Trumpian & Co. definition of what DEI is and how it operates

EXCEPT

the dude from Germany, who tried to explain what it's really for and what it's not, how and why it really was applied and how it wasn't, what separates the facts from the political hyperbole. But that doesn't really matter in today's non-fact world.

As for me, as a refugee who had to pay ransom to obtain his freedom from Uncle Sam, I look at all this, in all it's layers, and similar to what Berthold Brecht wrote after he was forced out of Germany in 1935, and feel an intense feeling of Schadenfreude, as he did at the time.

From a friend:

„What is DEI? When we don’t have full knowledge of things we tend to make judgements on what others say it is

So in case you don’t know really what DEI means here’s some info to help you see -

Some of what DEI is:

-ramps and sidewalk curb cuts

-subtitles & captions (TV & phone)

-family restrooms

-changing tables in men’s restrooms

-breast feeding/pumping stations & accommodations

-floating paid holidays

-pay equity & transparency

-parental leave (time & pay)

-coming back to a job after birthing a child

-not having to just accept workplace harassment

-work accommodations for a variety of disabilities

-flexible work arrangements

-size inclusive chairs and beds in medical facilities

-belt extenders on planes

-various food options for vegetarians/vegans/kosher/gluten-free/etc at medical facilities

-non smoking areas/end of smoking indoors

-being able to have medical professionals and your coworkers use your preferred name (not just queer people have those)

-wellness programs and incentives

-more relaxed & inclusive dress code policies

-rooms to pray/meditate at work & other public places

-employee recognition programs

-employee/network resource groups

-large print materials

-materials in different languages

-multiple religious options at hospitals

-accessible bikes and public transit accommodations

-businesses not becoming fully cashless

-company-covered mental/behavioral health resources

Some of What DEI isn’t:

-hiring an under qualified person for a job just because they’re a person of color

-hiring based on race just to meet diversity goals (this is illegal)

-a new fad or buzz word. DEI work has been going on for many many years, under different names“[/quote]

^^^ THIS ^^^

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2025-03-02 2:18 p.m.

I've also been in Gary Merrill's shoes. Mind you, DEI does not require hiring an unqualified minority candidate over a qualified white candidate. Just giving an edge to a qualified minority candidate in the hiring process. Having two job candidates who can do the job; one white male and one minority; one may under the DEI criteria give preference to the minority candidate even if the white male may be slightly better.

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2025-03-02 2:36 p.m.

As an American living/working in Canada, I'd like to take a second to call out TromboneVan's post attacking another chat member's post because as he said - "he's Swiss/Canadian and can't vote here". Trump has inserted himself in Canadian politics regularly, and Elon Musk recently travelled to Germany to literally insert himself into their election. There is a significant "one-way street" regarding criticism of other's politics, especially from the MAGA right that is at best, hypocritical. At worst, it is bullying. Put on your "big boy pants" TromboneVan - perhaps you're so sensitive because you know that your arguments are not valid. Americans who actually travel around the world become sensitive to how bullies like you damage our reputation world-wide.

As far as adding the pic of three African-Americans - really? The old "I can't be racist - I have a black friend" routine! Sure, there is some diversity among Trump supporters, but it's still a very small percent.

As to calling out the lack of diversity in various classical genres - you're making our point! My point in an earlier post is that events like the Marine Band concert are actually something that should appeal to both sides of the political divide. Sure, it's targeted towards minority kids, but it's not giving someone a job or giving them a spot at Eastman or Curtis outside of the competitive process. It is giving them a training opportunity that might be a jump start for the future. The fact that there are less performers of color in many musical genres can be directly traced to less opportunities for musical training in their early years. The concert may not make up for that, but at least it's a start. To be fair, it's only one small event, and nothing can take the place of long-term educational reform that makes first-rate schools (including arts) available for all. Running up a flag that says "Mission Accomplished" is not going to do any good for anyone.

Jim Scott

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-03-02 2:37 p.m.

[quote="officermayo"]<QUOTE author="claf" post_id="268712" time="1740907160" user_id="3865">

From my European point of view, that's exactly what happened.

People didn't vote for Trump, they voted against a woman (not to mention she also was of mixed origins).[/quote]

They voted against an idiot...
</QUOTE>

I find this comment to be ignorant and racist. This trope is what MAGA trots out to paint every powerful black woman with, along with the word "nasty." Idiot, nasty, DEI, unqualified and ignorant are the most common terms slung at such women. But let's look at the facts, shall we?

