Does anyone on this forum consider themself as being " woke "

Status
Not open for further replies.
Irish_Tom said:
Your post stated that those on the left are easy to manipulate and are a pushover because they fall for* silly meanings of words.
*My addition.

The insinuation is that those on the left are stupid and gullible, and thus are an easy target for media outlets to influence.

I'm simply pointing out that it's not exclusive to the left.
Click to expand...


Mainly left.
They change the meaning of words to suit there agenda.
They do name calling very well.
And are a bunch of pushovers.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
And there we are.
Click to expand...


You do know you can be a liberal and vote the opposite don't you?
Most people vote for the party that will do what they want.


"By the late 2010s, woke had been adopted as a more generic slang term associated with left-wing politics, progressive or socially liberal causes such as anti-racism, LGBT rights, feminism and environmentalism. It has also been the subject of memes, ironic usage and criticism for its methods and consequences."

;)
 
In the US, the right have changed "socialist" to mean "communist", "defund" to mean "remove", "green" to mean "crazy".

Let's please not try to pretend that only one side is bad. Look up, see the truth of the insanity of the name-calling of both extreme sides. See the misrepresentation of the opponent's position by both sides.

You're being lied to systematically and cynically by political parties and news organisations on all sides.

"Truth" is dead, objectivity is crushed.
 
"defund the police" was turned in to "abolish the police" by the BLM loonies though.

Then they took over a city block, prevented police from entering, then started murdering eachother. Blamed the police for not doing anything. After that the idea kinda died...
 
Irish_Tom said:
The problem with that is that 'fairness' is subjective — that's practically the cornerstone of the difference in opinion between right and left.

Take pretty much any lightning-rod issue and you can make a case one way or the other on the grounds of 'fairness'.
Click to expand...
dowie said:
Well not when wokeness is concerned... the fairness aspect and a disabled people example was already addressed in the post containing the image.

If all that people campaigning for "equity" wanted was some actual, root causes of issues like that addressed then I doubt it would be particularly controversial to say you favpoir "equity" not "equality".

The issue is how it is used in reality, "equity" is cited not just to address some underlying cause of unequal outcomes but to address outcomes themselves on the (often flawed) basis that there is some single issue or -ism responsible for the discrepancy.

For example - requesting higher test scores from Asian American students and lower test scores from African American students in top US universities.

UK universities might make an adjustment on say A-level grades based on whether someone went to a posh private school vs someone coming from a low performing school - that seems more reasonable as there is an actual causal aspect there of being better prepared for those exams etc...

The US on the other hand has these standardised tests - the SAT etc.. the whole point of them was to address issues of fairness and make things more equitable, there isn't a particularly broad syllabus for these things, a high SAT test score is linked to IQ (though that is a can of worms in itself), obvs practicing and preparing can lead to a higher score but it's more of a test of ability/potential which levels the playing field between people who have attended some posh school vs a rough inner-city one... but because there is a discrepancy, high scorers being made up ot too many Asians, too few blacks then it gets framed as an equity issue to address it.
Click to expand...
Yes everything can be argued one was or another and ‘fairness’ is ultimately subjective, but it has to be dynamic and fluid because fairness and equity is inherently dynamic and fluid - indeed, equitable remedies exist to step in where the strict rules of law end up with an inherently unfair outcome.

As Captain Picard said: “There can be no justice as long as laws are absolute.” :p
 
Nitefly said:
Yes everything can be argued one was or another and ‘fairness’ is ultimately subjective, but it has to be dynamic and fluid because fairness and equity is inherently dynamic and fluid - indeed, equitable remedies exist to step in where the strict rules of law end up with an inherently unfair outcome.
Click to expand...

True but the point is that there ought to be an underlying cause whether fluid or not. The issue I'm highlighting there is the lack of causality - that any discrepancy can be simply claimed to be sexism, racism etc... just because a woke person says so.... That is my criticism of how equity is applied, that they're trying to force equality of outcome instead of addressing any unfairness that might impact on the ability to offer equality of opportunity.
 
Jean-F said:
I think that whoever first coined the word “woke”, considered that most people were sleepwalking through life, unaware of what was going on around them, so the coiners termed themselves “woke”, to illustrate that they were superior thinkers to the somnambulists, so in effect, insulting those that they considered not to be “woke”.
Or something along those lines, gimme a break over here, I’m only on my second cup of coffee, I know what I want to say, but at this early hour I’m unsure of the proper order in which to put my words.
Click to expand...
Appreciated, thank you!
 
FoxEye said:
In an age of rapidly growing inequality and real societal problems, they prefer hot-button topics that are trending, than to think deeply about difficult issues, and discuss them like reasonable people. Instead it's all soundbites, put-downs and echo chambers.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I define "woke" people. Basically anyone who obsesses and is outrage by social justice minutia yet completely panders to big tech and hyper capitalism as long as it virtue signals in their favor.
 
Tony Edwards said:
Thats what the far right have done and thats why they keep getting canceled. Just because people like your self want to move the goal posts to make far right seem centrist it doesnt make it so.
Click to expand...

Coming from anyone else, that insult might have held more weight. From you, it's like a badge of honour.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom