Coupling tribal history with Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) training, Thurston County is partnering with South Puget Sound Community College (SPSCC) to reposition indigenous resistance as instructional material for governance and equity planning.
Thurston County officials are coordinating educational programs on the "Fish Wars," to be delivered both as internal county staff training and a public discourse.
The proposal is scheduled for implementation in October, in time for the celebration of the upcoming national recognition of treaty rights activist Billy Frank Jr.
County Manager Leonard Hernandez gave a walk-through of the planned initiatives during the Thurston County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) May 6 agenda setting meeting. He described the proposed partnership as an “exciting opportunity” suited for the county’s workforce learning and development, and public engagement.
The workshop format under review was modeled on prior “staff training” facilitated by Willie Frank III, which included segments on “education about the Fish Wars” and tribal-state governance.
Commissioner Carolina Mejia said the partnership is with Willie Frank III in his personal capacity, not a formal collaboration with the Nisqually Tribe.
Hernandez said the proposed projects are compatible with Thurston County’s internal DEI mandates. If adopted, it would fall under the umbrella of the Thurston County Public Health and Social Services Department.
“South Puget Sound Community College has also engaged in wanting to do a combined staff training, and then community outreach around education about the Fish Wars and some other cultural history,” he said.
The plan is bifurcated, wherein there is a DEI-compliant training for government employees and a community-facing forum co-hosted with SPSCC. Hernandez added that the public component would likely be held in the evening.
Situating the proposal within an existing regional template, BoCC Vice Chair Wayne Fournier advocated for the replication of the “training workshop” model previously deployed in Pierce County.
Fournier shared the event was “very successful” in its ability to bridge public-sector instruction around historical case law and culturally-riched governance issues.
“It also kind of lines up with the rollout of the Billy Frank Jr. statue that’s going to be going into D.C. and into our own capitol within, like the next year, year and a half,” he said.
Fournier referred to state and federal projects to install a statue of Billy Frank Jr. in both the Washington Capitol and National Statuary Hall at the U.S. Capitol.
In March, Pierce County passed a formal proclamation celebrating March 9 as “Billy Frank Jr. Day,” wherein it cited the 1974 Boldt Decision and Frank’s advocacy as a “guiding light for cross-culture connections, bipartisanship, and leadership through consultation and bridge building.”
The historical basis for the commemorative efforts lies in honor of the treaty enforcement battles fought by Frank and others.
The Fish Wars of the 1960s and 1970s represented civil resistance by tribal fishers against unlawful regulatory encroachment. Tribal leaders coordinated “fish-ins” to provoke arrest and establish grounds for litigation. The tactics succeeded in drawing the federal government into the dispute as a plaintiff against the state.
In United States v. Washington, known as the Boldt Decision, Billy Frank Jr. was a major figure where the court sided with the tribes and recognized the state had infringed on “reserved rights” guaranteed by treaties.
The ruling was a landmark decision in Native American jurisprudence history because they were also guaranteed treaty-protected access to 50 percent of harvestable fish.
Thurston’s workshop proposal mirrors the mentioned honorable events. Hernandez said the goal is to educate tribal history within staff learning and administrative practice.
“We think this is a great opportunity … to draw out some of our local history and some of the cultural values that our tribes bring tremendous value to the region,” he said.
BoCC Chair Tye Menser and Commissioner Rachel Grant inquired about SPSCC’s part in funding the program and asked for clarification on cost exposure.
Fournier confirmed that SPSCC would share costs and noted the Minnaert Center had already been identified as the probable venue for the forum. Hernandez then said the complete fiscal breakdown would be reported back once the BoCC gave planning direction.
Mejia added that the workshop aligns with SPSCC’s internal policy priorities.
“It was in their board plan to have a workshop like this,” she said, referring to the college’s existing institutional focus on cultural education and public sector collaboration.
The BoCC expressed support for the plans and authorized the county manager to begin logistical planning.
A full implementation update is expected later this year, including finalized dates and program schedules, financial breakdown, and coordination with SPSCC and Willie Frank III.
19 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
What does DEI have to do with the history of tribal fishing? Just asking.
Wednesday, May 14 Report this
RondaLarsonKramer
That is a fair question. Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are deeply intertwined with tribal fishing rights in Washington State, reflecting broader efforts to honor Indigenous sovereignty, rectify historical injustices, and ensure equitable access to natural resources:
Diversity: Acknowledging the unique cultural practices and knowledge systems of Indigenous communities enriches the collective understanding of sustainable resource management.