Harris graduated from Howard University with dual degrees in economics and political science. She then attended the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where she served as president of the Black Law Students Association. She earned her Juris Doctor degree in 1989 and was admitted to the California Bar the following year.

Harris then entered the workplace and served as an Alameda County Deputy District Attorney, then San Francisco County Assistant District Attorney, where she became the chief of the Career Criminal Division and prosecuted homicide, burglary, robbery, and sexual assault cases – particularly three-strikes cases.

Harris then ran the Family and Children's Services Division in the San Francisco City Attorney's Office. She then served two terms as District Attorney of San Francisco from 2004 to 2011. She also took appointed positions at the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and later the California Medical Assistance Commission.

Harris was then elected District Attorney for San Francisco County and served two terms.

In 2008 she became Attorney General for California and served two terms, heading the largest state AG department in the country.

After that she ran for United States Senator and won, carrying all but four counties in the nation's largest state.

In 2020 Harris became Vice President of the United States.

In every, single position she held she racked up "firsts." First woman, first woman of color, etc. She broke down barriers at ever stage of her career.

Unlike the current president, she has no arrests, no indictments, no felony convictions, never stole classified documents, didn't go bankrupt 6 times, never found liable for fraud or sexual assault, never incited an insurrection, never falsely claimed an election was rigged against her, never tried to overthrow the government, never coddled up to dictators, and never abandoned our allies....just for starters.

And what is your resumé, Sgt. Mayo, to give you the knowledge and experience pass the judgment of "idiot" on such a highly educated, experienced, and accomplished minority woman?

I just bristle at the false labels constantly being hurled at Harris and other women -- especially women of color -- who are political opponents of MAGAs. They have nothing but ad hominem attacks for strong minority women, which reveals a bias and a very common bigotry.

Please do better than this.

Edited to add: BTW, I've worked with Harris and I have a deep dislike for her. But to call her an idiot? And a puppet? You should be better than such adolescent and bigoted nonsense.

CalgaryTbone · by **CalgaryTbone** » 2025-03-02 2:42 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="officermayo" post_id="268738" time="1740934096" user_id="12380">

They voted against an idiot...[/quote]

I find this comment to be ignorant and racist. This trope is what MAGA trots out to paint every powerful black woman with, along with the word "nasty." Idiot, nasty, DEI, unqualified and ignorant are the most common terms slung at such women. But let's look at the facts, shall we?

Harris graduated from Howard University with dual degrees in economics and political science. She then attended the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where she served as president of the Black Law Students Association. She earned her Juris Doctor degree in 1989 and was admitted to the California Bar the following year.

Harris then entered the workplace and served as an Alameda County Deputy District Attorney, then San Francisco County Assistant District Attorney, where she became the chief of the Career Criminal Division and prosecuted homicide, burglary, robbery, and sexual assault cases – particularly three-strikes cases.

Harris then ran the Family and Children's Services Division in the San Francisco City Attorney's Office. She then served two terms as District Attorney of San Francisco from 2004 to 2011. She also took appointed positions at the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and later the California Medical Assistance Commission.

Harris was then elected District Attorney for San Francisco County and served two terms.

In 2008 she became Attorney General for California and served two terms, heading the largest state AG department in the country.

After that she ran for United States Senator and won, carrying all but four counties in the nation's largest state.

In 2020 Harris became Vice President of the United States.

In every, single position she held she racked up "firsts." First woman, first woman of color, etc. She broke down barriers at ever stage of her career.

Unlike the current president, she has no arrests, no indictments, no felony convictions, never stole classified documents, didn't go bankrupt 6 times, never found liable for fraud or sexual assault, never incited an insurrection, never falsely claimed an election was rigged against her, never tried to overthrow the government, never coddled up to dictators, and never abandoned our allies....just for starters.

And what is your resumé, Sgt. Mayo, to give you the knowledge and experience pass the judgment of "idiot" on such a highly educated, experienced, and accomplished minority woman?

I just bristle at the false labels constantly being hurled at Harris and other women -- especially women of color -- who are political opponents of MAGAs. They have nothing but ad hominem attacks for strong minority women, which reveals a bias and a very common bigotry.

Please do better than this.
</QUOTE>

:good: :good: :good:

MStarke · by **MStarke** » 2025-03-02 2:49 p.m.

[quote="CalgaryTbone"]As an American living/working in Canada, I'd like to take a second to call out TromboneVan's post attacking another chat member's post because as he said - "he's Swiss/Canadian and can't vote here". Trump has inserted himself in Canadian politics regularly, and Elon Musk recently travelled to Germany to literally insert himself into their election.[/quote]

Thank you. I have and will build and express my opinion on American and other countries' politics also when I cannot vote there.

