Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness
-
But neither you nor jon display much willingness to differentiate support for Trump over his political opposition, from some caricatured devotion to everything he thinks and says. Which is exactly an issue of fitting people into compartments.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:21 last edited by Doctor Phibes 8 Jan 2020, 17:22@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
But neither you nor jon display much willingness to differentiate support for Trump over his political opposition, from some caricatured devotion to everything he thinks and says. Which is exactly an issue of fitting people into compartments.
Some people here do seem to support just about everything he does. I also realise lots of people who voted for him didn't much like him. I find there's a huge difference from what people say here and what people say to me in real life. In real life I find it's much easier to have actual discussions without it descending into idiocy. And I fully realise I'm as guilty of that as anybody else. I've always had a very low boredom threshold, which generally leads to bad behavour. If you actually take half of what I say seriously, then what can I say?
-
@Catseye3 said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Moving on down in the article, in any discussion, Sullivan writes, "An oppressed person’s word is always the last one."
Is that because the other is struck dumb by the surreal stupidity with which he is confronted?
No, that's because of the weaponized cancellation of anybody who questions whether oppression grants ultimate authority in cultural/political discussions.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:22 last edited by@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
No, that's because of the weaponized cancellation of anybody who questions whether oppression grants ultimate authority in cultural/political discussions.
Which is saying the same thing in Horace-speak.
-
Or to reconcile with the many lifelong GOP stalwarts who couldn’t pull a lever for him. Including at least 4 here.
Trump definitely started a movement, and it was a fairly radical departure from the GOP that preceded it.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:27 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Or to reconcile with the many lifelong GOP stalwarts who couldn’t pull a lever for him. Including at least 4 here.
Why would I need to go to any pains to reconcile that? People find Trump viscerally revolting because he sniffs low class. That sort of visceral revulsion is a red-line issue for some. I've explained that here at length. It's far from inscrutable to me.
Trump definitely started a movement, and it was a fairly radical departure from the GOP that preceded it.
His personality is a radical departure from GOP politicians before him. The movements he started were mostly in reaction against him, on the left.
-
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
No, that's because of the weaponized cancellation of anybody who questions whether oppression grants ultimate authority in cultural/political discussions.
Which is saying the same thing in Horace-speak.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:29 last edited by@Catseye3 said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
No, that's because of the weaponized cancellation of anybody who questions whether oppression grants ultimate authority in cultural/political discussions.
Which is saying the same thing in Horace-speak.
No, it wasn't the same thing. Nobody is silent against the cancel mob because the cancel mob is too stupid. It's because the cancel mob is too dangerous.
-
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
But neither you nor jon display much willingness to differentiate support for Trump over his political opposition, from some caricatured devotion to everything he thinks and says.
Nonsense. Surely one of the reasons we post his most ridiculous tweets here is to watch you guys squirm a little.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:32 last edited by Horace 8 Jan 2020, 17:32@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
But neither you nor jon display much willingness to differentiate support for Trump over his political opposition, from some caricatured devotion to everything he thinks and says.
Nonsense. Surely one of the reasons we post his most ridiculous tweets here is to watch you guys squirm a little.
Well, you enjoy giggling at people you think are stupid. Meanwhile, as far as i know, most posters here, even his supporters, wish he'd calm down with those stupid tweets.
-
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:33 last edited by
Exactly, which we recognize. Hence my point.
-
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Or to reconcile with the many lifelong GOP stalwarts who couldn’t pull a lever for him. Including at least 4 here.
Why would I need to go to any pains to reconcile that? People find Trump viscerally revolting because he sniffs low class. That sort of visceral revulsion is a red-line issue for some. I've explained that here at length. It's far from inscrutable to me.
Trump definitely started a movement, and it was a fairly radical departure from the GOP that preceded it.
His personality is a radical departure from GOP politicians before him. The movements he started were mostly in reaction against him, on the left.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:41 last edited by@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
People find Trump viscerally revolting because he sniffs low class
That depends on the definition of low-class
-
@Catseye3 said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
No, that's because of the weaponized cancellation of anybody who questions whether oppression grants ultimate authority in cultural/political discussions.
Which is saying the same thing in Horace-speak.
No, it wasn't the same thing. Nobody is silent against the cancel mob because the cancel mob is too stupid. It's because the cancel mob is too dangerous.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 17:55 last edited by@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
No, it wasn't the same thing. Nobody is silent against the cancel mob because the cancel mob is too stupid. It's because the cancel mob is too dangerous.
How about both?
As for the dangerous, yes, they are. But I can't accept that a movement this goofball can last forever. Like Phibbs (?) said, they're good at tearing down, not so much at building back up. And conditions don't remain in torn-down status indefinitely.
I remain enough of a Randist to believe that in the end, above all, competence must prevail. I want to say to these people: If you want the goodies, do the work. Clear the starry-eyed crap out of your vision, study your human history, and accept that rising to the top demands more than painting big yellow letters on the pavement. Didn’t nobody promise you a rose garden, babe, and ain’t nobody gonna carry you but so far, for so long.
