1/ The CDC decided to make *Health Equity* core to its mission, and says that means advocating for:
-Free internet access
-Free access to bikes
-Policy changes in housing
This is the Woke and weaponized bureaucracy at work.
So, let's talk about what's going on here
A thread🧵
2/ Most people think the CDC should focus on health and allow the department of transportation to deal with things like bussing. So, why is the CDC engaging in advocacy for a progressive policy position in a totally different area?
How, and more importantly, WHY did this happen?
3/ This is an important thing to study if we wish to understand how woke activists weaponize institutions and bureaucracies in the name of wokeness (AKA Critical Social Justice).
We need to understand this if we are going to fight the weaponizing the bureaucracy effectively.
4/ The answer is going to rest on a combination of how Critical Social Justice (AKA “WOKENESS”) thinks about “systems” and “systemic power,” and how they define “equity.” Once you understand how wokeness thinks about systemic power and equity, you'll understand how this happened.
5/ First, what they mean by “systemic.”
The woke see society as a system, or set of systems. These systems include institutions, groups, families, paradigms, social conventions, morals, values, norms, the economy, the military, social expectations, discourses and so fourth.
6/ On woke theory, everything in society is either a part of these systems or is produced, created, and maintained by them. So when the Critical Social Justice activists talks about “systems” they are talking about all the social elements of society which structure society.
7/ This means that they analysis of every social phenomena that the woke do is about how various social phenomena interact with these systems.
I can't stress this enough. Every analysis a woke activist does will be in terms of systems, and how systems interact with each other.
8/ What matters to the woke is the roles that things play in the system (or systems) and the way that those roles interact with POWER.
With that said, let’s now talk about what the woke mean when they talk about “power.”
9/ One of the central concerns of wokeness is social power. Wokeness is, above all else, obsessed to the point of distraction with who has power. Wokeness thinks power is the thing which primarily mediates relationships and that power is the twhat governs all social interactions.
10/ To make matters worse, following the philosophy of Michael Foucault, Critical Social Justice has come to believe that claims about what is true are in fact also loaded with questions, concerns, and issues regarding power.
It's all about power.
11/ According to Critical Social Justice labeling a belief as “true” elevates that belief to higher social status, and privileges that belief over and above other beliefs. Thus, whoever gets to decide which beliefs a society thinks are true has a tremendous amount of power.
12/ According to woke theory everything is like this. Such things as facts, science, standards, norms, rules, decisions, law, legislation, policy, and so on are not neutral matters we decide on the basis of what is true...
13/ Instead, what is true is decided by people who have the power to decide what is true and those decisions are warped by the biases and interests of those who decide what is true.
Power is what really matters. It's the whole show and the thing that is actually important.
14/ The fundamental questions the a woke activists asks about everything are “who has the power to decide, whose interests are served, and who benefits.” Everything rules, norms, facts, science, law, policy, **MERIT** and everything else is warped by jockeying for social power
15/ We can now see that when the woke activist talks about systemic power, what they are talking about is the various ways in which society is built, and how the structuring of society allows for the creation, allocation, validation, and legitimization of the use of power.
16/ The primary concern of wokeness is not finding out what is true, right, good, helpful, beautiful, moral, etc, Rather, the chief end of wokeness is the redistribution of power. They want is to redistribute resources, influence, prestige, and power to “level the playing-field.”
17/ However, it is not enough (according to wokeness) to give everyone equal opportunity because even if we hand out equal opportunities the systems which make up society are designed to ensure that the straight white males always have an advantage.
18
Thus, what the woke activists want is EQUITY: a redistribution of shares in society such that everyone has and equal share in everything, because that is only way to ensure everyone has the same amount of power. AKA they want equality of OUTCOMES, not equality of opportunity
19/ because the chief end of wokeness is the redistribution of power the only way to fix these systems it to completely re-order, reconfigure, and rebuild them so that they produce equal outcomes.
So how does this explain why the CDC is advocating for free access to internet?
20/ Well, when the woke analyze healthcare they analyze it as a system, and how it relates to all the other systems in society. What this means is that they want to rebuild the healthcare system, including the CDC, so that it is directed toward equal outcomes
21/ However, because they analysis is systemic that means it relates to ALL the systems in society. As such, in order to fix the healthcare system and create truly equal outcomes, all the other systems in society need to be fixed by being rebuilt in order to have equal outcomes.
22/ This turns out to mean that in order for the CD to be doing its job, it has to look at how the other systems might interact with the healthcare system, and advocate for rebuilding those other systems so that those other systems are also directed toward equal outcomes.
23/ The result of this is that when the woke ideologically capture an institution they always redirect the resources of that institution away from its original mission and attempting to use that institution to fix inequality by using it to advocate for equity in all of society.
24/ Practically, this means they hollow out institutions and use the prestige, validity, clout, influence and credibility of these institutions to advance Critical Social Justice instead of doing what the institution was designed to do.
This is the result of ideological capture.
25/ This is how the CDC ends up being used as a vehicle to advocate for affordable broadband internet.
Do you see how that works?
They hollow out the institution and use it a vehicle to advocate for and spread woke ideas, views, and policies.
26/ What we see here is that the major Achilles heel of Critical Social Justice is that it does all its analysis through the lens of systemic power. This prevents it from being able to fix easily fixable problem that can be observed and fixed through other means.
27/ Further, because Critical Social Justice uses institutions to advocate for its own ideas, views, policies, and preferences, Critical Social Justice is a major drain on the resources and effectiveness of any institution that it gets a foothold in.
28/ These are not the only problem of Critical Social Justice. It’s approach to truth, reason, science, goodness, beauty, art, and meaning inevitably leads to relativism and nihilism. However, what I wanted to focus on here is what the woke mean when they talk about equity.
29
I hope that explanation makes sense to everyone.
I did a full essay on this topic over on substack. All my substack essays are free, but if you appreciate my work you can support me with either a paid or free subscription.
1/
I realize the over-feminization of public life is a problem, and I think wokeness is also feminine coded.
But leftist extremism of wokeness are not necessarily feminine coded.
In the 60's and 70's the radical left was led by violent, militant, masculine men...
2/ The left engaged in bombings, riots, kidnapping, riots, and other such sort of behavior. They formed militia's armed themselves to the teeth, and made straight-forward demands while engaging in direct confrontation.
In fact, feminists used to complain about how the left...
3/ Was run entirely by men. This was a common theme in feminist writing and discourse.
The recent increase in popularity of guys like Hasan Piker (or Bob Vylan, the rappers who chanted "death to the IDF" onstage at a festival) are attempts by the left to re-masculinize...
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