We are living in an interconnected world and have to arrange not only with the sh.. our own governments are doing, but also with others.

And the US have a very strong history of getting involved in other countries politics. Some with very good reasons and intentions, some maybe not so much.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-02 3:03 p.m.

Is being VP to the most corrupt President in history (46) an accomplishment?

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-03-02 3:27 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]Is being VP to the most corrupt President in history (46) an accomplishment?[/quote]

You know that kind of ad hominem only works among your fellow MAGAs, right? The rest of us have, um, let's just say a "more accurate" understanding. And when you say "most corrupt," you invite comparisons to Trump and Nixon, and the GOP doesn't come out looking very good.

May I suggest limiting your posts to generally recognized facts and leaving the political nonsense claims aside? We all understand that you think everything about Trump is simply amazing and everything about every Democrat who ever lived is failed and corrupt and hates America. Yeah, we get it. You don't need to keep repeating it.

But to answer your question without the ad hominem, yes[/u], being Vice President of the United States is a huge accomplishment. (And I wonder why you ignored all of the other accomplishments I listed? That's a rhetorical question, it's not one I expect you to throw yet another ad hominem at).

May I politely request that you stop responding to me? Like, at all? Or if you feel you must, would you do us all the favor of leaving your political slogans out of them? Thank you so much.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-02 3:38 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]<QUOTE author="tbdana" post_id="268642" time="1740860216" user_id="16498">
Honestly, it's a very white movement.

[/quote]
</QUOTE>

I appreciate black MAGA Patriots out there like Terence. He has very upbeat, good energy, I think you might like him.

https://x.com/w_terrence/status/1892658882142404651

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-03-02 3:43 p.m.

Sigh...

Okay, I guess I just have to block you, then. The one and only person I have ever felt the need to block.

Buh-bye...

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2025-03-02 3:51 p.m.

Would’ve been content to stay out of this, but it’s kinda like watching a train wreck. I believe that’s why we avoid political discussions.

I don’t really care how much more enlightened one side is, left or right, Republican or Democrat, what have you, this thread has turned into nothing but the consistent perpetuation of party politics from either side with no true listening or productive discussion occurring.

No one wants to change their opinion (rooted in bias no matter which sides politics you choose to perpetuate), have a free, open and factual discussion, or much less listen. I’m just waiting for the name calling to start next…surprised it hasn’t yet in all honesty…

I honestly believe there is nothing good coming from this discussion at this point, and it’s sad to see the amount of ‘interest’ in the form of posts this particular has produced in as little time as it has produced…

I honestly feel it might not be a bad thing for the moderators to lock this one up at this point…

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-02 4:03 p.m.

Tbdana, you're already on my ignore but you keep tagging me... so you get what you dish out... Black MAGA has every right to occupy this space as much as it does the White house, if your idiotic nonsense mainstream media talking point lies do.... for the most part you are the one tagging me and I try to talk in a little more respectful way to people than I think you often do here, as much as you preach all that.

musicofnote · by **musicofnote** » 2025-03-02 4:15 p.m.

[quote="tbdana"]<QUOTE author="officermayo" post_id="268738" time="1740934096" user_id="12380">

They voted against an idiot...[/quote]

I find this comment to be ignorant and racist. This trope is what MAGA trots out to paint every powerful black woman with, along with the word "nasty." Idiot, nasty, DEI, unqualified and ignorant are the most common terms slung at such women. But let's look at the facts, shall we?

Harris graduated from Howard University with dual degrees in economics and political science. She then attended the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, where she served as president of the Black Law Students Association. She earned her Juris Doctor degree in 1989 and was admitted to the California Bar the following year.

Harris then entered the workplace and served as an Alameda County Deputy District Attorney, then San Francisco County Assistant District Attorney, where she became the chief of the Career Criminal Division and prosecuted homicide, burglary, robbery, and sexual assault cases – particularly three-strikes cases.

Harris then ran the Family and Children's Services Division in the San Francisco City Attorney's Office. She then served two terms as District Attorney of San Francisco from 2004 to 2011. She also took appointed positions at the state Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and later the California Medical Assistance Commission.

Harris was then elected District Attorney for San Francisco County and served two terms.

In 2008 she became Attorney General for California and served two terms, heading the largest state AG department in the country.

After that she ran for United States Senator and won, carrying all but four counties in the nation's largest state.

In 2020 Harris became Vice President of the United States.

In every, single position she held she racked up "firsts." First woman, first woman of color, etc. She broke down barriers at ever stage of her career.

