one last time : what is "woke" and why is it a bad thing?

unless we get an answer that "conservatives" generally agree on, i'm going to go along with the rude pundit.

As often as Florida governor, GOP presidential candidate, and man who looks like making children cry arouses him Ron DeSantis talks about crushing the "woke mind virus," which I think means, "**** I can make sound scary," as often as he promises to "leave woke ideology in the dustbin of history," as he does in his truly, laughably shitty campaign website, I haven't seen a single challenge to him where he's asked, "The **** do you want?"

Because what would be the answer? What could possibly be the answer to, say, the desired outcome in eliminating all programs at schools that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion? Just to game it out here, those in the DeSantis/Christopher Rufo camp of purging the offices of diversity or any academic programs that teach things like "racism is bad" would probably trot out their evil initials of doom and declare that, in and of themselves, DEI and CRT (whatever the **** they think critical race theory is) are discriminatory. But how they're discriminatory is never explained because the explanation would have to include "against white people" and as blatant as they are about their racist intentions, they never quite make the leap to that. (Yes, there are exceptions who have always been shitheels and say the worst things possible.)

 

So Jesus and Confucious were woke, according to your other thread, but woke is an undefined term of the other side according to this one.

Sounds like you’re just an overall very confused person.

 

well, you gonna unconfuse me? why should i care if these corporations are "woke?" aren't these attacks just negative ad campaigns from their competitors?

 

If everyone is all over the map on specific definitions then the most obvious and prudent method is not get hung up on the definition at all but take every example where it’s mentioned on a case by case basis using your own judgment on what’s right and wrong.

The alternative is not only confusion, as you’ve demonstrated, but an unwillingness to even look at something objectively because of the political partisanship attached to that word.

 

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/01/23/the-weaponising-of-woke/

 

Woke is the theory that humans are divisible into two classes: oppressor and oppressed. White men are oppressors, everyone else is oppressed.

 

But that's the problem, it is undefined. Technically, it means being socially conscious. And that means MLK was woke, Abraham Lincoln was woke, the 13th amendment is woke, etc. But somehow, the far right attempted to make woke anything and everything that they don't like from LGBTQ to history to math to science to books to whatever, especially with multiculturism and respecting others to accountability.

 

that's not woke, that is what you think CRT is.

However, there have always been oppressors and there has always been oppressed. The color of the skin is not the issue, that is just oversimplifying things to fit a political narrative.

 

It is exactly what woke is. You can play your New Speak mind games elsewhere.

 

by that definition is anybody "woke?" we clearly do not divide people into "two classes," as we recognize ranges and spectra of all kinds and are not really into "must be 1 or the other" bipolarity.

 

that is not what woke is. Historically, woke is an adjective derived from African American Vernacular English to mean "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination." And this word was first used by Jamaican philosopher and social activist named Marcus Garvey. Then the internet came and in the 2000s and 2010s, it became quite popular on the internet and moved from there. But the original intent was social prejudice and discrimination, which this country still has a problem with apparently.

 

Not according to wokesters .

 

Words evolve.

 

deleted

 

Wokeness is an attempt to end real debate




The goal of Woke is dominance and exclusion

1. 'Demand for dominance/compliance (because of lack of safety/perceived threat).
2. Dominance exercised through the exclusion of perceived threat.
3. Non-compliance/questions trigger accusations, i.e. racism, sexism, etc. (the booby-trap).
4. Accusations become proof of lack of safety/threat.
5. Return to step 1 and repeat.'

'High school debate clubs. Like so many other aspects of our education system these clubs have been infiltrated by wokeness. It’s literally the end of debate in' many cases.

'Once upon a time, the National Speech & Debate Association, or NSDA, was the country’s premier debating organization, touching the lives of two million high school students across its nearly hundred-year history. Its famous alumni include Oprah Winfrey, and Supreme Court justices Neil Gorsuch and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The NSDA, formerly known as the National Forensics League, currently has 140,000 young debaters on its roster—but now, rather than teaching them to debate, it is teaching them to self-censor and conform their arguments to a new politically correct standard.'