Equity: Ensuring that tribes have fair access to fishing resources addresses historical disparities and supports their economic and cultural well-being.
Inclusion: Involving tribal representatives in decision-making processes fosters collaborative governance and respects Indigenous sovereignty.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
burkemeister
Tribal fishing rights in Washington State are not a function of modern diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) ideology—they are legal rights grounded in treaties, federal court decisions, and constitutional principles. These rights predate current social policy trends and must be understood in their legal and historical context, not reframed through contemporary ideological lenses.
Legal Foundation Over Ideological Framing: Tribal fishing rights were established through treaties in the 1850s and upheld by landmark cases like United States v. Washington (the Boldt Decision, 1974), which affirmed tribes’ rights to 50% of harvestable fish. These rights are not privileges extended through DEI considerations; they are binding legal agreements the U.S. government is obligated to honor.
Sovereignty vs. Inclusion: True Indigenous sovereignty means self-governance and self-determination, not inclusion in broader government structures dominated by non-tribal interests. Framing tribal participation as "inclusion" subtly undermines their sovereign status by suggesting tribes are subordinate stakeholders rather than co-equal governing entities.
Equity vs. Treaty Rights: While “equity” often implies redistribution to correct disparities, treaty rights are not redistributive—they are property rights. Equating legal fishing rights with equity initiatives implies they are subject to change or political debate, which undermines their constitutional protection.
Cultural Value vs. Practical Governance: Indigenous knowledge systems can contribute meaningfully to resource management, but practical governance of natural resources must prioritize sustainability, legality, and scientific data—not ideological commitments to “diversity.” Culture can inform policy, but it should not override environmental realities or legal obligations.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
burkemeister
In short, reinterpreting tribal fishing rights through the lens of DEI distracts from their rightful legal basis and risks politicizing an issue that should remain grounded in treaty law and constitutional governance.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
Southsoundguy
DEI has come and gone. Why are the people in power the last to figure it out?
Thursday, May 15 Report this
Boatyarddog
WRONG SS Potatohead ...DEI is as importantant as Diversity in a Forest... we Certainly DO NOT want an ALL WHITE MALE SOCIETY ruling like KINGS.
Get your head out of where the sun don't shine. And please explain WHY you think DEI isn't important? YOUR comments Lack ANY KNOWLEDGE just TROLLING AROUND IS my Guess.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
burkemeister
Well, Boatyarddog, your response doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in its depth or credibility. From what I’ve seen in past threads, you tend to toss around shallow remarks as much as anyone—rarely offering insight, much less aiming to inform or educate. If you’re truly invested in the discussion, perhaps you could explain why DEI is so essential, rather than sidestepping the real issue.
The fact is, DEI as it’s practiced today is deeply rooted in Marxist ideology. Classic Marxism divided society into economic classes—oppressors and the oppressed. DEI recasts this framework along identity lines: race, gender, sexuality—claiming that disparities are always proof of systemic injustice, and using that claim to justify redistributing power and privilege.
The danger here is real. This mindset fosters division and resentment, not unity. It replaces individual merit with group identity, erodes personal responsibility, and politicizes everything. Instead of encouraging equal opportunity, it demands equal outcomes—regardless of effort, skill, or character.
In short, DEI’s ideological roots are not benign. When followed to their logical conclusion, they undermine the very freedoms and cohesion that hold a society together. If we want progress, we need to start with truth—not ideology.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
WillStuivenga
Well, burkemeister, I don't see the need to resort to claims of Marxist influence to explain DEI. Historically, we know quite clearly that the "all men are created equal" from the Declaration of Independence, quite literally meant "men" only, and specifically landed white men. They were originally the only "citizens" with full rights, included the voting franchise. It took literally centuries of struggle for women and people of color (and somewhere along the way, those who weren't landowners) to acquire voting rights, just to name one example. And even after those rights became more widespread in society, rampant discrimination still occurred against the "other" whether that meant women, people of color, LGBTQ+ folks, and the like, in almost every element of society, including red-lining, discrimination in hiring practices, access to health care, admittance to quality schools or even the provision of quality schools for children, etc. etc. etc.