Unlike the current president, she has no arrests, no indictments, no felony convictions, never stole classified documents, didn't go bankrupt 6 times, never found liable for fraud or sexual assault, never incited an insurrection, never falsely claimed an election was rigged against her, never tried to overthrow the government, never coddled up to dictators, and never abandoned our allies....just for starters.

And what is your resumé, Sgt. Mayo, to give you the knowledge and experience pass the judgment of "idiot" on such a highly educated, experienced, and accomplished minority woman?

I just bristle at the false labels constantly being hurled at Harris and other women -- especially women of color -- who are political opponents of MAGAs. They have nothing but ad hominem attacks for strong minority women, which reveals a bias and a very common bigotry.

Please do better than this.

Edited to add: BTW, I've worked with Harris and I have a deep dislike for her. But to call her an idiot? And a puppet? You should be better than such adolescent and bigoted nonsense.
</QUOTE>

EXCELLENT. I refused to answer to someone stooping to ignorant name calling. Glad you did. Responding to such idiots just unnecessarily spikes my blood pressure.

(fubar noted)

Digidog · by **Digidog** » 2025-03-02 4:16 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]<QUOTE author="tromboneVan" post_id="268711" time="1740904553" user_id="6540">[/quote]

I appreciate black MAGA Patriots out there like Terence. He has very upbeat, good energy, I think you might like him.

https://x.com/w_terrence/status/1892658882142404651
</QUOTE>

Well; posting a couple of pictures with some black people showing their support for Mr. Toupee, is not evidence of the absence of racism on Mr. Toupee's, and his administration's, behalf. Quite the contrary: To have the need - and enforce that need - to especially and explicitly point out how including you are, can in itself be an act of racism - or be a lithmus indication of racist views and attitudes.

You should not forget, that historically there were patriotic (maybe German nationalist) jews voting for Hitler in 1933, tricked and decieved by his lies about making Germany great and take back its place among the greatest of nations and powers. Though they were not in any significant numbers, they got a brutal awakening when they were subject to discrimination and racism immediately after Hitler had secured his power; measures that later escalated to repression and deportation, and ultimately mass murder.

If I were an african-american citizen of the U.S. today, I would be very concerned about my situation, my safety and my prospects - regardless of how loyally and publically I had supported Mr. Toupee, or not.

One very important thing to know, is that politicians mean to do and politically pursue what they say; especially on totalitarian and violent politicies. Mr. Toupee and his lackeys have all used phrasings and whole sentences taken from Nazi propaganda, Nazi leader's speeches and ideological pamphlets, and they would not have used any of these sayings if they did not mean to apply their meaning onto the U.S. population and society.

tbdana · by **tbdana** » 2025-03-02 4:38 p.m.

[quote="atopper333"]

I honestly feel it might not be a bad thing for the moderators to lock this one up at this point…[/quote]

I agree.

tromboneVan · by **tromboneVan** » 2025-03-02 4:44 p.m.

When you speak the truth, and make an argument with facts, you do not have to censor people.

:good:

Burgerbob · by **Burgerbob** » 2025-03-02 4:54 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]When you speak the truth, and make an argument with facts, you do not have to censor people.

:good:[/quote]

trombonEvan, you have not presented those here. You are not being censored, in any case.

tromboneVan · 2025-03-02 4:56 p.m.

I do not think we should be engaged in closing threads whenever there is a disagreement - and by disagreement, I mean an opposing point of view that challenges the narrative is made. But that is the playbook of the left.

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2025-03-02 5:02 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]When you speak the truth, and make an argument with facts, you do not have to censor people.

:good:[/quote]

As someone who hasn’t taken either side in this conversation….

You say you speak the truth, is it your truth? Is it a collection of facts you’ve obtained through various information sources which have an inherent bias which supports your view? Is it information fed to you based on the algorithms of your previous search history providing for you what you already believe the truth to be?

Have these facts been actually vetted? Or is this yet an another extension of ‘moral relativism’ which allows a person the ability to say ‘the truth is’ based on their own inherent bias?

It works on both side of the isle, yours and theirs. Objectivism in America has been lost which has moved the left farther left, and the right farther right, which has had the effect of moving the middle farther way from the center and both sides of the isle so to say.

This comment indicates no room for discussion or growth which is in line with multiple other comments made in this thread from multiple contributors. This is yet a further point as to why this tread is no longer productive and should be locked….

atopper333 · by **atopper333** » 2025-03-02 5:08 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]At the very least we have opinions and then we disagree on the particulars.. I do not think we should be engaged in closing threads whenever there is a disagreement - that is censorship is my point.[/quote]

I agree with you, but when it is reduced to blatant arguing and no room for discussion, then what is the point? You aren’t changing their minds, they aren’t changing yours…

And then the response is you have the truth and they do not, but the very inference of this statement indicates that those who do not agree with you are…liars.

