From Mao to America: The Alarming Similarities of Implicit Bias Training

AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein, File

The progressive movement in America does not openly identify as communist. But this does not mean the authoritarian left is not finding sneaky ways to employ some of the same tactics seen in Soviet Russia, communist China, and even North Korea to force their will on the rest of us.

This tendency has shown up in various ways – especially in education and corporate America. Indeed, a closer look at how far-leftist ideology is reinforced in these institutions reveals that their tactics have much in common with Mao Zedong.

Adelphi University in New York is offering “Safe Zone Training” sessions to educate students about inclusivity and allyship towards the LGBTQIA+ community. The training provides participants with a manual that covers various topics, including offensive terminology to avoid and privileges that non-trans individuals may take for granted.

What is noteworthy about this story is the “Free to Be Me” statement located toward the beginning of the manual. The statement asks participants to confess: “I am a product of a heterosexist and transphobic culture and I am who I am. I don’t have to feel guilty about what I know or believe, but I do need to take responsibility for what I can do now.”

Those taking the training are also urged to sign a statement saying they will “[s]truggle to change [their] false/inaccurate beliefs or oppressive attitudes toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer people.”

Essentially, the training asks participants to acknowledge that they are hateful bigots who despise members of the LGBTQ community. But this is not the only example.

Last year, Laura L. Morgan, a former medical professional, penned a piece for the Wall Street Journal in which she told her story of being fired for refusing to take “implicit bias” training that would require her to admit to being a racist. Morgan, a nurse, describes her experience and concerns about the mandatory training in healthcare institutions.

She states that she objected to the training because it was based on the idea that she, as a white person, is inherently racist, and she believes this is a false assumption. She mentions that many states in the US are now requiring implicit bias training as a condition for obtaining medical and nursing licenses, and she disagrees with this approach, citing flaws in implicit bias testing and the potential unintended consequences, including increased burnout and harm to patients, especially minority patients.

She also criticizes medical associations for buying into the belief that healthcare professionals are racist, and calls for a more fair and respectful approach to addressing issues of bias and discrimination in healthcare.

Implicit bias refers to unconscious attitudes or stereotypes that influence people’s perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors toward others, often without our conscious awareness or intention. Proponents of this theory contend that these biases are typically formed through societal, cultural, and personal experiences, and can impact our decision-making and interactions with others, even if we do not consciously endorse or believe in them.

Morgan describes her experience in the article:

I was fired from my nursing job this year for refusing to take “implicit bias” training. After 39 years of providing equal care to all my patients without regard to their race, I objected to a mandatory course grounded in the idea that I’m racist because I’m white. I fear every healthcare professional will soon be forced to make the same awful decision I did: Falsely admit to being racist or abandon the medical field.

In recent years, there has been a growing trend of mandatory “implicit bias” training in healthcare institutions, with many states in the US requiring such training as a condition for obtaining medical and nursing licenses. These trainings typically urge white participants to admit that they are racist and are to be treated as bigots.

This might sound familiar to one who has studied left-wing authoritarianism. These practices are eerily similar to the use of struggle sessions, which totalitarian regimes use to reinforce their domination over members of the public.

Struggle sessions, originally popularized during China’s Cultural Revolution in the 1960s, were used as a means of enforcing ideological conformity by publicly shaming and pressuring individuals to confess their supposed sins and wrongdoings – even if they did not commit any. During a struggle session, the accused person is subjected to intense verbal attacks, accusations, and sometimes physical abuse, with the goal of forcing them to publicly admit their guilt and demonstrate their commitment to the prevailing political ideology.

The session may be held in a public setting, such as a workplace or a community gathering, and the accused may be subjected to public shaming, humiliation, and pressure to conform to the group’s beliefs. Fast forward to today, and some critics of implicit bias training argue that these trainings share similarities with struggle sessions in their approach, methodology, and impact on healthcare professionals. Sure, American struggle sessions might not be as strenuous as those in communist China, but the objective is the same: Shame, coerce, or intimidate people into complying with the ruling power.

One of the key criticisms of implicit bias training is that it is based on the assumption that individuals, particularly those in privileged groups, are inherently biased and need to be “re-educated” to correct their biases. This approach can lead to a one-size-fits-all approach that assumes guilt rather than innocence, treating individuals as inherently flawed and in need of correction. This can create an environment where healthcare professionals are pressured to confess their biases, whether real or perceived, and may even be coerced into making false confessions to conform to the training. Needless to say, this does not exactly make for a healthy work environment or society at large.

Additionally, the methodologies used in some implicit bias trainings can be highly emotional and confrontational, resembling the public humiliation and pressure tactics used in struggle sessions. Some trainings use techniques such as role-playing, public confessions, and confrontational discussions that can create a hostile and uncomfortable environment for healthcare professionals. This can lead to increased stress, anxiety, and even trauma for individuals who are subjected to these training methods, potentially resulting in burnout and decreased job satisfaction.

This is the outcome for which the authoritarian left is pushing. What is even more frightening is that they have begun employing this tactic in K-12 schools to influence young minds to buy into their dogma on race, gender identity, and sexuality.

Yes, I know some people throw around the word “commie” like leftists do with “racist.” But the similarities between struggle sessions and what the left is currently doing in many institutions are too close to ignore. These folks are using the same tactics as those that were used in communist regimes. They are just dressing them up differently. As those who love liberty, we must be aware of the enemy we are facing and how they operate.

The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of



Trending on RedState Videos