“I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert… Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
‘My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!’
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.”
“Ozymandias” was written by Percy Bysshe Shelley and first published in 1818. The inspiration came from reports of a colossal statue of the Egyptian pharaoh Rameses II (called “Ozymandias” in Greek), which was being pillaged by the British and shipped to the British Museum at the time. The poem quickly became one of Shelley’s most famous works.
The poem captures the irony of human ambition and the impermanence of worldly power. The ruined statue, once a grand monument to the pride of a mighty king, now lies shattered and half-buried in an empty desert. The boastful inscription proclaims Ozymandias’s greatness, but all that remains is decay and desolation. Through this, Shelley underscores the futility of seeking eternal glory through conquest or domination—time eventually erases all empires.
“Ozymandias” is a powerful reflection on hubris, legacy, and mortality. In politics, business, and life, the poem serves as a cautionary tale: greatness built on pride and domination will not endure. What lasts are values, ideas, and expressions that outlive the fleeting grip of authority. Its lesson continues to echo across time, reminding us that even the “kings of kings” are humbled by the sands of history.
Ozymandias, the proud king’s boast (“Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!”) stands in bitter contrast to what remains: a shattered visage, ruined monument, a sense of grandeur lost in the sands. Shelley warns us about the danger of building for legacy without substance, about how human hubris, even in its most majestic forms, is subject to time and decay.
That metaphor feels relevant to how SHRM has been ran under Johnny C. Taylor.
For those unfamiliar, the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) presents itself as a leading authority in the HR profession. It boasts it represents millions of HR workers, hundreds of thousands of members, and a global reach. Its statements, conferences, rebrands are all intended to testify to its power and influence. But increasingly, what remains beneath the rhetoric is a hollowing out of trust, a misalignment between words and values. The “works” may be impressive in scope, but if the foundational purpose (justice, equity, dignity) is eroded or compromised, the monument risks being more spectacle than substance.
I’ve written about SHRM’s issues before, but it’s always been from a place of hope. I don’t think I’m hopeful anymore. Under Johnny C. Taylor, ever the self-promoter, SHRM has firmly demonstrated it is more concerned with being on the fascist guestlist than with justice for HR professionals and workplaces. I’m sure everyone was devastated he wasn’t named Labor Secretary.
And the organization’s decent into despair and decay continues, look upon his works, ye HR practitioners, and despair!
SHRM recently announced that Van Jones and Robby Starbuck will be on a panel at SHRM Blueprint 2025, moderated by none other than Taylor. The stated goal is to present “differing perspectives” in the Inclusion & Diversity (I&D) arena. SHRM’s title for DEI, not mine, or anyone else who actually cares about diveristy, equity, inclusion, or other people.
For those unfamiliar, Robby Starbuck is a “conservative” commentator, and I use that term loosely. Van Jones is a liberal social justice voice. Starbuck’s public profile has become increasingly defined by his controversial rhetoric, particularly his opposition to LGBTQ+ rights, DEI initiatives, and his promotion of conspiracy theories. His strategy often involves pressuring corporations to abandon what he calls “woke” policies and framing himself as a defender of political neutrality—though his efforts push a discriminatory agenda.
On LGBTQ+ and DEI issues, Starbuck has
- repeatedly characterized the display of Pride flags as “grooming and indoctrination,” part of a broader narrative that LGBTQ+ visibility around children is inherently harmful.
- alleged that trans people transition in order to assault cisgender women in public bathrooms—an unsubstantiated and harmful claim that has been widely challenged.
- wrote in June 2023 about McGraw Hill’s Pride celebration that “They say no matter how you identify, you should be accepted. That means a man can identify as a child,” prompting accusations that he was invoking false equivalencies tied to pedophilia.
- referred to DEI programs as a “Trojan Horse” for left-wing policy. He routinely pressures companies via social media campaigns to roll back or eliminate their DEI initiatives—targeting brands like Tractor Supply, John Deere, Harley‑Davidson, Lowe’s, Brown‑Forman, and others.
Not only does Starbuck peddle racist and bigoted views, he also peddles conspiracy theories and misinformation, including false claims that the pesticide atrazine “turns frogs gay,” that children are being “sexualized” through chemicals, and that Matthew Perry’s death was caused by COVID‑19 vaccines—not as determined by the medical findings.
It’s outrage porn for MAGA. It’s baseless, false, wrong, and evil. This is the man that SHRM is brining in to present to HR professionals.
It is mindboggling that SHRM would bring in someone like Robby Starbuck to speak to its members. This is not the kind of voice HR professionals should be hearing from. Starbuck is not a leader, not an innovator, and certainly not someone advancing the HR profession. He is a bigot, a wild conspiracy theorist whose rhetoric has inflicted real harm on real people – people HR professionals are supposed to be supporting and helping! His views are not only extreme and baseless, but they are also dangerous. By putting him on stage, SHRM is presenting his crackpot ideas as if they are legitimate contributions to our field. They are not.
I am sick of the false equivalence that everything has “two sides.” Not all views are equal, and not all deserve a platform. Giving equal weight to views that demean, exclude, or dehumanize others only legitimizes hate. If someone’s views are rooted in racism, misogyny, transphobia, or deliberate misinformation, they are not worthy of debate. They deserve only outright rejection.
I don’t want these views anywhere near my profession. SHRM should be ashamed of itself for this choice, and HR professionals everywhere should loudly disavow this decision. The SHRM Board of Directors, in particular, should feel deep shame for allowing this to happen.
So now, an institution that once held my respect no longer does.
No one should seriously consider SHRM in its current state a leader in the HR space. It doesn’t speak for HR professionals. It has withered into sunken ruins beneath sand and dust. If SHRM wants to “look on its works” and avoid having only “shattered visage[s],” as in Ozymandias, it will need to show not merely grand statements but humble, consistent, honest, and sometimes difficult actions.
Or it can maintain itself as a colossal wreck, boundless and bare, and continue losing trust, respect, and influence.
But hey, I wonder what the “other side” has to say…
© 2025 HR Philosopher. All rights reserved.
The HR Philosopher 