A buddy asked in a conversation, "Do right leaning people have to adopt the stupid ACAB mindset of the wokies on Twatter?"

Strange as it might sound, it warrants a brief investigation.
The woke "ACAB" is a shorthand for a broader idea of "police as a system and institution is broken". Under the "ACAB" banner, the accent is more on the whole of the system & institution - and less on individual officers.
The wokes have various leftist beefs with the police, like "overpolicing certain ethnicities", "police brutality", "blue wall of silence", the generic "racism" and "white supremacy". Also "protecting / siding with white supremacists". They often throw in "domestic violence".
Is this the same reservations as we raise? NO, very much no. In fact they are largely *the mirror opposite*.

What we contend with is:
- crack-down on natural rights, like self defense & free speech
- excusing various crimes for sake of diversity
- pandering to the leftists
The contentions from the wokes are partly result of pervasive propaganda ("police bad"), partly matter of different & opposing civilizational goals & measures. The wokes are strict equalitarians, and measure their successes through lens of *culturally* equal results & statuses
Lastly, the wokes are *very* happy to use police for political ends. In fact the wokes perceive it as "evil" when the police is *not* engaged in political policing according to woke standards. Which boils down to *morality policing* in the woke worldview.
To sum it up: the list of problems with police are largely the *mirror opposite* between wokes & rw.

Is there a plane for a tactical alliance on the subject? Emphatically *NO*.
There's one meta-contention common between the woke and the rw: "the police is policing us according to other people's standards". However the proposed solutions are again mirror opposite.
The woke solution is one homogenous police enforcing same standards through the whole nation. Side note: the wokes expect "one nation" to gradually encompass the whole of humanity.

No cultural differences allowed, beyond the superficial "diversity".
The rw solution is one of complementary, local polices, enforcing standards specific to the people they are policing. This means, yes, sometimes disparate effects in similar circumstances, because the local culture and the local people differ.

Mirror platform, really.
Note that since the wokes have cultural stranglehold on the *big, centralized* institutions, their woke platform of "Abolish the police" has an unsaid part: "Abolish [your local] police, continue with [our centralized] police". Overseen & controlled by the woke institutions.
Another way to put it is,

rw view: "citizens police each other, to standards particular in their own locations; the police are specialized citizens"

woke view: "the government polices people to nationwide (eventually worldwide) standard; policing is unique to the gov"
Those differences *emphatically* precludes any temporary alliance with the wokes on the "ACAB mindset".

You can successfully ally with people like Michael Malice, who doesn't want much policing at all, *including* centralized policing.


• • •

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

Keep Current with mark doppelgänger 🛰

mark doppelgänger 🛰 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 @DoppelMark

18 Nov
Never mind all the Googles of this world; the government is the OG information economy, and it *eats* anybody's information economy lunch all day every day.

Prog media tries to out-flank with emotion economy.

What is the resourceful dissident to do?
I suppose government creating a classified document is, in information economy, an analog to minting a financial instrument. Gives natural explanation to why such inflation of classified information. FOIA is, in a funny way, *direct transfers*, usually to friendly NGOs.
>what is the resourceful dissident to do?

There are many things the government inherently sucks at. For sake of example, consider *leadership*: obviously not a meta-stable thing for the government to run. And it's lightly taxed.

Is there "leadership economy"? Can there be one?
Read 5 tweets
14 Nov
A couple days ago Pfizer made this fail meme.
Why did their marketoids make such a grave mis-understanding?

Two theories. Let's investigate.
The template: "Running Away Balloon".

Note the emotions are fairly unambiguous: a man tries joyously to get ahold of a nice ball; a pink monster forcibly stops him causing stress to the man.

The first panel clearly shows the emotions: desirable ball, joyous & hopeful man moving forward.

The second panel happens rapidly & unexpectedly - shows the moment the emotions *turn* to worry. The pink monster was *an internal monster*, stopping the man's improvement.
Read 8 tweets
10 Nov
Remember this "epic own" by Seth? Countless likes and retweets of a screencap "haha new university bad"?

False narrative. Adams had access & used the texts - fragments; the tweet focuses on making it seem unlikely - and yet it happened.
Several people responded with corrections, this one is particularly well put together:

Read 7 tweets
7 Nov
You've heard of "labor theory of value".
Get ready for "dollar theory of value" - invented to dunk on cryptocurrencies: Image
IDK if this guy sells gold,
or perhaps it was him who spent 20,000 BTC to buy pizza early on in Bitcoin's history ImageImage
He pays dues ImageImage
Read 5 tweets
5 Nov
"Steele Dossier" revelations, Danchenko and connection to Clinton. Some journalists are finally taking note, like Jonathan here.

The activists on the left came up with interesting counter-narrative. Let's investigate.
Lefty activists' counter-narrative, part 1:
"the information was accurate, it was just passed through unexpected channels".

Wow, a barefaced assertion of "nothing to see here". Of course the information was bogus.
"Trump did worse by sharing *muh confidential data*". It's a weird one; as far as I can tell it hinges on The Guardian (lol) reporting.
Read 7 tweets
1 Nov
rise of experts as symptom of breakdown of societal structures.

for subjects too large, or too long running for one person to reasonably observe, we used to have societal structures to hold memory and form opinions.

now that's offloaded onto experts for hire.
we end up nonsense such as certain draconian measures in the pandemic, varying climate change predictions that always point to one and same solution, and topsy-turvy energy sector policy.

and we are told "only experts can form opinions on those".
note that forcing whole society to act, expeditiously and laboriously, on plans that the society is not convinced to, is immoral and evil.

both directly, and also as creating structures & cultural norms for further such evils.
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

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!