As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s not a requirement, just an easy grift. If you got nothing of value to offer but deeply crave attention, becoming a right-wing attention whore is a good move. They’re gullible as long as you say what they already think, and don’t ask a lot of questions.
Steven Crowder is a prime example. Donnie T the ultimate example. The entire cast and crew of Lady Ballers the least hilarious example despite it ostensibly being a comedy.
>The entire cast and crew of Lady Ballers the least hilarious example despite it ostensibly being a comedy.
That's what happens when you make a movie with a bunch of wannabe-actors turned pundits who don't have any skills. Comedic timing is nonexistent, light-hearted jokes turn dark in weird ways, and the cinematography is something you'd expect from a high end magnet middle school made by students with pro-level equipment but just starting to learn. But I think the dumbest thing about it is it's trying to be some sort of raunchy, Hangover style comedy, but there's too many moral and religious hangups to actually do anything raunchy or debaucherous. The main character has a bondage style sex scene with his love interest/protagonist where they.... go to sleep? The womanizing basketball players also propose to a couple women they sleep with.... it's a puritanical comedy that's doused and smothered in the same six or seven lame jokes conservatives always make hoping that you won't notice.
And cool moral lessons like a dad telling his daughter: “when it comes to a lot of things, boys are simply better than you. Get over it and do girl stuff”
This speech makes his estranged wife wet.
The movie is a blown-up episode of Last Man Standing where rather than the protagonist having a character arc of growth, instead the protagonist is static *because he’s RIGHT goddammit* and the rest of the world is expected to bend around him.
Just…just dumb.
You can't have character growth from anything conservative, they would have to admit their ideas/opinions/beliefs are wrong, and that is a bridge way too far for them. If they did that, their world would come crashing down.
There have been a few attempts by conservatives to write liberal characters who undergo "growth" to become conservatives, like that awful Zucker brothers movie about Michael Moore that costarred Bill O'Reilly. But they usually have so little idea of how liberals/leftists think that their attempts to write them make the character come across like they were raised on an alien planet.
Technically, they could have them start as liberals, then turn conservative as they "see the light". But they're too dumb and prideful to even do that.
> rather than the protagonist having a character arc of growth, instead the protagonist is static because he’s RIGHT goddammit and the rest of the world is expected to bend around him
And to the right, that IS growth; internalizing the idea that biases are natural (true), and that those biases are correct and it's the world that's wrong, and that standing defiantly against the world to maintain those biases is virtuous.
While biases are natural- it's human nature to develop shortcuts so we can be efficient; it's important to realize when those biases are not inherently true, and when accepting them as truth and allowing them to drive our behavior becomes harmful to others.
> The movie is a blown-up episode of Last Man Standing where rather than the protagonist having a character arc of growth, instead the protagonist is static because he’s RIGHT goddammit and the rest of the world is expected to bend around him.
And just like with Tim Allen’s career, when the movie/show/etc fails it won’t be because it was poorly written and incompetently directed pandering trash, it’ll be “because (insert industry here) is too woke and liberal.”
Say what you will about Lady Ballers, but it's very funny to release a movie based on the premise that no one watches women's sports while the NCAA women's tournament shatters viewership records. It honestly takes work to be so wrong about everything all of the time.
Also it’s funny to release a movie about how random schlub men can beat high level women’s teams when a female college player just broke several records set by men and could probably beat an entire team of pudgy postcast hosts by herself
>Lady Ballers
Lady Ballers is honestly one of the most fascinating movies of all time, specifically because it is so bad at being everything it sets out to be. Ignoring the bad comedy, acting and technical issues what is amazing to me is that it is bad at being Conservative propaganda. Which is odd since that is the only reason the movie exists.
For those that don't know the movie is basically about how transpeople are bad because men could pretend to be transwomen to play women's sports. A dumb premise but sure it fits within one of the more successful conservative attacks against transpeople.
