beowulf

Do no post videos without commentary.

I don't know how to write anything about this so that you don't misunderstand it. You totally confused everything I wrote.

You have that confused. It's not what I think or anti-woke think. That is Critical Race Theory. I think it's ridiculous. No one else thinks of white privilege as property. This came from Cheryl Harris who wrote an article for Harvard Law Review in 1993 called Whiteness as Property.

Critical Race Theory is a version of Marxism that replaces class with race. They think of whiteness or white privilege as constituting a kind of cultural private property. Marx wanted to abolish private property. CRT wants to abolish whiteness. Woke is a way to get people to constantly focus on race by being "acutely aware of racial and social injustice". I don't necessarily have my own definition of the word Woke. I see that it's more than just being aware of injustice because of it's hyper focus on racial differences in an effort to push CRT. Robin DiAngelo in her book White Fragility essentially says that all white people are racist. So for her being woke means realizing that. I guess if I had to come up with my own definition of woke. It would be... Woke = Hyper focus on race and racial injustice, excluding white people.

Equity would be included along with Critical Theory and Critical Race Theory. It's more than just being alert to injustice in society. Here is how the activists would define the word woke specifically. But all of this rolls up into Critical Theory, Critical Race Theory and Intersectionality. A better way to put it would be an American version of Marxism. Woke doesn't stand by itself.

I wrote that as apology for what I wrote originally. Not as a rebuttal as you seem to assume. So you don't think Critical Social Justice views would consider Donald Trump or Trump supporters "to be utterly morally reprehensible. They are racists. They are misogynists. They hate trans people and want to deny their very existence. They are bigots. They are fascists. They are “literal” Nazis." In his paragraph he expanded that to "people who occupy positions of systemic power and privilege and yet who refuse to acknowledge and work to dismantle them" I would say that is probably correct.

I read it again and realized that you did quote the whole thing. I apologize for that. Clearly he was describing the views Critical Social Justice and not his own.

If you never read any opposing opinions then how would you ever find out if you are wrong? If you can't argue both sides then you are not fully informed.

Said another way, who has a better perspective someone on the inside of a cult or someone on the outside. Who has a better perspective on the Wetboro Baptist Church, the members or someone outside of it?

Sort of a cop-out to post a few thousand words condemning "wokism" and then say you don't have time to post what you think about it. That doesn't make sense. I did post what I thought of it. You referred to my condemning "wokism", that's a pretty clear indication of what I think of it. But I also said I don't have time "write out all the details of what I think of Wokism". I don't see the inconsistency that you are complaining about. You're objection seems to be that I don't have time to write an exhaustive essay on Woke? Really? Instead of me taking the time to write in great detail on Woke, I submitted two videos and a website. I get that no matter what I write or reference on this topic you probably will find something to complain about.

You must be confused. I submitted a concise definition of Woke and provided links to two videos and a website that has tons of information.

This is a dishonest way of dismissing anything you don't like. James Lindsay takes the time and effort to back up what he says with the sources. He often quotes them directly so you can verify. The source is less important than whether or not the information is correct. A source you don't like can be correct. A source that takes the time provide their sources allows you to verify their honesty. You can call it whatever you like, it's just pointing out the obvious. Link to the source is a vague pointer? "rambling on about who knows what", nice way of avoiding arguing the points being made. I don't have the time to write out all the details of what I think of Wokism, so I provided a website that has all of the points in text and video that does that for me. I couldn't do a better job than James Lindsay.

I stand by my assertion that Wokism is a cult. There are varying degrees of membership in this cult. It's extremely difficult for people in a cult to realize it's a cult. If you want to understand why I think that, go to https://newdiscourses.com/ or watch their videos on Youtube or Rumble. It's very in depth and the sources are all provided. Those that are in the cult will mostly disparage me and the sources rather than argue the points made. Some will just say it's wrong, which is always a possibility. The more I research this topic the more convinced I am that it's a cult with roots in Marxism. I get that most people will simply think I am an asshole. I am and I don't give a fuck. You can't have any serious discussion with out risking offending someone. So I prefer to be upfront in saying that I will offend someone or everyone. Grow up and grow a thick skin and get over it. Life is too short to be offended by everything.

This includes What is Woke.

The whole concept of "White Privilege" is an example of judging people by the color of their skin. Not only is it racist but it's also false. There is no such thing as a privilege that is granted based on skin color. I come from a multi cultural background. My father was not born in the US. I am light skinned and my father is dark skinned. I enjoy no privilege that my father does not, he lives here in the US. I have lived in another country and can tell you that the US is far less racist. The US is probably the least racist country on Earth.