In MY, admittedly perhaps a layman's understanding, DEI is the attempt to create a more level playing field, to allow ALL citizens access to equal rights, freedoms, and opportunities. Is is the attempt to make sure that minorities have the SAME rights as white males, and properly understood, and properly implemented, it is in no way, shape, or form, an attempt to discriminate AGAINST white males or any other group, just to insure that EVERYONE has the same rights and privileges that white males (of which, yes, I am one) have always had, and have always taken for granted. So DEI (despite the current administration's clearly racist attempts to squelch it) is every bit as relevant today as it always has been, and will continue to be until we reach a perfectly level and fair society, which seems unlikely to happen anytime soon.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
WillStuivenga
Oops, I made one typo in the preceding: the phrase "included the voting franchise" should have been "INCLUDING the voting franchise" without the emphasis which was merely added for clarity here.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
burkemeister
Thank you for your thoughtful response WillStuivenga. I agree that America’s history includes genuine injustice—particularly in its early exclusion of women, non-white citizens, and the poor from full participation in civic life. The extension of civil rights to all people, regardless of race, ***, or class, is one of the country’s most important achievements. But where we diverge is in how we understand and approach that history today—especially through the lens of DEI.
DEI as it exists now is not simply about fairness or equality. It is rooted in a broader ideological framework that traces back—not to the Declaration of Independence or the civil rights movement—but to Marxist thought, adapted through Critical Theory and its offspring, Critical Race Theory.
Here's how the connection works:
Class Conflict to Identity Conflict: Marxism originally divided society between economic classes—the bourgeoisie and the proletariat—arguing that all inequalities were the result of oppressive structures. DEI applies the same structure, but instead of economic class, it substitutes identity categories—race, gender, sexuality, etc.—and views society as a system of oppressors and oppressed.
Power and Redistribution: Marxist ideology sees history as a power struggle and calls for the redistribution of wealth and power to achieve equity. DEI mirrors this by calling for redistribution of opportunity, status, and influence based on identity—often through racial quotas, preferential hiring, and the re-centering of institutions around "marginalized voices," regardless of merit.
Group over Individual: DEI, like Marxism, prioritizes group identity over individual rights. It often treats people not as individuals with unique thoughts and experiences, but as representatives of identity categories—either beneficiaries of privilege or victims of systemic oppression.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
burkemeister
Where this becomes dangerous:
You're right to point out past discrimination. But DEI doesn’t correct those wrongs by ensuring equal treatment—it enshrines permanent categories of grievance and guilt. It demands equity of outcome, not opportunity, and does so by sacrificing merit, objectivity, and unity in favor of identity-based policies. In effect, it trades one form of injustice for another.
Moreover, Marxist-inspired systems—no matter how noble their stated goals—have consistently led to division, resentment, and authoritarianism. The goalposts for “equality” keep moving, and in the name of “inclusion,” dissenting views are often silenced.
In contrast:
The American ideal—that “all men are created equal”—was flawed in its application, yes, but revolutionary in its principle. That ideal has been the foundation of every civil rights advancement in this country. We should continue expanding equal opportunity and protecting civil liberties—but without importing the toxic worldview of class warfare, now repackaged in DEI language.
DEI may sound virtuous, but in practice, it's not about equality under the law—it's about managing power along identity lines. That’s not justice. That’s a soft form of the same Marxist mindset that’s proven so harmful throughout history.
Thursday, May 15 Report this
WillStuivenga
@burkemeister: We will simply have to agree to disagree. Your opinions are your opinions, and you have every right to hold them, and to express them, a right to free speech that I would rigorously defend. But they are opinions, which you have supported with zero facts or citations. My opinions are mine, and so far as I can tell, far more grounded in reality than yours. An almost necessary corollary to your views on this would be that "The New Deal" and "The Great Society" were all socialistic, Marxist efforts. Well, if so, then hooray for Marxism, as they have resulted in a far more just and equitable society. Would that those efforts could be redoubled, and expanded today. For the past several decades, at least since Ronald Reagan's disastrous policies, the gap between rich and poor in this country has been steadily widening until we have arrived at the point today where the world's richest man is essentially running the country to the detriment of the rest of us and mostly to his own personal benefit. Where finally even right-wing ideologues like Steve Bannon are suggesting higher taxes for the ultra-wealthy, and Trump himself bandied the idea recently, only to be shot down by those in his own circle.
I would argue that the injustices in our society are hardly something to be relegated to "history" but are active and prevalent today for most of American society INCLUDING the traditionally privileged class of white males. It's BECAUSE those white males feel so disenfranchised by the current state of affairs that many if not most of them voted for the charlatan currently occupying the White House, who is busy doing his best to make their lives even worse through his tariff regime (which will likely dump the whole world, not just the US into a recession), and through his attempts to destroy the Social Security and Veterans' Administrations, just to name a few of the most obvious ways he's ruining what's left of our government. And you have the temerity to grouse about DEI? Get a grip! That's the least of our problems!