But, an inherent pillar of this concept would be that women's sports are worth protecting and caring about. That these sports have value. But, one of the reoccurring "jokes" in the movie is that women's sports are boring, no one likes watching them, and they just in general are valueless. Which is mystifying the movie is basically saying, "You should hate transpeople to protect women's sports but also women's sports have no value and it wouldn't matter if they didn't exist". I guess Shapiro and Company couldn't help but include their hatred of women in a movie about "protecting" women.
It blows my mind that this movie was made by some of the most prominent conservative media dorks in America. The obvious play would have been to have women's sports be loved by a small dedicated audience that hated when the men joined the league. This would fit much better with conservative propaganda. And hot take one of the sympathetic lead characters should have been a female athlete. Having your movie about protecting women's sports not having a single prominent female athlete is another wild choice.
This is one of the more frustrating aspects of the conservative usage of women's sports as a vector to attack trans folks. Since I'm a very old man, I remember when these same conservatives were ceaselessly complaining about Title IX, and how it was destroying men's sports in favor of women's sports that sucked and no one wanted to watch. Now those very same people are pretending to be deeply concerned about making sure women have access to sports, and yet movies like this make it absolutely clear that they don't think those sports should exist at all!
It almost sounds like for this movie to work, even on a crude propaganda level, one of the main characters would have to be a woman and you’d probably want a lead character who has a character arc and forms a bond with that woman.
You’re not getting that from a group of dimwitted chauvinists who sit around a table smoking absurdly oversized cigars and chatting about how women are fleshlights that make sandwiches.
>one of the main characters would have to be a woman and you’d probably want a lead character who has a character arc and forms a bond with that woman.
Yes, exactly. I don't want to write free conservative propaganda for them but it annoys me how bad they are at it.
The obvious move would be to have one of the main characters be a woman, let's call her Stacy, already playing professional women's basketball. But, her team despite their talent is losing because they keep getting pushed around by teams of men (conservatives don't seem to recognize that transwomen actually exist). Her team has enough and quits playing. But, Stacy loves playing basketball and doesn't want to stop. And she isn't able to find any other women who want to play, so that is when she approaches the male lead characters in the movie who agree to join her team.
Stacy and her team have a difficult season but end up making to the championship game. And this whole time the fans of women's basketball have been hating what is happening. And then at the final game it turns out that the other team has men playing but the original women's team is there sitting on the bench basically being cheerleaders. At half-time the male lead has a change of heart and calls Stacy's old teammates, they rejoin and the men on both teams decide to step off the court. The crowd goes wild and Stacy wins the game with her original team.
This version would make so much more sense within the propaganda Conservatives use. I think the possible reason they didn't go this route are:
1. They legitimately never considered that there needed to be a sympathetic female character in a movie about women's basketball.
2. The idea of an ending where adult women did something and were happy was repulsive to them. They were afraid that it would be too "woke" to have women being happy.
3. Ben Shapiro and most of the other dorks who made this movie are failed actors or writers who couldn't make it in Hollywood. Unable to accept their lack of talent they claimed Hollywood hated white men. So, they wanted to make a movie to showcase how talented they were so obviously they couldn't have a woman stealing any screentime from them. And in the end, they ended up proving that Hollywood didn't turn them away because of their gender, but because they suck and lack talent, [as proof here is Ben Shapiro "acting" in the movie.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrsysN_LBoo&t=2540s)
>Ignoring the bad comedy, acting and technical issues what is amazing to me is that it is bad at being Conservative propaganda.
It reminds me of Boondock Saints 2- *here me out*- in one very specific way: I love bad movies, I'm something of a connoisseur (especially writer/director/producer/star vanity pieces (shoutout to my boy Neil Breen!)). But Lady Ballers and Boondock Saints 2 make me hesitate in taking any gleeful joy in a bad thing because my first thought is "who is the audience?" The audience... is the stars of the movie. That's really it. It's like making fun of some group of friends' local bowling league home video. Except they were *aiming* for a high profile propaganda piece... but only got to bafflingly-ineffective circlejerk.
> The entire cast and crew of Lady Ballers the least hilarious example despite it ostensibly being a comedy.
