your honesty and perspective are refreshing, even if we might disagree on how we got here and what its going to take to resuscitate us.
"Don't do..." "Don't say..." "Don't..." Quakes, you have made your point repeatedly. You don't like woke terminology, and you don't think it should be used. Fine. In place of that, what should be said? Give an alternative of what should be said rather than just endless saying that we shouldn't be using "woke." Just saying "don't" is not helpful. From the BBC article you linked: "Woke" is described as being alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice, along with being aware of what's going on in the community. What is wrong with that? This sounds more like you are bitter at BernieBros, and not at woke. Unless you think all of us here have abandoned the Democrats. We should not be afraid of promoting ideas of equality. We should fight for them. Yes, those ideas can be messy and complex, but we should not run away from them.
This sounds an awful lot like the rejection of intellectualism. And I don't mean the big words that smart people us, I mean the idea of people being able to explain complex idea in relatively simple terms. Neil deGrasse Tyson does this well, and get mocked. Anthonly Fauci had a history of doing this well, and got death threats. And there are any number of very intelligent people able to do this, but they get mocked simply for being intelligent. And that is from the Republican party, not the Democratic Party. Republicans are the ones who don't like the idea of more complex ideas being made understandable - they want those ideas to be belittled, because if they become understandable, it undermines their position (as it has developed) which is about simplicity. This is why I have said to you, previously, that woke is about equality, and that should be the focus - social equality and the equality of opportunity. And the majority of this country has a history of understanding that, at the end of the day, this is what makes us improve as a country. There are all kinds of academic research behind those reasons, but when those reasons are presented in a rational and understandable way, Republican reject it as "woke." Because it challenges their position.
Well, I fight the Woke and check out my phone There's more Lib language I hate today We're angry again, there's new terms on the screen A-roundin' third and headed for home It's a blue-eyed fascist man Anyone can understand How we need to make him feel Oh, shut the F up Woke I'm ready to scapegoat...today Shut the F up Woke I'm ready to scapegoat...today Look at me, I can be, a Centrist tool
Republicans have found it to be very useful for swaying the electorate, precisely because intellectualism and a careful (scientific) read of the situation is not what's driving votes, apparently. So yes, appealing to potential new voters intellectually is probably not bringing us back to life. We have to put on the gloves and get in the ring... ...Newsom 2028! Democrats are over here like "well, akshually..." while we're getting absolutely flattened.
Nothing. I'm pretty sure I've acknowledged that some of the woke ideals were well intended. So yeah, my introduction to woke was disgruntled Bernie Bros who weren't going to support Hillary when it really, really (really) mattered, which set in motion Trump I and ultimately Trump II, then, seeing Democrats splinter again when it mattered even more...I'm a bit grumpy when it comes to our own house, admittedly. Democrats can't hang together when it's critical and we're paying a dear price for it.
You are definitely still a Democrat because a Democrat will take one electoral loss and be convinced that it is the end. No long term vision. No vision more than 3 months in advance.
The reason we really splintered didn't have all that much to do with "woke" ideas or terminology. It was more to do with the timing of Biden dropping out, and likely related, not wanting to elect a female (and another Black person) as President.
Based on what I quoted, for the sake of @superdave so that he has your definition of woke, you are bouncing between ideas and terminology. It's really difficult to understand your position when you bounce back and forth like that. The Bernie Bros were 2016, not 2024. And give an idea of a solution, not a problem.
To me it feels like this last electoral loss was the big one. The loss in 2015 was sickening but there were still a few speed bumps to slow the madman down...now he's full throttle barreling down the highway, taking out everything Democrats just spent the last 60 years fighting for... ...meanwhile Democrats are busy attacking our own and bleeding support.
Hi NIC. You should educate yourself on far left antifa activism in this country. Two entirely different things.
2015 akshually and yes, that's who I'm referring to. Disgruntled Bernie Bros who were mad at the DNC for not nominating their guy.
I Think I made my point. I posted data showing that Democrats don’t do the thing he says they shouldn’t do. I figured that facts would either cause him to stop this junk, or I’d be certain he’s just trolling. I promise I won’t revisit this.
this is barely even worth dignifying with a response, but yeah, NICD... ...punch any and all Nazi's, at every single opportunity. .
As a purveyor of Wingnut media, you've certainly heard of virtue signaling. But what about vice signaling? Financial Times editor Robert Shrimsley suggested the term vice signalling as a counterpoint to virtue signalling: A vice-signaller boasts about sneaking meat into a vegetarian meal. He will rush on to social media to denounce as a 'snowflake' any woman who objects to receiving rape threats, or any minority unhappy at a racist joke...Vice-signallers have understood that there is money to be made in the outrage economy by playing the villain. Perhaps, secretly, they buy their clothes at the zero-waste shop and help out at the local food bank, but cannot be caught doing so lest their image is destroyed. Stephen Bush, also in the Financial Times, describes vice signalling as "ostentatious displays of authoritarianism designed to reassure voters that you are “tough” on crime or immigration", and that it "risks sending what is, in a democracy, the most dangerous signal of all: that politicians do not really care about their electorate’s concerns, other than as a device to win and to hold on to their own power". In particular, Bush cited Donald Trump's Mexican border wall pledge and Boris Johnson's Rwanda asylum plan. Examples of vice signalling have been described as "show[ing] you are tough, hard-headed, a dealer in uncomfortable truths, and, above all, that you live in 'the real world'", in a way that goes beyond what actual pragmatism requires, or to "a public display of immorality, intended to create a community based on cruelty and disregard for others, which is proud of it at the same time". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling#Vice_signalling
This, 100%. WokeMonitor isn't interested in discussing how to protect and advance Democrat policies, he's on his own personal crusade against some vaguely defined problem that is not even rooted in reality. And he seems incapable of moving beyond his perceived pet peeve. Worst of all, this shit keeps happening over and over again on what seems to be every f*cking thread on this site.
I literally watch/listen to/care about zero/none/nada "Wingnut media", so when you start off with a nonsense statement, anything beyond that becomes a TL;DR non sequitur. please try harder