Abigail Spanberger, Agent Double-O-Trans

We're screwed.

But the think I really wanted to point to is the following (I've discussed the embedded quote before):

According to John Gentry, author of Neutering the CIA: Why US Intelligence Versus Trump Has Long-Term Consequences, the CIA deploys diversity dogma to a greater extent than the National Security Agency. As the former CIA analyst noted, the NSA specifies 11 employee “resource groups,” including IC-Islamic Culture, NG-Next Gen, and PRIDE—Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and allies.
John Brennan could cite “no major accomplishments in operational performance” Gentry wrote, and “no IC official ever credibly explained how demographic diversity improved the performance of US intelligence or even provided an example.” Others claim to have found several. Consider the mysterious Sneha Nair, Biden’s choice for “special assistant” at the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and co-author of “Queering nuclear weapons: How LGBTQ+ inclusion strengthens security and reshapes disarmament

.” During “Pride Month,” Nair wanted readers to understand:
The visible representation and meaningful participation of queer people matters for nuclear policy outcomes. Discrimination against queer people can undermine nuclear security and increase nuclear risk. And queer theory can help change how nuclear practitioners, experts, and the public think about nuclear weapons. . . Equity and inclusion for queer people is not just a box-ticking exercise in ethics and social justice; it is also essential for creating effective nuclear policy. Studies in psychology and behavioral science show that diverse teams examine assumptions and evidence more carefully, make fewer errors, discuss issues more constructively, and better exchange new ideas and knowledge.

I know Gentry. He's a smart guy, and eminently worth listening to--though I have my disagreements with him. And he does know about the inner workings of the CIA.

   As for the embedded quote: this is the real idea of "diversity"--though it gets confused with Affirmative Action, a completely different thing. The core idea of "diversity" is that it makes organizations better at what they do. It's entirely forward looking and has nothing to do with rectifying past wrongs--which is what AA is supposed to do. There's some truth in that central claim of the diversophiles...if the right kinds of heterogeneity were chosen, it would, I'll bet, have a tendency to improve certain kinds of performance. E.g. if "viewpoint 'diversity'" were selected for. But that's not what they select for. Rather, "diversity" means: more leftism...and more individuals from left-preferred demographics...like blacks and transes...which means: more leftism... 

Which tends to me: worse performance...

More leftism means more cult groupthink...which is always bad.