-
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 19:34 last edited by
I don't know who's gonna win, but this is making me horny so I'm gonna fuck the winner.
-
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Except not. If you criticize and make fun of both Trumpism and wokeness you don’t make too many friends. Look at some of my threads next door criticizing wokeness -you can practically hear people sputter and point. And here, look at the grief I get from you for refusing that orange pill.
I think the word Trumpism is a convenient one used to integrate anybody who prefers Trump to his current political opposition, with Trump himself. Wokeness on the other hand is a blatant large-scale cultural movement, permeating every aspect of this culture we all have to exist in.
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 19:42 last edited by Loki 8 Jan 2020, 19:45@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
@jon-nyc said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Except not. If you criticize and make fun of both Trumpism and wokeness you don’t make too many friends. Look at some of my threads next door criticizing wokeness -you can practically hear people sputter and point. And here, look at the grief I get from you for refusing that orange pill.
I think the word Trumpism is a convenient one used to integrate anybody who prefers Trump to his current political opposition, with Trump himself. Wokeness on the other hand is a blatant large-scale cultural movement, permeating every aspect of this culture we all have to exist in.
This resonates with me. Not voting is a big contender and just praying wokeness burns itself out.
-
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 19:50 last edited by
@Larry said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
I don't know who's gonna win, but this is making me horny so I'm gonna fuck the winner.
Which immediately will make them the loser
-
wrote on 1 Aug 2020, 19:52 last edited by
I don't know if it will make them the loser or not, but they'll walk funny for a couple of days..... hahahaha
-
Now about the article: The one thing that leaves me a little dissatisfied with it is that I think most "woke" people aren't very familiar with critical theory. I have a hard time imagining that all those adolescent ultra-progressives read works from the Frankfurt school or Foucault.
So, while it may be true that "critical theory" has been the origin of the "woke" philosophy, it seems to me that there is a narrative that justifies being "woke" that doesn't require familiarity with critical theory.
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 03:03 last edited by@Klaus said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Now about the article: The one thing that leaves me a little dissatisfied with it is that I think most "woke" people aren't very familiar with critical theory. I have a hard time imagining that all those adolescent ultra-progressives read works from the Frankfurt school or Foucault.
So, while it may be true that "critical theory" has been the origin of the "woke" philosophy, it seems to me that there is a narrative that justifies being "woke" that doesn't require familiarity with critical theory.
All three of my girls went to Oregon State University. My oldest (housing studies) and youngest (communications) have responded with much woke-speak following George Floyd and BLM protests. My middle (forestry) is much more "hard work, good choices, personal responsibility". It has been a bit difficult to navigate these waters with reasoned discussion.
-
@Klaus said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Now about the article: The one thing that leaves me a little dissatisfied with it is that I think most "woke" people aren't very familiar with critical theory. I have a hard time imagining that all those adolescent ultra-progressives read works from the Frankfurt school or Foucault.
So, while it may be true that "critical theory" has been the origin of the "woke" philosophy, it seems to me that there is a narrative that justifies being "woke" that doesn't require familiarity with critical theory.
All three of my girls went to Oregon State University. My oldest (housing studies) and youngest (communications) have responded with much woke-speak following George Floyd and BLM protests. My middle (forestry) is much more "hard work, good choices, personal responsibility". It has been a bit difficult to navigate these waters with reasoned discussion.
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 03:14 last edited by@Kincaid Hi Kincaid!
-
@Klaus said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Now about the article: The one thing that leaves me a little dissatisfied with it is that I think most "woke" people aren't very familiar with critical theory. I have a hard time imagining that all those adolescent ultra-progressives read works from the Frankfurt school or Foucault.
So, while it may be true that "critical theory" has been the origin of the "woke" philosophy, it seems to me that there is a narrative that justifies being "woke" that doesn't require familiarity with critical theory.
All three of my girls went to Oregon State University. My oldest (housing studies) and youngest (communications) have responded with much woke-speak following George Floyd and BLM protests. My middle (forestry) is much more "hard work, good choices, personal responsibility". It has been a bit difficult to navigate these waters with reasoned discussion.
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 03:27 last edited by@Kincaid said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
It has been a bit difficult to navigate these waters with reasoned discussion.
Well the reasonable discussion is probably easier with your middle daughter.
-
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 03:40 last edited by
Too complicated for me.
As I become older, I sometimes appreciate the reasons Stalin had for executing the intellectuals...
-
Too complicated for me.
As I become older, I sometimes appreciate the reasons Stalin had for executing the intellectuals...
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 04:03 last edited by Doctor Phibes 8 Feb 2020, 04:12@Jolly said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
Too complicated for me.
As I become older, I sometimes appreciate the reasons Stalin had for executing the intellectuals...
Because he was a psychopathic peasant?
-
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 04:21 last edited by
I expect we will all be safe from a purge of intellectuals.
-
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 04:38 last edited by
@Horace said in Andrew Sullivan on The Roots of Wokeness:
I expect we will all be safe from a purge of intellectuals.
You might want to hide that pretentious tea you're so fond of.
-
wrote on 2 Aug 2020, 04:43 last edited by
More like puerhtentious.