1/ Ever wonder why Universities produce so much wokeness?
The answer is 'Activist Scholars': woke professors who have decided that the goal of a University is to ideologically indoctrinate students and spread activist propaganda.
They admit this, and I have receipts
A Thread🧵
2/ See, the problem is NOT merely that some professors have blind-spots that need to be corrected by having lots of other professors with different views. That issue is important, but that is not what I am talking about.
Activists Scholars are an entirely different problem.
3/ The Scholar Activist sees their job to do activism in the classroom including using their classroom in the University to train more woke activists
This Paper by Kia M. Q. Hall is about activities for training Black Lives Matter activists in the classroom.
4/ You see, the Scholar Activist does not even attempt to teach from neutral ground. They have an ideology, and use their classroom to train students to become activists on behalf of that ideology.
Here Deborah Lowry suggests a way to teach that "supports student-activists":
5/ This isn't bias and blind-spots, this is activists deciding the classroom is a place for them to teach and train activists to agitate on behalf of woke ideology.
But it goes further; many of these professors explicitly admit they no longer care about telling the truth...
6/ Here, Kelly Oliver says the quiet part out loud.
She says feminist theories do NOT have to be true or false...they have to be STRATEGIC. The truth does not matter, strategy does.
This is because, she says, feminism has to be revolutionary; and she means *REVOLUTIONARY*
7/ Not to be outdone, professor Joan Scott tells us that they seek a theory that will be relevant for political practice, and Sociologist Raewyn Connell seeks a theory of Gender that takes politics into account.
8/ These professors are saying, very explicitly, that they are publishing in academic journals, and teaching in University classrooms, a set academic theories which exist ENTIRELY for the purpose of doing woke activist politics.
This isn't bias, it's indoctrination.
9/ You see the fruit of this sort of activist training in the situation that occurred at Evergreen State college when student activists took over the Campus.
Here, students tell the faculty of the college they just took over they learned their activism FROM THAT SAME FACULTY.
10/ The faculty of evergreen turned their students into activists, who turned around and used their activist training to take over the college and demand the already woke college become even more woke.
Woke professors caught in a feedback loop of wokeness of their own creation
11/ I hope thus far you have seen that there is a good sized segment of the University that has decided that rather then pursue truth and seek to be a neutral in the classroom as possible, they are going to pursue politics, and use the classroom to indoctrinate the students.
12/ So how did they manage to do that?
To understand that you need to understand what tenure.
Tenure means that a professor can be terminated only for cause under extraordinary circumstances. It is almost impossible to fired once as a professor if you have tenure.
13/ Woke academics who have gotten tenure, use their positions to help as many other woke people get tenure as possible.
Here, Henry Giroux explains how he helped **100** people get tenure, and how he sees doing so as being an important "political intervention."
14/ This means a couple of things.
The first is that these professors can publish woke papers in academic journals, which makes their ideology look legitimate. This is like laundering money, except in this case the thing being laundered is activist ideology.
The second is....
15/ A professor with tenure is nearly impossible to fire. Even if they get caught teaching activist ideology they can't be fired, and that means they are free to propagandize and indoctrinate without fear of being fired.
Are we beginning to see what's happening here?
16/ The woke are taking over Universities by helping each other get tenure, so they can keep indoctrinating students in the classrooms while publishing their woke ideology in journals so it gets treated like real science, scholarship, and knowledge.
17/ What gets left out by the woke is the truth, because the woke are not interested in trying to find out and teach about how the world really is.
Here, Kelly Oliver talks about how to divorce science from nature, so that feminists can take over science with feminist ideology.
18/ They are telling us what they are doing, and they are being clear about it. They mean what they say, and they say what they mean.
We need to take these people at face value and start believing us when they tell us who they are and what they are doing.
19/ There are no easy answers here but we can start by showing people what is going on and sharing this information widely. Then we can start figuring out a strategy to counter wokeness in the University.
let's get to work
/fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Indigenous displacement is an idea from postcolonial theory often used to normatively criticize western nations; often using statistical demographic change as evidence of the charge.
My question is: why this doesn't idea apply to London?
2/ The point I am trying to bring out here is related to a question asked by the philosopher Joseph Heath: "What is the difference between a settler and an immigrant?"
Concepts like "indigenous displacement" appear to be neutral descriptions but are in fact normatively loaded...
3/ And the result is that they get deployed according to the normative political considerations of the person using them.
This is why Europeans who move to the U.S. are called "settlers" but Syrian refugees get called immigrants.
"Catholics would be tolerated on the fringes of society"
This sentence is why the dissident right will fail. Trad-Caths/Catholic Integralists see protestants as an abhorration of the true faith. So there's *zero* chance they ever agree to be "tolerated at the fringe of society."
The dissident right has a Protestant wing and a catholic wing.
Protestant DR types think some form of *protestant* Christianity (usually but not always some form of Calvinism) needs to be the default religion of the public.
Trad-caths think it should be catholicism...
And the trad-caths are never, evr, going to let the protestant calvinists (whom the catholics view as a heretical abhorration of true Christianity) force catholics to be merely "tolerated at the fringes."
Likewise, protestants will *never* submit to catholic rule. Ever.
Since "noticing" appears to be a thing, I'd like to say that I "notice" things as well....And I can't help but *notice* the obsession that certain people have with Israel, even though other nations (China, India, Russia, etc) impact the U.S. far more....
I also can't help but notice that those same sorts of people are obsessed the influence of wealth Jews, but have nothing to say about the influence of money from China, Qatar, Russia, India, and so on.
The Jews are, apparantly, an item of incredibly deep concern...
For a great number of people, and I can't help but *notice* that the far greater and more pernicious influence (and subversion) coming from foreign money in other countries gets mysteriously ignored, and I *notice* that Israel is held to a higher standard than every other country
1/ Wokeness is the alloy of the political ideology and moral value framework from Critical Theory with the social constructivist worldview and epistemology of postmodernism.
As the political side of woke recedes culturally, it leaves behind the underlying postmodern worldview.
2/ The teleology of the woke project came from the moral commitments of intersectional social justice (Trans-rights, Race based activism, etc)
Those movements are being dissolved by their own incoherence and absurdity (Land acknowledgements, claiming men can become women, etc)
3/ The dissolution and exhaustion of the political movement that provided the teleology and moral value framework for wokeness leaves the entire social movement around which those things were built without any thing to serve as locus for meaning, purpose, or values.
The left has what @wesyang calls a "Vertically Integrated Messaging Apparatus." It's an apparatus of messaging distribution which is owned and operated by leftists top to bottom, and disseminates only the information which aligns with leftist moral norms and political priorities.
@wesyang The lefts messaging apparatus used to be the information distributor for all of society (we called it "mainstream media") but new media alternatives and the rollback of social media censorship regime's mean society is no longer a captive audience for the lefts messaging apparatus
For decades it was the progressive leftist worldview from which the norms of public life and the values of the common culture were derived. The at-large culture was the home of leftists, and conservative evangelicals were treated like unwanted guests.
Those days are over.
The culture is changing so quickly that people are about to get whiplash. It's no longer the case that the default values of public life are those of the social-justice left, (or of "progressives") and progressives no longer get to determine what is allowed in "polite company."
In other words, the progressives no longer get to simply assume that their goals, values, and priorities get to take center stage in the at-large culture.
The presumption of progressive leftists that they get to set the terms of the debate no longer carries any weight.