An insurance company recently emailed me a proposal in which the insurance agent’s signature included his “he/him/his” personal pronouns. That inclusion filled me with such distrust and disdain that I will reject the proposal, regardless of how competitive it is.
Insurance is serious business to me. My business has been sued and my insurer (at the time) screwed me and reneged on the policy. So I know for a fact that insurance for ‘Fitness Professionals’ does not cover any of the activities that good Personal Trainers engage in. It is assumed to cover bodybuilding training; but it absolutely does not. Strength Coach insurance does not cover Strength Coaches working with any non-competitive athlete; though almost no Strength Coach knows this. But I do know; so I take it seriously. And it is vital to me that my insurer is equally serious.
The declaration of pronouns is a political statement. The pronouns themselves are not the point. The point is the company declaring their fealty to the religion of identity politics.
The Real Meaning
So what does it mean when an insurance company jumps on the “go woke, go broke”, identity politics train? It is essentially a declaration that they will absolutely refuse to honour their policy with you if you do not share in their insane, divisive, evil, Marxist ideologies. It is a declaration that they will use anything you have ever said or done against you, if it could be interpreted negatively by the impossible and insane standards of identity politics.
As we have all seen recently, law-abiding people are being successfully fined, sued, fired from their jobs, their bank accounts frozen or cancelled, and they are even being jailed for their political beliefs or voicing plain truths that contradict the insane proclamations of the church of identity politics. So there is no question whether an insurance company that worships at the church of identity politics would decline a claim on the basis of the claimants politics or personal characteristics. Of course they would.
Your social media posts, and those of your friends and family, will almost certainly be considered with any claim assessment. So too will your race, sex, sexual orientation and religion etcetera. And given the ever growing body of legal precedents and legislation criminalising political views (eg hate speech and anti-discrimination laws), the insurance company’s lawyers will have plenty of disingenuous legal excuses for denying your claims.
The Really Dark Side
Identity politics is applied Marxism. It is based on the intellectually bankrupt belief that every human interaction is a battle between oppressed and oppressor. The idea of people working together for mutual benefit is absolutely denied by Marxism; despite it being the fundamental basis of all achievement of the human race, for all of time.
To Marxists, hard-working, competent and successful people are oppressors of the lazy and incompetent. Employers are oppressors and staff are oppressed. Even parents are considered oppressors of their children, who are oppressed. The Marxist remedy to claimed ‘oppression’ is violence. Oppressors are to be violently overthrown by the oppressed, and their belongings stolen.
The atrocities that Marxists have committed in the name of their ideology would make Nazi’s sick with horror. The documented torture that the Soviet Marxists inflicted upon Orthodox Christians is the most grotesque and disturbing material that I have ever read. The fact that it truly happened is horrifying beyond words. But the absolute evil of Marxism knows absolutely no boundaries. Tens of millions of people have been murdered in the name of Marxism. So Marxists would have no issue at all with dishonouring contracts.
A declaration of allegiance to such an ideology by an insurance company is curious. Insurance companies are infamous for being among the worst examples of deceitful, dishonest and unethical corporate monstrosities. If ever there was a business that socialists could fairly criticise for unethically damaging humanity in favour of money, it is the insurance business. These are companies that, for example, literally let people die to avoid paying for the healthcare they were obligated to provide.
So how and why would such a business declare fealty to Marxism and identity politics? Obviously they are doing it in the same way and for the same reason as all giant multi-national corporations are: corrupt and disingenuous opportunism. They are not including personal pronouns in emails for the benefit of the staff or customer; they are announcing their allegiance to the cabal of financial and political groups responsible for ESG scores, ‘Sustainable Development’, ‘Stakeholder Capitalism’ and the fantasy of Global Marxism.
In other words, no senior executive in any large multi-national company really believes in any of the insane identity politics garbage that they advertise themselves to support. They could not care less about the swirling emotional delusions of the blue-haired peons within their organisation. In the same way, no senior executive is really so braindead as to think that a new tax will change the temperature of the planet. Nor do they care about poor people with brown skin any less than poor people with white skin. They could not care less about any of the irrelevant and disingenuous “social justice” causes they claim to care so deeply about. And everyone knows it.
By putting personal pronouns in email signatures of their disposable staff, companies are not ‘recognising’ them; they are mocking them. And they are mocking the customers who are too financially insignificant to do business directly with the CEO; a CEO who you can be guaranteed would never be so ridiculous as to announce their pronouns in any serious conversation.
Quite obviously, it would be ridiculous to enter a contract with an organisation that openly mocks you, lies to you and lets you know that it hates you. It would also be ridiculous to contract with an organisation that considers any transaction to be inherently combative, any obligation on their part to be an act of oppression against them, violence and theft to be the righteous response to anyone they can label an ‘oppressor’, and denies any agreement can be mutually beneficial.
Seeing that all of that was stated by the inclusion of personal pronouns in the company email, I will not be considering this company’s offer. Disappointingly, I know that they do not care about that either.