Friday, May 16 Report this
WillStuivenga
And if you think Marxism inevitably leads to authoritarianism, what do you think the current administration is aiming for? Trump is trying as hard as he can to assume ALL power in this country, including relegating to himself powers and authority that the constitution clearly delegates to the other supposedly co-equal branches of government. Why just today, in the Supreme Court, right in front of the entire nation, one of his lawyers argued that the executive branch does not necessarily have to abide by court decisions in all cases.
As we see around the word in numerous countries right now (Russia, Turkey, Hungary, just to name a few) authoritarianism is far more likely to come from the right than from the left. Trump has already started his attempts to take over the results of state elections. In his view, repeatedly stated, the only elections that weren't rigged are the ones he wins. Right now, Marxists are the LAST thing you need to be worried about, if you prefer a democratic form of government.
Friday, May 16 Report this
burkemeister
WillStuivenga, I’ve presented historical facts and well-reasoned arguments, not mere opinions. If you’re unwilling to engage with those facts—or even acknowledge their existence—it suggests you’re more committed to defending an ideology than seeking truth.
It’s unfortunate, but when someone rejects reasoned dialogue in favor of dogma, further discussion becomes unproductive. For that reason, I’ll leave it here.
Friday, May 16 Report this
WillStuivenga
Classic projection: YOU'RE the one stating opinions and dogma and CLAIMING they're facts with zero evidence provided. Nothing you said about DEI is actually true, and you've provided nothing but your opinion on your views. I agree it's probably a good idea to leave it there. I already said we'd have to agree to disagree.
Friday, May 16 Report this
burkemeister
The Marxist Origins and Implications of DEI: A Historical Analysis
Introduction
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives have become prominent in various sectors, aiming to address disparities and promote inclusivity. While these goals appear commendable, it's essential to examine the ideological underpinnings of DEI, which can be traced back to Marxist thought, especially as developed by the Frankfurt School and Critical Theory. Understanding this lineage is crucial to assess the potential implications and challenges posed by DEI frameworks.
The Frankfurt School and the Genesis of Critical Theory
Established in 1923 at the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt, Germany, the Frankfurt School was a collective of Marxist scholars, including Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Herbert Marcuse, and Erich Fromm. Their objective was to adapt Marxist theory to address the cultural and ideological aspects of capitalist societies. They developed Critical Theory, which sought to critique and transform society by analyzing power structures, culture, and ideology.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Wikipedia
Critical Theory diverged from traditional Marxism by focusing on cultural hegemony and the role of ideology in maintaining oppressive systems. This approach laid the groundwork for later developments in identity politics and social justice movements.
From Critical Theory to DEI: The Evolution of Ideological Frameworks
The principles of Critical Theory influenced various academic disciplines, leading to the emergence of Critical Race Theory (CRT), feminist theory, and ***** theory. These frameworks examine how systemic power dynamics affect marginalized groups, emphasizing the role of identity in experiences of oppression.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
+2
Wikipedia
+2
Encyclopedia Britannica
+2
DEI initiatives draw heavily from these theories, aiming to address disparities by promoting representation, equitable outcomes, and inclusive practices. However, critics argue that DEI's emphasis on group identity and systemic oppression mirrors the Marxist focus on class struggle, substituting economic classes with identity groups.
Potential Dangers of DEI Rooted in Marxist Ideology
Erosion of Individual Merit: By prioritizing group identity over individual qualifications, DEI initiatives may undermine merit-based systems, leading to perceptions of unfairness and resentment.
Suppression of Dissent: DEI frameworks often label opposing viewpoints as oppressive, potentially stifling open discourse and critical thinking.
Perpetuation of Division: Emphasizing identity categories can reinforce divisions rather than promote unity, fostering an environment of "us versus them."
Institutional Overreach: Implementing DEI policies may lead to increased bureaucratic control and monitoring, reminiscent of centralized planning in Marxist regimes.
Conclusion
While the intentions behind DEI initiatives—to promote fairness and inclusivity—are laudable, it's crucial to critically assess their ideological foundations and potential consequences. Recognizing the roots of DEI in Marxist thought allows for a more nuanced understanding of its implications, ensuring that efforts to promote equity do not inadvertently replicate the very systems of control and division they seek to dismantle.
