1/ Leftist activism uses exactly this dynamic as a strategy. The goal is to create hot-takes that generate enormous outrage (IE: Syndey Sweeney ads are fascist) which bait people into reacting by writing response pieces or by dunking on it
2/ By using the negative engagement and dunking as free advertising, the leftists is able to provoke more outrage.
They repeat this process until people have outrage fatigue, and the hot take no longer provokes strong reactions, and stating the hot-take no longer causes outrage.
3/ Once the hot-take no longer causes outrage, leftists repeat it until people are sick of it and it becomes background noise. At this point the hot-take becomes banal, and people begrudgingly accept that the hot take is now just another part of the landscape of public opinion
If you hang around leftist circles enough you'll hear the "nazi bar" parable, and this explains how they think about everything.
They don't see themselves as part of being a social movement based on highly controversial and hotly disputed ideas...
...Leftists think their moral values, and social views are just uncontroversial expressions of what is morally right, and leftism is just what you get when everyone is "being kind" and "being a good person."
In their heads, they are the regular crowd at the bar.
They see leftism as the natural, normal, and healthy state of affairs that occurs when everyone is "being kind," they don't realize that leftism is a worldview and political ideology that is hotly contested, and that's built on a set of social values that are highly controversial
The claim that it is an undue burder to ask women to put any effort at all into their relationships with men is a load bearing pillar of woke feminism.
This paper claims that asking women to interpret what men say is a form of "hermeneutic labor" which harms women.
The paper argues that hermeneutic labor is the emotionally taxing requirement that women should interpreting what men say and how they feel. It also argues that women act as men's therapists by telling men how they feel, and that women do all the relationship maintenance.
The premise of the paper is that women do all the work of interpreting how both people in the relationship feel, and then expressing that so they can both understand. The author basically says that women have been acting as mens' therapists for centuries.
1/ This "government teacher" doesn't know when America was founded, won't teach students the official curriculum, and teaches kids about activism, anti-racism, and Black Lives Matter.
Woke teachers took over K-12 education and the get funded by grants like these,
2/ The entire education system is full of activists, professors, and teachers who believe teaching is a political act, and Social Justice (AKA: woke ideology) should be the foundation of all learning and education.
Many of them are funded by the grants Murkowski wants to protect
3/ Let's take for example the 21st Century Community Learning Center Grant Murkowski mentioned in her letter.
This grant funds a school Rann Miller teaches at. Miller wrote an article defending the use of Critical Race Theory and the 1619 project in education👇
1/ The U.S. Government Accountability Office was designed to be a non-partisan watchdog that Audits government for waste, fraud, and abuse.
However, the GAO has been captured by progressives who are using it to advance to advance their political ideology.
And I have receipts.🧵
2/ The job of the GAO is to hold government institutions accountable for the way they spend money and carry out their mission. That is, the GAO doesn't decide what policies get implemented, it makes sure the policies government passes get implemented, whatever those happen to be.
3/ In other words, the GAO is supposed to ensure that government institutions are actually using the funding they get from congress to implement the policies congress has actually passed, rather just implementing the policies that the bureaucrats themselves prefer.
1/ In March this guy farmed 11 million views and 20K RT's by saying an "RFK blackmail story is breaking from multiple angles," while vaguely insinuating the CIA and Pfizer were involved and regurgitating widely available information.
2/ His whole game is to take widely available information dug up by other people and use it as a pretext to suggest that various events are caused by powerful interests who "pull the strings," and then make vague and unfalsifiable insinuations regarding who the string pullers are
3/ This is how he posture as a brave truth teller whose doing his own research when all he's really doing is regurgitating readily available information read through a cynical and conspiratorial lens, while engaging in wild speculation about "whose really pulling the strings."