Well educated people: professors, consultants, and authors, are attacking the woman Trump nominated to the Supreme Court for adopting orphans from Haiti.
In woke-world this is normal and I'll explain why
2/ This is Amy Coney Barret with her family.
Keep this image in mind as we examine the horrible things the woke have said. We need to remember both who is being attacked, and who's hurting because of it. This isn't just an academic exercise, people are hurting.
Ok, Let's begin:
3/ We can't understand how this attack works, or what motivates it until we understand the theory motivating the attack: Critical Race Theory (CRT).
CRT is one of the most poisonous, noxious, toxic theories to ever come out of academia, and it's what's driving this attack.
The idea of "White Privilege" is everywhere...and it's NOT what you think.
So, let's talk about it:
2/ The idea of white privilege has spread through society like wild fire since about 2013.
A lot of people think that the basic concept of white privilege is "white people face less racism then black people."
This is NOT what the term means
3/ The woke play a game with "white privilege" where they alternate between two positions: an extreme position they really believe and talk about openly when they won't be attacked, and a far more modest position they fall back on and defend when anyone questions them.
-Ibram Kendi, Author of: "How To Be An Antiracist," "Be Antiracist," and "Antiracist baby."
If you ever wanted proof that wokeness is a sham and it's academics are total frauds, there it is.
So, let's talk about Antiracism
2/ Race in America is a difficult topic, and must be dealt with carefully, rigorously, and with an eye to helping people grow, learn, and heal. Americans of all races want to put an end to racism, and doing that means getting this stuff right.
3/ Antiracism is neither careful nor rigorous.
Look at Ibram Kendi: first he says people have the ability to be antiracist, then he says no one ever becomes antiracist.
How are regular people supposed to make sense of this as they try to understand difficult racial issues?
This woman launches a smear against group of men for publishing a paper, asserting they are a "patriarchy" because they are all men.
It's a drive by smear that doesn't even engage with the work. She just attacks them.
2/ This project is open to anyone, *ANYONE* to submit code. It's open to thd public and anybody who wants to work on the project may do so.
Here is the link to their contribution guidelines. It is a VERY open amd welcoming group
3/ Why do I care? Because of her hypocrisy. She has ZERO popblem leveraging her looks to get 16k followers, and letting you know she's pretty via humble-brags and flexes dressed up as oppression: "you guys, I got told I'm pretty again. Being hot is so very hard. I am oppressed"
1/ Ever wonder why Universities produce so much wokeness?
The answer is 'Activist Scholars': woke professors who have decided that the goal of a University is to ideologically indoctrinate students and spread activist propaganda.
They admit this, and I have receipts
2/ See, the problem is NOT merely that some professors have blind-spots that need to be corrected by having lots of other professors with different views. That issue is important, but that is not what I am talking about.
Activists Scholars are an entirely different problem.
3/ The Scholar Activist sees their job to do activism in the classroom including using their classroom in the University to train more woke activists
This Paper by Kia M. Q. Hall is about activities for training Black Lives Matter activists in the classroom.
If you want to know why the Woke ignore statistics, science, facts, and reason, And instead use feelings, emotions, intuition, and "lived experience" then you need to know what the woke mean by "ways of knowing.'
So let's talk about it
2/ Ways of knowing refers to one of the ways the woke think about "epistemology."
Epistemology is the study of human knowledge. That is, the person doing epistemology wants to know what "knowledge" is, how we get knowledge, and what knowledge can be used for.
3/ In the liberal tradition we think knowledge is a belief that is:
1. Truth. (The belief corresponds to reality) 2. Justified. (The person is "justified" or has good reasons to hold the belief.
In the liberal tradition our epistemology revolves around science and reason...
2/ This study claims to measure "racial resentment" by making statements and asking people how much they agree. It claims that the way people answer the questions will indicate how much "racial resentment" they have
That is what they claim to do. They do something else entirely.
3/ When we look at the questions asked, you will quickly notice that none of the questions ask about resentment. In fact, the questions don't ask people how they feel about other races AT ALL.
Here are the questions, take a look then I'll show you how what they're doing
1/ Cultural Appropriation may be the single worst idea to come out of wokism.
It is cynical, divisive, and absolutely poisonous to our goal of creating a society where people from different cultures can get along.
So let's talk about it
2/ If you were to ask the woke to define cultural appropriation they might say something like this:
"The exploitative use, or theft, of another cultures ideas or cultural expressions (things like dances, clothing, music, songs, slang, food, religious symbols, etc)"
3/ Now, it's important to note that cultures borrow from each other all the time and most cultures contain elements borrowed from other cultures. That means the words "exploitation" and "theft" do a LOT of work. So lets look at whats going on under the hood here...
Next time a company fires someone for old tweets or facebook posts because they HAD to "protect their brand..."
Just remember Netflix was willing to lose money and take the heat over "Cuties" so they could pump images of 11 year old girls doing this into every home in America:
For people saying "it was art" smoking pot artistically still gets you high, drinking a 12 pack artistically still gets you drunk, and sexualizing 11 year old girls for the sake of "art" using gratuitous close-ups is still sexualizing 11 year old girls using gratuitous close-ups.