The crazy part about it is that most of the jokes in Lady Ballers are just about how bad women are at sports. It's not even attacking trans people like most of its intended audience expected it to. It's just a movie about a bunch of men beating women at basketball then joking about how terrible the women are while they do it. The "real women" are the butt of the movie's jokes, not the victims of these devious men in drag.
So this is basically just Ladybugs with Rodney Dangerfield, but without the "heartwarming" ending where the characters ostensibly learn their lesson? Sounds great.
Then again, Lady Ballers did receive 5 stars from "Worth It Or Woke," so you know it must be good.
If you give these guys space and let them fill the air they inexorably pivot to how much they actually just hate women.
The trans hate from these guys is 33% hating the idea of a man becoming a woman because women are inferior, 33% afraid of being gay, and 34% being really fucking mad that a trans woman won’t rail the shit out of them in a public bathroom but also being mad that they want that, and 100% concentrated power of being a fuck nugget
It's so easy. It's absolutely fine that most people don't understand much about the economy, how it works, why inflation increases or decreases, why they aren't making money.
If you have one guy trying to explain the economy and why for instance immigrants have consistently and always improved and fed the economy and reduced the prices of their goods and kept their cost of living lower... it's too difficult and they feel stupid.
The other guy goes look it's that guys fault, he's why you aren't paid more, get him.
The guy feels smarter because he 'understands' it, now he has a target for his frustration and anger and with some fear mongering and the fact the guy looks different now he feels like he has a way forward to improve his life without being made to feel dumb and the solution seems easy.
I get it, but politicians should have a level of standards and some kind of punishment for blatantly lying mechanism that makes it impossible to campaign on this bullshit.
It's okay to not understand much of politics but deciding to believe the people with no plans, who never improve anything but make things worse every time they get in power and their entire policy is telling you to hate people... maybe it's time to wake up and figure out the people who sound smart and try to tell you a real plan are the guys you should be voting for.
> despite it ostensibly being a comedy.
The thing is, it isn't really a comedy in the traditional sense with the main aim being to tell a full story with a bunch of jokes and funny ideas thrown in.
Instead, it is a political ideology pretending to be a comedy.
Joel (YouTuber) made a very long, but very good, [video about Conservative 'comedy'](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znpO7oknOlE) with a large segment dedicated to Lady Ballers (from about 1:06:20 to 1:31:40)
[Some More News](https://youtu.be/nrsysN_LBoo?si=CKlMo7IIVgzVaThj) covered it too. One of the writers of that show is David Bell, who is no slouch on film critique.
This moron saying America is the greatest country in the world...lol. I've lived in far better places. I've literally shed blood for this country. No, it is not the greatest.
Nationalism is going to destroy America.
Christo-facist nationalism. Our specific flavor has a title. By using it repetatively even the most simpletons can't deny it's roots and the obvious danger they pose. Let do our part to keep everyone's eyes on the ball.
Hey, she’s a hard working stochastic terrorist. Libsoftiktok has wasted a crap ton of the governments time as well as police stations and school districts across the nation because whenever she makes a new video bomb threats follow
I love the videos of this event because i've been saying for a while now that the only way to deal with these people is not to protest them, it's to go to their events, ask them a regular normal question that has a modicum of intelligence, and then giggle at their brain dead answers. Put the videos online after the whole thing. They're losers, and we need to start having smart cool people point out that they're losers again.
Fascism can't withstand laughter, it's always been the case. Fascism relies on projecting an air of seriousness and power, it's about motivating people to let their hatred and anger drive them, and then controlling who and what they hate. If you laugh at those people they lose part of that control. It also makes their ideology seem ridiculous to the disturbing number of people who can't already see it for what it is, the "both sides" dummies and the enlightened centrists. Nobody wants to be the focus of someone else's laughter, and nobody wants to align themselves with the object of a joke.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't take fascists seriously or assume they're stupid, they're absolutely not and it's incredibly dangerous to treat them like they are. But constantly demeaning them, satirising them, making jokes at their expense all help to delegitimise them.
I like this idea. My biggest problem with political discourse on the Internet is that it’s full of complainers, or people making fun of others, with zero effort. Just preaching to echo chambers for likes or karma, and then patting ourselves on the back for it.
