Woke right vs woke left
-
@Mik said in Woke right vs woke left:
Yes, the vengeance is deserved and well earned, …
Really? You may have a few specific cases in mind but I doubt that is generally true.
@Axtremus said in Woke right vs woke left:
@Mik said in Woke right vs woke left:
Yes, the vengeance is deserved and well earned, …
Really? You may have a few specific cases in mind but I doubt that is generally true.
Wow… Masturbating to the old WaPo really does make you go blind.
-
Yes, the vengeance is deserved and well earned, but an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Someone has to rise above. Sadly, Trump never will.
@Mik said in Woke right vs woke left:
Yes, the vengeance is deserved and well earned
This level of petulance and vengeance is absolutely not warranted. I suppose he was inspired by Michelle Obama's idea, except "when they go low, we go LOWER". It's a race to the bottom, and for once Trump is #winning
-
It’s far from clear to me that Comey, Lisa Cook, Chris Krebs, Bolton, and all the FBi agents and DoJ employees that worked on his criminal cases “earned” their treatment.
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
Politics by useful anecdote is timeless. Tribal excitement over useful anecdotes that support a political point is timeless. Which definition of woke are we using to call that woke?
@Horace said in Woke right vs woke left:
Politics by useful anecdote is timeless. Tribal excitement over useful anecdotes that support a political point is timeless. Which definition of woke are we using to call that woke?
James Lindsey has the best exposition on the topic. It’s a lot to read -though ChatGPT can summarize it for you.
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
The parallel is pretty deep.
Just like the woke left were told by their media that white killing of blacks was endemic, and their media never shared the data that showed the opposite is a far bigger problem, the right wing media has amplified a similar fiction about left-wing violence, and would never share the data that showed right wing domestic terrorism has been far worse.
Indeed, the FBI/DoJ took the data off their site shortly after the Kirk murder.
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
It’s far from clear to me that Comey, Lisa Cook, Chris Krebs, Bolton, and all the FBi agents and DoJ employees that worked on his criminal cases “earned” their treatment.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
It’s far from clear to me that Comey, Lisa Cook, Chris Krebs, Bolton, and all the FBi agents and DoJ employees that worked on his criminal cases “earned” their treatment.
And that's just some of the first names that come to mind. Here's the "very low ratings" ABC news list: https://abcnews.go.com/US/list-individuals-including-lisa-cook-targeted-trump-administration/story?id=124968309
-
@Horace said in Woke right vs woke left:
Politics by useful anecdote is timeless. Tribal excitement over useful anecdotes that support a political point is timeless. Which definition of woke are we using to call that woke?
James Lindsey has the best exposition on the topic. It’s a lot to read -though ChatGPT can summarize it for you.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
@Horace said in Woke right vs woke left:
Politics by useful anecdote is timeless. Tribal excitement over useful anecdotes that support a political point is timeless. Which definition of woke are we using to call that woke?
James Lindsey has the best exposition on the topic. It’s a lot to read -though ChatGPT can summarize it for you.
Definitions cannot be long expositions that take a lot of reading. The claim was that certain behavior fit under the umbrella of woke, the question was, what is the definition of woke for that umbrella.
I have listened to Lindsey try to explain the parallel, and came up ambivalent.
Zoom out far enough and any human behavior can seem the same, and you could probably find wokeness in the Bible. But I would have hoped that "woke" is more specific than timeless psychological tribalism or whatever else Lindey leans into for his analogy. It really does depend, 100%, on the definition of "woke" one is using. If one's definition of "woke" is a hand waved definition of general timeless human behavior, then throw away the term.
-
It’s far from clear to me that Comey, Lisa Cook, Chris Krebs, Bolton, and all the FBi agents and DoJ employees that worked on his criminal cases “earned” their treatment.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
It’s far from clear to me that Comey, Lisa Cook, Chris Krebs, Bolton, and all the FBi agents and DoJ employees that worked on his criminal cases “earned” their treatment.
As it is far from clear that the host of conservatives targeted during and after the first Trump administration deserved it as well.
Scorched earth politics does not serve us well.
-
Here’s ChatGPT’s summary of Lindsey’s ‘woke right’ concept:
Core Definition
Lindsay uses “Woke Right” to refer to persons on the political right who adopt many of the methods, mindset, and rhetoric traditionally associated with the “Woke Left,” but channel them toward right-wing or reactionary ends rather than progressive causes. 
