1/ The woke are not trying to win the culture war against liberals intellectually, they are trying to win SOCIALLY.
The woke don't fight academically with evidence and reason.
They fight SOCIALLY using power moves to take over institutions and bullying tactics to shut us up.
2/ The woke do not want to merely participate in liberal democratic society; allowing their ideas to be carefully scrutinized by our academic, cultural and democratic institutions.
The woke want to SEIZE POWER in those institutions, and mutate them into institutions of wokeness.
3/ So the tactics adopted by the woke were developed for seizing institutional, cultural, and political power, not for discovering the truth. If it works to send social media mobs after people to get them fired so woke people can take their jobs works, then that is what they do.
4/ Since the goal of the woke is to seize social and political power so they can wield it in the name of their ideology, they are not interested in being kind, civil, or "nice."
In fact Robin DiAngelo actually says "niceness" is bad, and claims it reproduces white supremacy:
5/ The result is that when the woke try to get into positions of power, they do not typically do so by demonstrating they have the MERIT to be in those positions. They are not, to be frank, interested in meeting the standard of merit that liberals use in selecting their leaders.
6/ This is because the woke think liberals and other non-woke groups don't really care about merit, and just use merit as an excuse to keep "marginalized groups" out of positions of power. The woke think leadership requirements are little more than poorly disguised power hoarding
7/ As such they think meeting liberal standards accepts the logic of liberalism, which they reject and want to replace with wokeness.
So, rather than follow liberal rules of civility, merit, reason, and democracy; they follow woke rules and play cynical social power games.
8/ They will accuse, imply, and insinuate all kinds of things about anyone in order to socially destroy whoever dares to get in their way.
They're not going to tell you you're wrong, they're going to tell everyone else you're a racist, sexist, homophobe.
That's how it works.
9/ Here, @BretWeinstein explains how false accusations of racism were used to try to intimidate him into going along with a woke takeover of College where he was teaching at the time.
Please pay close attention here:
10/ In this Clip Reihan Salam (@reihan) response to comments by Eddie Glaude (@esglaude) and while he is talking Eddie interrupts him to insinuate that Reihan is not being genuiune and is merely trying to score political points in a debate.
This is a typical woke tactic.
11/ The point he is that if you think you're going to push back on wokeness with arguments according to the rules of civility, fairplay, evidence and reason you are sorely mistaken.
This is not how this works.
12/ The woke don't play that game. Theirs is a contest for power, and they use cynical social tactics in order to try to browbeat people into doing what the woke want them to do.
Push back requires we recognize what game the woke are playing, and make that clear to everyone else
13/ Wokeness has a vulnerability: being understood.
When people understand the game the woke play, they stop going along with it and the woke lose power.
So make their game clear, make it transparent, and call it out. The sooner you do the sooner they woke lose power.
/fin
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ The National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) created a DEI program focused on:
-Power, privilege, and oppression
-Understanding microaggressions
-Centering Native Voices in Atmospheric Sciences
-Knowledge that "does not come from science"
2/ The NCAR had two programs. The first was called UNIEON (which stands for "UCAR/NCAR Equity and Inclusion program"), and the second was a program they funded called "rising voices," which was about bringing "indigenous knowledge" into science.
And it's funded by tax dollars.
3/ The goal of the DEI program (UNIEON) was to bring DEI into the NCAR, and then get the participants to start implementing the DEI ideology via "Bystander intervention." That is, it invites people to insert themselves into other peoples social interactions in order to spread DEI
1/ If you want to understand influencer behavior, read Former WWE executive Eric Bischoffs' book "Controversy Creates Cash" about the inner workings of pro wrestling.
He said controversial things, regardless of morality, generates attention, creates buzz, and sells tickets.
2/ The title of the book comes from a chapter where he discussed bringing in Dennis Rodman for an event because Rodman was controversial and "controversy creates cash." Much of what is happening online, including the Charlie Kirk conspiracies, is driven by exactly this dynamic.
3/ While there is certainly more to it (parasocial relationships with influencers, foreign influencers, etc) one of the major factors that incentivizes outlandish claims and conspiracy theorizing is that the controversy generates attention, creates buzz, and drives engagement.
1/ There's a genre of woke-posting where they state their views as if they were talking to toddlers as a way of making their views look obvious (even kids get it!), grabbing moral authority (I'm the teacher!), and leveraging condescension to imply their opponents are beneath them
2/ These women are not actually trying to explain anything, the explanation is just a front for their condescending tone. The real goal is to "put you in your place" by treating you like a toddler so they can grab the social high-ground in the conversation
3/ The reason they do this is because by adopting the posture of a kindergarten teach it forces you fight through layers of snark, sarcasm, and condescending tone while being put in the social position of a child talking to a teacher.
Making the Friend/Enemy distinction the fundamental axis of politics is to reject the Aristotelian claim at the heart of western civilization that says politics is about human flourishing and pursuing the good, and to replace it with the political ideology of 3rd world tribalism.
If you want The West to turn into Somalia, tell people that the fundamental distinction all political motives and actions revolve around is "who is on my team and who isn't," and the goal is to reward your friends while harming enemies.
Cause that's how Somalia works
There are a whole lot of people running around acting like "friend/enemy" is some kind of deep idea, or profound simplification of politics, when in fact it's little more than the rejection of the grand political tradition of western civilization in favor do 3rd world tribalism.
2/ They don't do land acknowledgements and such in order to make my son feel unwelcome, they are just applying the things they were taught in college about "reconciliation." For the most part, these teachers mean well and are really trying their best, but because of the skew...
3/ of the teacher toward being both progressive and toward being women, the result is a very feminine coded social justice oriented environment across the education system. The result is that the environment is terrific for little girls, but can be difficult for little boys...
People coming from third world nations to advanced western nations bring their ideas about of how society works with them.
So they don't see electoral politics as a tool for ensuring proper governance, they see it as a way to get goodies for their clan and win tribal conflicts
This isn't because those people are evil, stupid—it's because in third world nations the primary use of politics really is for winners to give goodies to their friends and settle scores with their enemies.
The competent management of infrastructure and services is secondary.
So, rather then ask "how can I govern in a way that is best for the health of the nation as a whole, and whst is the best way to ensure competent management of the advanced systems that make society work?" The third worlder asks "how can I reward my friends and harm my enemies?"