'The NSDA has allowed hundreds of judges with explicit left-wing bias to infiltrate the organization. These judges proudly display their ideological leanings in statements—or “paradigms”—on a public database maintained by the NSDA called Tabroom, where they declare that debaters who argue in favor of capitalism, or Israel, or the police, will lose the rounds they’re judging.'

They should get rid of those judges.

'A trans judge named Lila Lavender who explains:'

'Before anything else, I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. I will no longer evaluate and thus ever vote for rightest capitalist imperialist positions/arguments. Meaning, arguments/positions which defend the bourgeoisie’s class dictatorship (monopoly capitalism and thus imperialism), from a right-wing political form. I.e., the politics, ideology, and practice of the right-wing of the bourgeoisie.'

'Examples of arguments of this nature are as follows: fascism good, capitalism good, imperialist war good, neoliberalism good, defenses of US or otherwise bourgeois nationalism, Zionism or normalizing Israel, colonialism good, US white fascist policing good, etc.'

'Anyone who wants to claim their opponent represents a threat to the safety of others can do so and may be able to score a win on that basis even while sidestepping the actual debate topic. For instance, in a championship tournament Matthew Adelstein was debating in favor of the federal government controlling water resources.'

'In his final round of the two-day tournament, Matthew was shocked to hear the opposing team levy a personal attack against him as their central argument. The opposing team argued: “This debate is more than just about the debate—it’s about protecting the individuals in the community from people who proliferate hatred and make this community unsafe.”'

'Then they pulled up a screenshot of a tweet from earlier that month, which Matthew had responded to.'

'The tweet read: “Name one thing that you, personally, feel is morally disgusting, but that you think, rationally, should be legal and accepted by society.” Matthew had replied: “Calling people racial or homophobic slurs.”'

'What Adelstein said in the tweet is a pretty basic free speech ideal, i.e. I disagree with you’re saying but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it. And yet, the judge in that case handed his opponents the win. The judge explained, “A debate space where racist or violent people are not allowed is preferable to one where they are.”'

'Naturally, one of the hot topics for these judges is trans issues. They literally warn debaters that debating these issues will lead to a loss.'

'At NSDA nationals, there were at least two dozen judges who warned students against “transphobia” in their paradigms. These ambiguous warnings instill fear in students about the arguments they can’t make. This fear drives self-censorship and eliminates certain viewpoints that need to be heard.'

'So the inevitable outcome of this is self-censorship by competitors. Just by leveling the threat, the judges have forced compliance on their particular issues. No actual debate will be allowed.'

 

Have you ever shared a Black Lives Matter post on social media but never donated your time or money to making lives better for blacks?

You're the definition of woke.

 

What is wrong with equality? And who is being “forced”? I mean take the role of women - how many female Republican congresspeople are there (santos doesn’t count) How many “ethnic diverse) republicans are there - do the proportions reflect the make up of the electorates?

 

????

 

Which is exactly what Marxist did after the abject failure of their first catch phrase to spark a revolution. What is called woke is in fact directly related to CRT whose creators referred to themselves as Marxists.

 

'woke' used to be a term for something along the lines of 'familiar with the oppressions of black people.'

Then it was appropriated from black people by (mostly white) progressives into a partisan catch-all for socialism, big govt and the Democratic Party, in an attempt to equate those things with ethnic equity.

Basically its just the latest way to say 'if you disagree with my politics, its because you're racist'.

 

Woke is a term that signifies social activities that attack our culture and security. It is simply a convenient term for it. Don't like it? Don't use it. Use your own term. Why did anybody have to provide this answer for the umpteenth time.

 

The term "woke" fell into disrepute because its association with the Black Lives Matter organization and the George Floyd riots. Black Lives Matter is a Marxist based organization that lived up to its reputation. It claimed to represent the rights, hopes and dreams of African-Americans, but ultimately its leadership took the spoils and left the rank and file with nothing, unless it's a rare arrest record for arson and looting. This is the usual pattern for Marxist based governments and organizations. Capitalism for the leadership, socialism (leftovers) for the rank and file or proletariat.


.

 

Woke is a culture and idiology that is antithetical or incompatible with a classical liberalism and individualist society and/or traditional value systems existing even in a social or personal sphere.

It's a culture and as a culture, it cannot be entirely defined or boxed in as you wish it to be.

 

total BS. It means nothing of the sort.