In other words:
• They retain a right-wing self-identification (or claim to act in right-wing causes), yet deploy identity politics, victimhood narratives, cancel culture tactics, moral purity tests, and power-campaigning methods reminiscent of left-wing social justice movements. 
• They shift attention away from individualism and classical liberal norms, instead framing political struggle in terms of group identities (e.g. “our people,” “our tribe,” “our tradition”) who are cast as being oppressed or aggrieved by progressive or liberal elites. 
• Like the “Woke Left,” they emphasize the wielding of power as central: they believe the Right must win, not merely argue, and they often urge adopting aggressive tactics to reshape discourse, social norms, culture, and institutions. I think the first two bullet points are evident in this particular example, and the third is clearly evident in the post-Kirk reaction, and would have been evident here as well, had the shooter had a different phenotype.
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
It’s the victimhood narrative. Which for Lindsey is an outsized part of ‘woke right’
Of course in September we also saw the biggest burst of cancel culture in a couple of years.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
It’s the victimhood narrative. Which for Lindsey is an outsized part of ‘woke right’
I guess "lift all boats" politics, such as classical economic messaging about free markets from the right, would avoid victim narratives. That messaging still exists in the modern GOP, as distinct from the Dems, who have abandoned it. The violence against Christians narrative is obviously fun for some pundits to talk about, and I'm sure it plays for clicks, but I doubt it motivates much in the way of votes. These things are difficult to measure. In terms of scale, the George Floyd riots and all the social fallout from that, all the DEI offices created in all the companies throughout the world, will remain impossible to match for anybody interested in both-sidesing "woke" and its cultural effect.
Of course in September we also saw the biggest burst of cancel culture in a couple of years.
Trump and his FCC chair. Which the conservative masses mostly pushed back against.
-
Here’s ChatGPT’s summary of Lindsey’s ‘woke right’ concept:
Core Definition
Lindsay uses “Woke Right” to refer to persons on the political right who adopt many of the methods, mindset, and rhetoric traditionally associated with the “Woke Left,” but channel them toward right-wing or reactionary ends rather than progressive causes. 
In other words:
• They retain a right-wing self-identification (or claim to act in right-wing causes), yet deploy identity politics, victimhood narratives, cancel culture tactics, moral purity tests, and power-campaigning methods reminiscent of left-wing social justice movements. 
• They shift attention away from individualism and classical liberal norms, instead framing political struggle in terms of group identities (e.g. “our people,” “our tribe,” “our tradition”) who are cast as being oppressed or aggrieved by progressive or liberal elites. 
• Like the “Woke Left,” they emphasize the wielding of power as central: they believe the Right must win, not merely argue, and they often urge adopting aggressive tactics to reshape discourse, social norms, culture, and institutions. I think the first two bullet points are evident in this particular example, and the third is clearly evident in the post-Kirk reaction, and would have been evident here as well, had the shooter had a different phenotype.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
Here’s ChatGPT’s summary of Lindsey’s ‘woke right’ concept:
Core Definition
Lindsay uses “Woke Right” to refer to persons on the political right who adopt many of the methods, mindset, and rhetoric traditionally associated with the “Woke Left,” but channel them toward right-wing or reactionary ends rather than progressive causes. 
In other words:
• They retain a right-wing self-identification (or claim to act in right-wing causes), yet deploy identity politics, victimhood narratives, cancel culture tactics, moral purity tests, and power-campaigning methods reminiscent of left-wing social justice movements. 
• They shift attention away from individualism and classical liberal norms, instead framing political struggle in terms of group identities (e.g. “our people,” “our tribe,” “our tradition”) who are cast as being oppressed or aggrieved by progressive or liberal elites. 
• Like the “Woke Left,” they emphasize the wielding of power as central: they believe the Right must win, not merely argue, and they often urge adopting aggressive tactics to reshape discourse, social norms, culture, and institutions. I think the first two bullet points are evident in this particular example, and the third is clearly evident in the post-Kirk reaction, and would have been evident here as well, had the shooter had a different phenotype.
Without a sense of scale, or a degree to which any of those sorts of ideas permeate the messaging and culture of a political side, it's difficult to acknowledge a real parallel. Of course it's simple to frame any side of any political argument as employing identity politics or victimhood narratives or moral purity tests. Of course "power is central". Zoom out far enough, and analogies exist between any two things. Of course it's a losing position to argue that there are "no identity politics", "no moral purity tests", "no concentration on power", on any side of any cultural issue. I try not to take positions that can be proven wrong by a usefully framed anecdote.
