Monday, October 02, 2023
View Blog
Sep 24

Written by: Diana West
Monday, September 24, 2018 8:41 AM 


Now at The Epoch Times

Amid The New Yorker's coaxed and uncorroborated smears of Judge Kavanaugh by Yale classmate Debbie Ramirez, hidden clues to Ramirez's ideological identity appear: 

Ramirez is a registered Democrat, but said that her decision to speak out was not politically motivated and, regarding her views, that she “works toward human rights, social justice, and social change.”

... Ramirez said that she hoped her story would support that of Christine Blasey Ford.

First, it is a testament to the tragic state of a Yale education that a graduate would emit such cant to describe her "views"; however, it is also revelatory of an animus so all-consuming that it is almost possible Ramirez doesn't believe herself to be "politically motivated" in "speaking out."

Ramirez is a highly educated (read: programmed) person; someone who studied (was indoctrinated in) sociology and psychology at Yale. 

I went to Yale, too, but I mainly read wonderful books and poetry in the English Department, which was still a possibility in the early 1980s; from what I gather now, there's barely an "English" Department -- too English (white), and too male.

For Ramirez to be in sync with her education (programming) is automatically to hope "her story" would support Ford's "story.” That’s not "politically motivated,” she might think: it's just breathing.

Such was my speculation, anyway, based on those two sentences above.

Who would imagine, though, that we would have access to granular details of Ramirez's continuing political programming? Not I -- until I visited the website of the non-profit she works for in Boulder, Colorado: Safehouse Progressive Alliance for Nonviolence (SPAN). 

At SPAN, Ramirez is "co-vice chair" of the board and a volunteer. That apparently means she "must learn and abide by" SPAN's "comprehensive Code of Ethics,” which begins with a set of fundamental guidelines for board members, staff, interns and volunteers called "Non-Negotiables."

This code and its "non-negotiable" guidelines, as well as directions on "Ethical Communication," are nothing SPAN takes lightly. They are prerequisites to employment: 

To ensure the thorough integration of these policies into the day-to-day operations at SPAN, all candidates for SPAN staff positions are provided the “Non-Negotiables” and “Ethical Communication” documentation prior to their interview, and questions about these documents are incorporated into the interview process. All SPAN volunteers receive the “Non-Negotiables” and “Ethical Communication” documentation during their interview with the Volunteer Coordinator. Expectations are clearly stated that all staff and volunteers must abide by the SPAN Code of Ethics.

Additionally, there's a required 33-hour training program "designed to enhance participants’ awareness of social justice issues, the dynamics of abuse and to develop greater awareness of the various systems of oppression."

The "Non-Negotiables" open by asserting, mantra-like, that "violence against women is systemic"; that "women are an oppressed group";  that "oppression in any form" -- SPAN's list includes "racism, sexism, heterosexism, classism, cissexism, ageism, ableism etc." -- is an act of violence.

We mustn't kid ourselves. What SPAN radicals deem “oppression” and acts of "violence" are exemplified in almost every aspect of the Western tradition, from Sunday school, to husband & wife (also Astaire & Rogers), to Navy SEALs, to Sleeping Beauty's Castle, to all planks of the GOP platform, all men (of course), and election results they disagree with. For example, I'm certain SPAN would label President Trump’s immigration agenda “racism” and “classism”; label the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman  “sexism,” “heterosexism,” “cissexism” (whatever that means); the physical requirements of special forces  “ageism,” “ableism,” and more.

To SPAN and other radicals, conservative politics and religious beliefs (not to mention logic, law, order, etc.) are all acts of violence.

Where does that leave us all in our "national debate"? Taking cover from the toxic waste bombs as the wild-eyed Left makes its desperate assault. SPAN radicals like Debbie Ramirez are well-prepared for this kind of war in which hysterics replace politics and slander replace debate. Even in this one small non-profit in Boulder, SPAN, we can see the predicate for the deep psychological disturbances that drive the vicious assault on Brett Kavanaugh, who, unbeknownst to him on the cusp on national glory, became that human bullseye on top of the larger target: our constitutional form of government. 

"Non-Negotiables”? Like a good Yalie, Debbie Ramirez probably has them memorized.


Here is the complete list of SPAN's  "Non-Negotiables" :

1. We share a basic understanding that violence against women is systemic;

women are an oppressed group;

and oppression in any form (racism, sexism, heterosexism, classism, cissexism, ageism, ableism etc.) is an act of violence.

2. We acknowledge intimate partner violence as an action taken primarily against women.

3. We do not blame the victim in any way for victimization. This includes:

respect for all people regardless of race, gender, religion, culture, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, immigration status or class;

an understanding of the use of violence that considers patterns of behavior, motive and impact, as opposed to a single act; and

an approach that is rooted in advocacy as defined by the client.

4. We continuously work to recognize and challenge our own personal beliefs. This requires:

an ongoing process of becoming aware of our own prejudices and privileges;

constant effort made toward avoiding projection of personal beliefs about a client’s and/or their children’s circumstances, or assuming that we know what is best for them;

the responsibility to be aware of our judgments and reactions when others disagree or hold different beliefs from our own.

a willingness to share personal ideas and to receive feedback and challenges on these ideas;

the responsibility to challenge oppression and privilege in others and ourselves; and

full accountability for our words and actions.

5. We demonstrate willingness to relinquish/share power and privilege. We are committed to seeking understanding about our experiences both as oppressor and oppressed.

6. We have a commitment to ethical communication in all of our interpersonal encounters. It is our goal to support each other in this process.

7. We value and are committed to social change through activism and community organizing.

8. We challenge and avoid the use of blaming, disrespectful or violent language in our daily lives.

9. We strive to ensure that our actions, with clients, each other and the community at-large are consistent with our stated beliefs.

10. We believe that the use of any form of violence to establish power and control is not acceptable.

In summary, the Non-Negotiables reflect a process that occurs on a continuum. There is no finish line or ‘final destination’ in following these guidelines. Instead, we recognize the fluidity of learning and change. There are few role models for the implementation of these and similar philosophical goals. We are committed to participating in the process reflected in these “Non-Negotiables” to the best of our ability.


Privacy Statement  |  Terms Of Use
Copyright 2012 by Diana West