So, about the @brandi_love thing...

What libertarians, constitutional conservatives, and social conservstives need to realize is:

You are all outgunned by the woke left.


Not one of those groups has even a snowballs chance in hell of winning without the others...
The libertarians need to understand that the woke left is authoritarian

The constitutional conservatives need to understand the woke will deconstruct the constitution.

And Social Cons need to realize the woke left is currently giving hormones and sex changes to *children*
The woke left will use the power the libertarians fear in order to destroy both the constitution that the constitutional conservstives love, and the social norms that the social conservatives want to protect.

These groups will either hang together, or they'll hang seperately
Libertarians must realize we need more than free markets

Constitutional conservatives must realize the constitution needs social and moral norms to work

Social conservatives must realize social norms can't be so specific they exclude anyone who isn't a traditional catholic.
There are people in each group who see how powerful the woke are, and are telling the other groups "do things my way or I'll let the woke destroy you."

They're using the threat of woke power as a bargaining chip to say "either put me in charge 100% or I'll let the woke win."
This is going to end badly for everyome because what the people who use woke power as a bargaining chip don't get is....

The woke will come for them as well. If the woke win everyone go the right of Bernie Sanders is in very serious trouble.

We need to be grown ups now.
We need a coalition that accepts freedom as a good, and social norms as a necessity.

We can say: "marriage is good, men and women are different, fathers are necessary, religion and community are needed, police are good, the country must be defended and taxes should be low."
And that platform wins with 90% of america and still cuts off 90% of the excesses of the woke.

Does it stop all immorality? No.
Does it ensure government shrinks? No.
Does it guarantee patriotism? No.
Is it perfect? No.

But it makes room for all of us...

And it wins.
It allows us to:

-re-establish the two parent family as the norm.
-stop CRT
-prevent using hormones and gender surgery on kids
-rebuild trust in our police services
-allow markets to function
-stop the march of the woke

It gets us an awful lot if we do it correctly.
And it does so without alienating the people we need to win.

I can live in a world where we estsblish a norm that says the best route for life is monogamous marriage and family, but we let people go off that road if they want.

And I think most americans can too.
We can establish the reality of biological sex and re-establish the traditional monogamous family unit as the norm that almost everyone will be better off following.

We can have social and moral norms and still understand that people are individuals who make choices.
Ya'll need to get along, becuase basically, we are here:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Wokal Distance

Wokal Distance Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @wokal_distance

18 Jul
@mariachong calls every moral concern to her right a "moral panic." This includes (but is not limited to):

concerns about free speech
Concerns about cancel culture
Caring about a math curriculum
Not liking Captain Marvel
disagreement with identity politics Image
@CathyYoung63 called out this exact kind of thinking in another context:

(I mis-quoted this tweet before, so I fixed it here in order to get the exact context correct)

Then maria says that "the right murder people" because of moral panics, and then follows that up by saying the the reason we have violence is....heated political rhetoric form the right, which is of course part of a right wing moral panic. ImageImage
Read 5 tweets
18 Jul
The people who say:

"That's not Critical Race Theory, that's Critical *Whiteness* Studies"

...even though the textbooks for each are written by the same people, are now saying that CRT opposition is in the same boat as QAnon.

This is just silly.
Leftist ideas must be described in high resolution, conservative ideas may be described in low resolution.
If you lump Critical Whiteness Studies in with Critical Race Theory you're ignorant and don't understand nuance, if you lump opposition to CRT in with QAnon that's ok.
Every slight nuance in left wing ideas separates them from the others and each leftist idea deserves it own fresh analysis done fairly and in good faith.

Meanwhile, even the most superficial similarity between right wing ideas is enough to lump them together and dismiss them.
Read 9 tweets
7 Jul
"It is not possible to avoid being socialized into a racist worldview if you're white. It's not possible, it's coming at us 24/7."
-Robin DiAngelo

Why does she think that? It's doctrine in Critical Race Theory called "Structural Determinism."

Let's talk about it

A Thread🧵
Now, some people claim Robin DiAngelo isn't Critical Race Theory (CRT). However, DiAngelo does Critical Whiteness Studies (CWS) and the authors of the original CRT text also put together the CWS text, and in the CWS text they say CWS was spawned by Critical Race Theory.
So why does DiAngelo think all white people are racist?
Well, the answer to that is structural determinism. Structural determinism says that the structure of a signifying system (such as language) determines how individuals socialized with that system think and act.
Read 23 tweets
4 Jul
The first screencap is @ConceptualJames.

The second screencap has the avatar and handle cropped out and says "only the old stuff for me" is **NOT** by James. He never said that.

It was cropped that way so people would conclude that both of the pics were tweets by James.
There's also a subtle sleight of hand:

@conceptualjames said Abolish Marvel because they had Captain America lose faith in the American *DREAM*

In the issue @drmistercody brings up Captain America is disillusioned with the American *GOVERNMENT*

See the difference?
Being mad at the government for corruption is totally different from losing faith in the American Dream and the ideals it represents.

But, pay attention to how @drmistercody decieves his audience, and how he doesn't care when that's pointed out. That's who your dealing with.
Read 4 tweets
4 Jul
Sam Hoadley-Brill @deonteleologist said he was fighting disinformation about CRT (pic 1)

He said CRT was marginal in k-12 and that CRT was not being put in k-12 (pic 2)

Today the NEA, the largest teachers union in the U.S. said it supports campaigns to put CRT in k-12 (pic 3)
Sam was never fighting disinformation, he was spreading it.

Richard Delgado, a co-founder of CRT, explicitly stated that CRT had taken off in education and was more lively in education than in law (Pic 1), and there are all kinds of textbooks on CRT in education (pic 2)...
This 2005 article explains how CRT was wedded to Critical Pedagogy in 1999 to create "Critical Race Pedagogy."
Read 11 tweets
1 Jul
The article Mr. Watson links to uses two of the main tropes that I have discussed to attack our opposition to CRT. First, they claim that CRT is not being used in education (pic 1)
However, Richard Delgado (a co-founder of CRT) says otherwise in this interview. (Pics 2 and 3)
Further, that claim misses the point.

University level CRT is not being taught in k-12. But that's not our claim. Our claim is that illiberal tenets of CRT are entering k-12 curricula under the umberalla of "antiracism."

This is why there are so many CRT in education texts:
The second tactic is to "whitewash" so to speak the nature of CRT. That is, the article explains a partial picture of what CRT is. The problem it leaves out the most toxic elements of CRT and only explains the noncontroversial point and tries to paint CRT as an innocuous theory.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!