Someone gets shot in a movie... but the bullets aren't real.
Someone is killed in a movie...they don't really die.
Someone is a Nazi in a movie... they aren't a Nazi in real life
If you can depict evil without doing the evil that's ok, but you can't DO evil so you can show it...
Wokies say that all the time because in woke world to "disrupt, dismantle, and deconstruct" refers to a specific set of strategies for attacking something. So, let's talk about what it means to disrupt, dismantle and deconstruct.
2/ First, we must understand the woke want a TOTAL revolution. Disruption, dismantling, and deconstruction are the tools they plan to use to tear down everything in the way of that revolution. Here, Critical Theorist Henry Giroux explicitly states that the woke want a revolution:
3/ What gets disrupted, dismantled, and deconstructed?
The answer is every social entity the woke think might prevent their "revolution." This includes but isn't limited to: language, music, art, churches, businesses, the military, universities, institutions, etc.
1/ Donald Trump has ordered the removal of Critical Race Theory from all Federal Government Agencies.
Critical Race Theory may look like harmless sensitivity training, but in fact it's the racial branch of woke ideology, and it is poison.
So, Critical Race Theory:
2/ In the 1970's Derrick Bell, a professor of law at Harvard, injected race into Critical Legal Studies (the study of American law using the neo-marxist method of Critical Theory). This fusion of race, law, and Critical Theory eventually came to be known as "Critical Race Theory"
3/ In using this neo-marxist method of Critical Theory to investigate how race and law intersect, Bell came to some of the most pessimistic and cynical conclusions imaginable.
So lets go through some of them so you can see just how awful this theory is.
We are literally the same species and the sexually dimorphic variation we see in humans is in service to the reproduction of a common species...and these people act like the dimorphic traits mean there is no common human nature between men and women. Ridiculous.
I may have just found why @RokoMijicUK is so desperate to avoid human nature: she wants a way to keep the cynical game theoretical morality of the postmodern left, but have it churn out her preferred results.
1/ I keep getting this so let me address it breifly.
Liberals would argue human nature operates at the level of the species "homo sapiesn", and physical characteristics operate at the level of either population groups or individuals.
So one doesn't determine the other...
2/ Liberals (like me) argue there is no reason to think visible differences in physical characteristics imply inner cognitive differences. A blue car and a red truck can have the exact same engine.
Physical traits tell you nothing about someones internal mental life.
3/ I see no reason to think human sexual dimorphism implies women and men have no common human nature.
That men and women share a common human nature does not mean that the categories of "man" and "woman", are social constructs disconnected from reality: they are not...
1/ There's a small but vocal minority on the right which claims either:
1. Liberalism is wokeness, or a type of wokeness.
2. Liberalism decays into wokeness and wokeness is an inevitable result of liberalism.
Both claims are wrong and I'll explain why.
2/ How can they claim wokeness and liberalism are the same thing?
There's two ways:
1. They might conflate agreement on political policy with ideological agreement.
2. They might argue liberals and wokies agree on worldview and ideology, and the differences are merely cosmetic.
3/ The first point is easy to refute: two people can agree on a policy for different reasons. A wokeist and a Libertarian may both think the Iraq war was a mistake; that doesn't mean they agree ideologically. This is obvious, it is the next argument that is far more interesting.
1/ While activists disrupt, dismantle and deconstruct everything from art to tech, Corporations are going woke.
Why? Because despite the woke rhetoric about "income inequality," there is ZERO ideological conflict between wokeness and capitalism. None.
2/ Thinking wokeness is opposed to capitalism is a mistake made by both the woke, and by those opposed to wokeness.
In fact, wokeness is a major driver of capitalism, and according to McKinsey more than 8 BILLION dollars was spent on diversity training in 2017.
3/ The woke say they're opposed to capitalism because it produces income inequality, but then they engage in the most vulgar capitalism you ever saw in your life. Here, AOC complains about income inequality, wears a $3,500 wardrobe for a magazine shoot, and then defends herself🤣
1/ 60's Hippy activists: Make love not money! Fight the corporations man!
2020 Woke activists: That haircut is racist (sponsored by McDonald's)
These two groups are related, and knowing how is KEY to understanding where wokeness came from, and how it operates.
2/ To understand how we get from one to another we need to understand what the 60's counterculture thought, and why that critique dominated for nearly 60 years. This will be an oversimplification, but it will give us enough to understand what is going on. Also...
3/ When the counter culture uses academic ideas, it picks and chooses. It's not like a machine with each idea used exactly as designed. It's more like a stew, where activists cook up their ideology and flavor it to their liking with ideas from various intellectuals.
This is a joke, but humour has a social function. Jokes can:
Or be used for bullying.
This joke is thinly veiled bigotry. The social funtion of this joke is to test the fences to see what's allowed.
My favorite thing about this tweet is people pretending his joke is about Chilli's.
The point of the joke is to claim eople with white skin lack any authentic version of that fundamentally human thing called: "culture"
And THAT is the point of the joke...
To diminish the concerns of (especially) white people whose cities are being burned to the ground. He does this by claim white people have no culture so when their restaraunts, businesses, and stores torched to the ground "nothing of value was lost that day."
In other words....