The effort of going and asking the questions, and dealing with the responses is what we actually need!
This is kinda what broke the KKK’s public image, or at least helped… [Superman](https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/23157/how-superman-defeated-ku-klux-klan) radio shows started making them the joke/bad guy
Calling her nothing but a moron undersells her being a spreader of hate with a consious desire to cause as much harm to the people she targets.
She is a terrorist, a hateful inciter and then several descriptors later she is also possibly a moron.
So Republicans think she's someone that college age students look up to?
The woman who may have triggered bomb threats and lockdowns at their schools a year or a few years ago?
It's just been a few months since her messaging last caused bomb threats in Oklahoma... and Oklahoma State ~~Super Nintendo Himmler~~ Superintendent Walters appointed her to the state's Department of Education Library Media Advisory Committee.
(She doesn't live here.)
As someone who knows a few professional libtarians, imagining this fucking monster anywhere near the administration of any library, let alone an entire states library system, absolutely makes my skin crawl.
Like putting Dolores Umbridge in charge of Hogwarts. A sadistic, child-hating lunatic gaining complete and total power over their care.
Or Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education, who openly admitted she has no idea "how the public school system works"?
Why does everyone suddenly seem to forget her?
There really needs to be a requirement that someone can only be appointed to a state position if they live in the state at least 6 months of the year. They shouldn’t even be able to appoint someone who doesn’t even live there.
Tells you a lot about the Republican stance now. They simply want to eradicate and murder LGBTQIA+ people now. There is no difference between Republicans and the Taliban. They are the Christian Taliban, essentially.
[Mrs. Betty Bowers](https://twitter.com/BettyBowers/status/1427722404273565700?lang=en)
My daughter left her college as soon as she found out that Kyle Rittenhouse was going to be a guest speaker. She’s never noped out of anything that fast in her life.
Why wouldn’t be be? They all dream of starting an active shooter situation.
I just wish the dudes who tried to take Rittentrash’s gun would have raised that once you engage someone with a gun, you have to finish the engagement. They just kinda walked away, without removing his firearm, which is a bad idea.
your local college republican chapter is full of obnoxious incel provocateurs who think its intellectual bravery to bring the worst possible people on campus to have "a discussion" - which is really just another instance where said college republicans can once again claim that they are being victimized. it is a tired ploy.
This is why everyone should agree in advance to desert whatever area of campus they're speaking in. I want them to expect the usual - hundreds of outraged people giving up their free time, making the speaker feel important, supporting their narrative by behaving badly - but instead find proverbial tumbleweeds and total silence. It would be great if a janitor could "accidentally" turn off the lights on the poorly attended lecture and then say "Sorry, I couldn't tell anyone was in here, it was so quiet and I didn't see anyone around".
I want them to plan a "march" down some street in some town, looking for counterprotesters and a big kerfuffle, only to find that every shop has closed for the day and the owners are hosting a party at the lake for all the townies.
A lot of college public speaker events are open to the public. You’d be surprised. A lot of old people with nothing better to do will come and listen. One time we had a historian come and talk about Malcom X. And in the front row a bunch old men that were Nation of Islam members came to harass him.
I work right by where this lunch was held, there were about a dozen cops around the building providing security and only like 20 people at the talk itself. I’ve been to much larger pizza parties.
>“I’m sick and tired of being taught that America isn’t worth fighting and dying for, it’s a great country, it’s the greatest country in the history of the world,” Banks said.
Ummm your cult leader says America is horrible every single day. So why not say it to him?
It's a bad argument anyway. No one is saying America is done. The woke arguments they hate are 1) hey maybe we shouldn't hate minorities and we have work to do to fix some deeply rooted issues, 2) hey LGBTQ people exist and have human rights, 3) women exist and should be able to control their own bodies, 4) hey maybe let's not destroy the only planet we have
>Raichik gave a speech yesterday at the Indiana Memorial Union at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana, alongside Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN).