To what degree do victimhood narratives play a role in the modern GOP as compared to the Dems? Well, the Dems used victimhood by proxy, the victimization of certain minority groups, to motivate the support of members of the majority, who wanted to demonstrate their virtue by defending the victims. If the right produces victimhood narratives, it is directed on the nose to those who are victimized. I appreciate at least that it's not the cheap emotional manipulation of virtue signalers who want to be seen as defenders of the downtrodden "other".
Education is extremely important.
-
Yes, the vengeance is deserved and well earned, but an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Someone has to rise above. Sadly, Trump never will.
@Mik said in Woke right vs woke left:
an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Someone has to rise above. Sadly, Trump never will.
Agree 100%
-
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
Here’s ChatGPT’s summary of Lindsey’s ‘woke right’ concept:
Core Definition
Lindsay uses “Woke Right” to refer to persons on the political right who adopt many of the methods, mindset, and rhetoric traditionally associated with the “Woke Left,” but channel them toward right-wing or reactionary ends rather than progressive causes. 
In other words:
• They retain a right-wing self-identification (or claim to act in right-wing causes), yet deploy identity politics, victimhood narratives, cancel culture tactics, moral purity tests, and power-campaigning methods reminiscent of left-wing social justice movements. 
• They shift attention away from individualism and classical liberal norms, instead framing political struggle in terms of group identities (e.g. “our people,” “our tribe,” “our tradition”) who are cast as being oppressed or aggrieved by progressive or liberal elites. 
• Like the “Woke Left,” they emphasize the wielding of power as central: they believe the Right must win, not merely argue, and they often urge adopting aggressive tactics to reshape discourse, social norms, culture, and institutions. I think the first two bullet points are evident in this particular example, and the third is clearly evident in the post-Kirk reaction, and would have been evident here as well, had the shooter had a different phenotype.
Without a sense of scale, or a degree to which any of those sorts of ideas permeate the messaging and culture of a political side, it's difficult to acknowledge a real parallel. Of course it's simple to frame any side of any political argument as employing identity politics or victimhood narratives or moral purity tests. Of course "power is central". Zoom out far enough, and analogies exist between any two things. Of course it's a losing position to argue that there are "no identity politics", "no moral purity tests", "no concentration on power", on any side of any cultural issue. I try not to take positions that can be proven wrong by a usefully framed anecdote.
To what degree do victimhood narratives play a role in the modern GOP as compared to the Dems? Well, the Dems used victimhood by proxy, the victimization of certain minority groups, to motivate the support of members of the majority, who wanted to demonstrate their virtue by defending the victims. If the right produces victimhood narratives, it is directed on the nose to those who are victimized. I appreciate at least that it's not the cheap emotional manipulation of virtue signalers who want to be seen as defenders of the downtrodden "other".
@Horace said in Woke right vs woke left:
Well, the Dems used victimhood by proxy, the victimization of certain minority groups, to motivate the support of members of the majority, who wanted to demonstrate their virtue by defending the victims. If the right produces victimhood narratives, it is directed on the nose to those who are victimized. I appreciate at least that it's not the cheap emotional manipulation of virtue signalers who want to be seen as defenders of the downtrodden "other".
Last I checked Trump, Lutnick, Bessent, etc weren’t downtrodden unemployed rust belt workers. Trump’s personal connection to Christianity seems a bit tenuous too.
And on the left members of the supposedly oppressed groups often help lead the charge, along side their comfortable white limousine liberal ‘allies’.
Seems to me the difference is less about proxy vs direct and more about which groups they seek to elevate.
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
The parallel is pretty deep.
Just like the woke left were told by their media that white killing of blacks was endemic, and their media never shared the data that showed the opposite is a far bigger problem, the right wing media has amplified a similar fiction about left-wing violence, and would never share the data that showed right wing domestic terrorism has been far worse.
Indeed, the FBI/DoJ took the data off their site shortly after the Kirk murder.
said in Woke right vs woke left:
The parallel is pretty deep.
Just like the woke left were told by their media that white killing of blacks was endemic, and their media never shared the data that showed the opposite is a far bigger problem, the right wing media has amplified a similar fiction about left-wing violence, and would never share the data that showed right wing domestic terrorism has been far worse.
Indeed, the FBI/DoJ took the data off their site shortly after the Kirk murder.
This last bit has a direct parallel from the BLM era - in 2021 the Biden FBI stopped publishing ‘victim-offender’ race tables (who killed whom). It’s possible to collect the data from raw files, but the (counter narrative) summary tables were memory holed.