What productivity is there in this?

Are we calling ending an argument ‘censorship?’

Arguments when everyone ceases to listen are a pointless endeavor and almost always devolve into something even more base…

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-03-02 5:21 p.m.

I'll remind everyone that the world doesn't revolve around the US, that discrimination (based on race, gender, sexual orientation or otherwise) is worldwide, that DEI initiatives don't only exist in the US, and that we get to have an opinion on these issues whether or not we vote in your country...

[quote="tromboneVan"]You are the most dismissive person on the forum, who has drank the most of the kool-aid, yet, look at the representation of minorities in your ensembles. Are they represented or not? Is it simply that you don't have a large demographic of minorities in your country, in early music even less, right? See you can't make people out of thin air, they have to exist in the fist place to be taking the auditions to be in the audition pool to be considered.. in the same audition as everyone else. People want to be treated equally. It's actually a form of abuse to coddle. Do you not see how your bias jumps off the screen? You come off as a screeching ideologue, and a hypocrite because you don't walk the walk with your own ensembles. I see less than 50% female representation in your groups, too. That is another topic you were very vocal about. But are you just a theorist or do you ever practice your racial / gender theory? It's very clear who the real racists and sexists are, because all you focus on in every forum conversation is race and gender.[/quote]

I'm pretty much done posting on here because everything's been said, and I figure this thread is probably just about to get locked by the mods. I just feel I need to quickly respond on the pointed attacks posted against me personally here. I note the very on-the-nose irony in tromboneVan complaining earlier about being treated badly on this forum when nobody did anything more than debate his positions, but instead of arguing against (or even acknowledging) the facts offered, preferring to now slander fellow forum members.

The ensemble tromboneVan seems to refer to had 9 main cast members, 4 of which were women. I've lead projects where 80% of the cast was LGTBQ+, and some where that number was 100% (I'll also point out that there's a difference between chamber music, where a few long-time colleagues that are a good match decide to start a group together based on years of collaboration and mutual trust, and a situation where one is hiring people). I will add that every single time I get asked to recommend trombone players for a project, I make it a point to ensure half or more are women. And if the project already involves a man plus myself, and there's only one more slot to fill, I will only recommend women. The people I regularly recommend for work includes women, gay people, trans people, people of colour (mostly Asian and South American; unfortunately we do have a problem with the pipeline with regards to black people, there are so few in classical music more broadly, so very few stumble upon our niche field. Which, by the way, is exactly why we need MORE of the kind of activities this thread was initially about, and not to see the few that exist cancelled). I know I've been passed over at times (and in some cases, un-booked from projects) in favour of hiring woman, partly for the sake of inclusion and diversity. I'm happy they get the gig and that I get to play in a much more welcoming and diverse environment than the modern trombone world. So yes, tromboneVan, I do apply the principles I talk about, thank you very much. You can stop stalking me now and go back to reading your regular propaganda diet.

tromboneVan · 2025-03-02 5:27 p.m.

People are allowed to voice their perspectives here if you are, and my comments specifically have been to give voice and space to Black Americans that believe in the shared vision of Making America Great Again... what people have against that I do not know.

LeTromboniste · by **LeTromboniste** » 2025-03-02 5:38 p.m.

[quote="tromboneVan"]Never tagged you directly in anything, did I? Nope. I guess you took that part as if it was directed at you specifically.[/quote]

Oh don't be disingenuous now. You really think people are stupid? Who else in this thread (or on this forum) might you have been talking about, who's in the early music field and who you refer to as "Swiss-Canadian"...

Also, if you're going to make pointed attacks like this against specific forum members, don't be a coward and sign them with your name. Good bye.

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2025-03-02 5:55 p.m.

We have strayed too far from the original subject and this thread is starting to look like the old political threads we had on The Trombone Forum, which we wanted to avoid. This thread is locked,

BGuttman · by **BGuttman** » 2025-03-17 1:23 a.m.

I know I locked this thread, but the original concert was sort-of put on with the winners of the audition and retirees from various Military Bands under the auspices of CBS 60 Minutes. Here's the story:

<YOUTUBE id="lhwS06U1SnA">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhwS06U1SnA</YOUTUBE>

Quick Links

Instruments

Marketplace

Marine Band Cancels Concert