References:
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. "Critical Theory." https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-theory/
Law & Liberty. "The Philosophy Underlying DEI." https://lawliberty.org/the-philosophy-underlying-dei/
Law & Liberty
Wikipedia. "Frankfurt School." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School
New Discourses. "The Marxist Roots of DEI Workshop: All Sessions." https://newdiscourses.com/2023/04/marxist-roots-of-dei-workshop-all-sessions/
New Discourses
+1
YouTube
+1
Word on Fire. "The Origin and Dismantling of DEI." https://www.wordonfire.org/articles/the-origin-and-dismantling-of-dei/
Word on Fire
Amazon. "America's Cultural Revolution: How the Radical Left Conquered Everything." https://www.amazon.com/Americas-Cultural-Revolution-Conquered-Everything/dp/0063227533
Amazon
Jacobin. "For a Century, the Frankfurt School Has Been a Thorn in Capitalism’s Side." https://jacobin.com/2023/10/frankfurt-school-domination-modern-social-research-capitalism-critical-theory
Jacobin
New Yorker. "The Surprisingly Sunny Origins of the Frankfurt School." https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/12/02/naples-1925-martin-mittelmeier-book-review
The New Yorker
Saturday, May 17 Report this
burkemeister
Books on the Roots of DEI and Critical Theory
1. America's Cultural Revolution: How the Radical Left Conquered Everything
Author: Christopher F. Rufo
A well-researched exposé of how Marxist thought, particularly from Herbert Marcuse and the New Left, permeated American institutions.
Traces a direct ideological line from the Frankfurt School to modern DEI initiatives.
2. The Devil’s Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West
Author: Michael Walsh
An analysis of how Critical Theory, rooted in Marxist ideology, seeks to undermine Western values and institutions.
Offers a cultural and philosophical critique of the Frankfurt School's long-term influence.
3. Race Marxism: The Truth About Critical Race Theory and Praxis
Author: James Lindsay
A clear and accessible breakdown of how Critical Race Theory is a direct application of Marxist class conflict theory, repurposed for identity categories.
Also discusses the role of DEI as praxis (activist application) of CRT.
4. Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity—and Why This Harms Everybody
Authors: Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay
Explores the intellectual history behind Critical Theory and how it evolved into applied postmodern ideologies like DEI.
Provides a critical but readable overview of how DEI emerged from postmodern and Marxist schools of thought.
5. The Rise of Victimhood Culture: Microaggressions, Safe Spaces, and the New Culture Wars
Authors: Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning
Not explicitly about Marxism, but explores the cultural shifts that DEI reflects and reinforces, including the moral frameworks of grievance and power.
Very helpful to understand the cultural psychology behind DEI norms.
Books on Marxism, the Frankfurt School, and Cultural Hegemony
6. The Frankfurt School and Its Critics
Author: Tom Bottomore
A scholarly but accessible history of the Frankfurt School's main thinkers and ideas.
Helps to ground your understanding of how Critical Theory developed as a Marxist critique of culture.
7. The Critical Theorists and Our Society
Editor: Dennis L. Dworkin
A compilation of essays and writings from key Frankfurt School thinkers, with commentary.
Good for those wanting primary source material and analysis side by side.
8. Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain: History, the New Left, and the Origins of Cultural Studies
Author: Dennis Dworkin
Explores how Marxist ideas migrated into cultural studies and education, laying foundations for what would become DEI ideology.
9. The Open Society and Its Enemies
Author: Karl Popper
While not directly about DEI, this is a classic defense of liberal democracy and critique of totalitarian ideologies, including Marxism.
Essential reading for understanding why ideological systems like DEI can become coercive.
Saturday, May 17 Report this
Boatyarddog
Hey Burkmiester i my humble opinion Socialism is not so bad if you use Diversity as a model, most want to pitch in, some want to control others so they feel safe 8n their little universe been that way since the dawn of time. My true intention with regard to statements calling out S***talkers of our Youth, progressive values, Liberialism ect. Over and over is to remind THAT Offender that they too can be harrassed. I also suceeded in getting someone to Debate with you. Again Our society needs big change but haters and Violent people MAGA Or their King Is Not going to succeed. In this Country or City.
Tuesday, June 3 Report this
Boatyarddog
Of your own account you spell out the Very reason DEI is so important. "The danger here is real. This mindset fosters division and resentment, not unity. It replaces individual merit with group identity, erodes personal responsibility, and politicizes everything"
This is exactly why It is so Important DEI is Preserved. DIVERSITY is as natural as Nature, go for a walk in the Woods, we see all kinds of plants and trees, EQUITY, because Everyone deserves to be heard and their ideas considered ideological, and Practical ideas, INCLUION because there should be representation for everyone in all decisions. Those that want to dominate don't want Diversity, Equity, or Inclusion.
Tuesday, June 3 Report this