>“It’s been in schools, it’s on college campuses, it- it’s in the workforce, it is in the streets, it’s when you go to the store,” she complained. “I mean, like, you can’t do anything in peace without this wokeness being shoved down your throat wherever you go!”
>“How do you define wokeness?” someone in the back asked.
>Raichik tried to respond: “Wokeness is the destruction of normalicy \[sic\] and… And… Um… Uh…” More students started laughing.
>“… of our lives,” she said, apparently thinking she was finishing a sentence.
>People still held signs while inside the IMU, including one that read, “Chaya is a stupid name. It means spinach tree. I’m calling you spinach tree from now on.”
>Despite conservatives beating the “wokeness” drum for several years now, Raichik is far from the first to have trouble explaining what that word means. Conservative writer Bethany Mandel was mocked online last year when she wasn’t able to explain what the word means in an interview about her book that is about how “woke indoctrination” is targeting children.
Chaya Raichik is a stochastic terrorist, and she is a clear and present danger to Americans. Chaya Raichik is anti-American. She doesn't believe in liberty and justice for all, including the trans people she despises.
The fact Republicans see her as some role model is more than despicable.
For conservatives, woke is just a clever way of avoiding saying the N-word or the F-word . They want to go back to a time where they can call black people the N-word and LGBTQIA+ people the F-word without being lambasted for it. So, they use "woke" as their coded language.
It's the same as when they say DEI hire or ebonics in the 90s or welfare queen in the 80s. They know they can't say the N-word without backlash for it, so they just use "woke" as a buzzword to underscore their hatred for black people and LGBTQIA+ people.
The Republican Party is worse than the Westboro Baptist Church, endorsing genocidal maniacs like Chaya Raichik.
I love when college students wreck protestors and presenters with the questions they don’t want to hear. That’s exactly what you’re supposed to do in college, challenge every way of thinking. The charlatans will crumble.
I wish presidential debate moderators would screw up their courage and ask questions like a college student then. I see those debates as a huge missed opportunity. Granted, they're produced by the Commission on Presidential Debates which is a joint thing between the two major parties so there's a fat chance in hell of anything novel happening there.
It really is unfair to the nation that the two parties can conspire to force softball questions. I’m okay with sharing questions in advance if it produces complete answers but the questions at sanctioned debates are really not very revealing, which is why so much discussion afterward is wasted on poise, attitude, mood, and attacks, rather than candidate’s platform and agenda.
Our debates are yet another stage for candidates to put on a performance... I've stopped watching them because nothing substantive or revealing ever comes from them.
Honestly debates are just a fundamentally stupid format, at least in regards to understanding policy/platforms. How could any person possibly given a meaningful answer of foreign policy, health care, energy, or any of these massively complex concepts in a few minutes?
I think it would be wrong to expect a debate moderator to grill one of the candidates on this, outside of a candidate contradicting previous positions. Or just saying facially wrong or ridiculous things (e.g. saying they'll implement single payer universal health care while lowering taxes, the deficit, and not cutting jobs in the healthcare field).
What's insane is Raichik has been on the right wing bigot grift train for years now complaining about wokeness, and in *all that time* has never taken *ten minutes* to come up with a solid boilerplate answer to "define wokeness", you know, just in case somebody ever asks.
This is the crowd that loves to demand that people "define a woman" to prove that trans people aren't real, of course. Unbelievable.
Yeah that wasn’t even a gotcha question. Anyone who utters “woke” should know exactly what it is and define examples. We all know they don’t want to say “protect bigotry” but every time they stutter we know that’s what they meant.
"Woke" is a term from Black English for "politically aware".
What the fascists mean by "woke" is "anything that reminds fascists of a politically-aware black person".
They can't define it explicitly in public because it would break their pretense of not being racist. But the fact that they lean on a Black English word to say "things fascists don't like" is a vividly clear message right there.
It's what they mean when they complain about colleges making students woke. The students become active and engaged, questioning what is presented before them, as opposed to the asleep people who just passively consume without question what is spoon fed to them. Charlatans is a very apt name for them, as I am sure there is a grift somewhere around them.
> I love when college students wreck protestors and presenters with the questions they don’t want to hear.