If you don't take it, it can only good happen.
-
@Horace said in Woke right vs woke left:
Well, the Dems used victimhood by proxy, the victimization of certain minority groups, to motivate the support of members of the majority, who wanted to demonstrate their virtue by defending the victims. If the right produces victimhood narratives, it is directed on the nose to those who are victimized. I appreciate at least that it's not the cheap emotional manipulation of virtue signalers who want to be seen as defenders of the downtrodden "other".
Last I checked Trump, Lutnick, Bessent, etc weren’t downtrodden unemployed rust belt workers. Trump’s personal connection to Christianity seems a bit tenuous too.
And on the left members of the supposedly oppressed groups often help lead the charge, along side their comfortable white limousine liberal ‘allies’.
Seems to me the difference is less about proxy vs direct and more about which groups they seek to elevate.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
@Horace said in Woke right vs woke left:
Well, the Dems used victimhood by proxy, the victimization of certain minority groups, to motivate the support of members of the majority, who wanted to demonstrate their virtue by defending the victims. If the right produces victimhood narratives, it is directed on the nose to those who are victimized. I appreciate at least that it's not the cheap emotional manipulation of virtue signalers who want to be seen as defenders of the downtrodden "other".
Last I checked Trump, Lutnick, Bessent, etc weren’t downtrodden unemployed rust belt workers. Trump’s personal connection to Christianity seems a bit tenuous too.
Trump is the chosen politician of a large group of people, and attempts to thwart him through lawfare are an attack on that group of people.
And on the left members of the supposedly oppressed groups often help lead the charge, along side their comfortable white limousine liberal ‘allies’.
Seems to me the difference is less about proxy vs direct and more about which groups they seek to elevate.
It's widely agreed upon, and directly observable, that the woke politics of the left were most directly attributable to high status progressive white females. I've even heard Ezra remark on that, several years ago. Of course they tried to choose figureheads with the right skin color and sexual preference etc, but those figureheads were chosen for their opinions. You can always find any phenotype with the appropriate opinions.
-
said in Woke right vs woke left:
The parallel is pretty deep.
Just like the woke left were told by their media that white killing of blacks was endemic, and their media never shared the data that showed the opposite is a far bigger problem, the right wing media has amplified a similar fiction about left-wing violence, and would never share the data that showed right wing domestic terrorism has been far worse.
Indeed, the FBI/DoJ took the data off their site shortly after the Kirk murder.
This last bit has a direct parallel from the BLM era - in 2021 the Biden FBI stopped publishing ‘victim-offender’ race tables (who killed whom). It’s possible to collect the data from raw files, but the (counter narrative) summary tables were memory holed.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
said in Woke right vs woke left:
The parallel is pretty deep.
Just like the woke left were told by their media that white killing of blacks was endemic, and their media never shared the data that showed the opposite is a far bigger problem, the right wing media has amplified a similar fiction about left-wing violence, and would never share the data that showed right wing domestic terrorism has been far worse.
Indeed, the FBI/DoJ took the data off their site shortly after the Kirk murder.
This last bit has a direct parallel from the BLM era - in 2021 the Biden FBI stopped publishing ‘victim-offender’ race tables (who killed whom). It’s possible to collect the data from raw files, but the (counter narrative) summary tables were memory holed.
Anecdotes will always be able to "prove" both-sides arguments, this is not new. Find an anecdote from one side, find an anecdote from the other side, draw an analogy, voila, both sides are equal. Without a sense of equal scale and importance, they should not be compelling to anybody.
-
I don’t think in the history of TNCR anyone has ever said ‘both sides are equal’ except as a straw man for a comparison they didn’t like. I certainly didn’t say it here.
@jon-nyc said in Woke right vs woke left:
I don’t think in the history of TNCR anyone has ever said ‘both sides are equal’ except as a straw man for a comparison they didn’t like. I certainly didn’t say it here.
"Both sides are equal" is a hobby horse of one of our remaining posters, and has been for many years. As for your argument here, rhetorical implications exist. The purpose of the comparison is to establish some sort of equality, generally where a bad thing one regrets about one's preferred side is whitewashed as an inevitable part of all sides. But since it's always possible to build anecdotal cases that any given behavior is exhibited by any given group, building such a case establishes nothing. Without scale and importance, the arguments are rhetorical fluff. Maybe even whataboutisms, which I am led to believe are categorically dismissible.