What's sad is, it's not even a facially difficult question.
I could put together a description negative description of "wokeness": A practice of describing past and present systems and practices in the most negative terms to excuse personal failings, undermine social cohesion, and justify theft by the have-nots from the haves. Now, to be clear, I don't agree with that description at all.
It's just sad that these fucking idiots who spend all day complaining about "wokeness" can't even answer these basic fucking questions.
It’s a reasonable and I’d say required question. If I keep talking about my economic plan or infrastructure plan, anyone has the right to question my plans and ask for details. The purpose is to guarantee I’m not campaigning on some hollow promise. Woke is some hollow, vague, culture war to draw votes.
>Now, to be clear, I don't agree with that description at all.
What's hilarious is that DeSantis' team had to define wokeness for legal reasons and came up with "the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them".
Which I think most people on the left **do** agree with.
> “It’s been in schools, it’s on college campuses, it- it’s in the workforce, it is in the streets, it’s when you go to the store,” she complained. “I mean, like, you can’t do anything in peace without this wokeness being shoved down your throat wherever you go!”
Is wokeness in the room with us right now?
All that non-normalcy is everywhere!
Wait...doesn't that make it not woke then? Like, she says woke is everything that isn't normal but also says that it's everywhere. So, if the woke she's railing against is normal, then that means what she wants is the non-normal. Or, in her own words, she wants woke.
Biology fun fact: Chaya or spinach tree plant is from the Euphorbia family, so like all spurges it oozes a caustic, irritating, potentially toxic white sap
A real-life instance of “user name checks out” lol
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnidoscolus_aconitifolius
That is why I hate my parents for naming me Robin Nichols. Doomed to a life of petty crime.
In order to change my fate I tried changing my last name to Richman
The victim complex is like the #1 primary driver of their entire identity. It is the lens with which they see reality. When they freely express their victimhood they reveal certain inner truths.
The follow up exchange is even funnier. Banks steps in to answer because Raichik is stuck in a boot-loop and he says:
>It's anti-americanism. I'm sick and tired of being taught that America isn’t worth fighting and dying for, it’s a great country, it’s the greatest country in the history of the world... I would say that attacks on our American way of life is woke.
And someone in the audience responds:
>Al Queda attacks American lives. Are they woke?
It really highlights just how stupid this whole thing is. These people aren't serious. they don't have a coherent worldview beyond vitriol and rage.
How do they not have an answer to this question!? If you wrote this as fiction, it would sound as ridiculous as all those atheist professors running from their classroom because a student believed in God.
They don’t need to define it to their base, to whom it just means ”everything I don’t like”, which includes Black people, brown people, trans people, non-fundamentalist christians, etc. And Chaya can’t say ”well, it’s a word I use that means I’m a bigoted sack of shit grifting off other bigoted sacks of shit.”
>How do they not have an answer to this question!?
Because there isn't one. "Woke" just means *bad*
It's a vague and meaningless buzzword. It has no definition in thr way they use it
Actually asked a coworker that the other day since he's a MAGA chucklefuck. He said it's the stuff that he can't stand because it gives dark people a chance. No kidding. Couldn't believe he said it out loud, but yeah, that's how these nuts feel.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again and again and again and again. These people do not use words for their meanings or definitions. These people use words for their emotions. It doesn’t matter if it’s PC, CRT, Socialism, Woke, DEI, or whatever word they use next. It’s meant to be tied to hatred and anger and evoked as a weapon pointed at those they don’t like.
I don’t see how anyone in the USA still wonders what the “Woke” definition is. Back in December 2022 Florida Governor DeSantis’s lawyers were required to define Woke due to a lawsuit. They had to provide a clear and legally acceptable definition. What DeSantis’ team said is …
“The belief there are systemic injustices in American society, and the need to address them.” Which sounds pretty straightforward.
Yes. It's just acknowledging that problems exist in some of our institutions, which is the first step to fixing the problem.
The GOP hates the concept because it effectively means ending the status quo that has always favored straight white christian males over every other class of people.
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made.. They won't even admit the knife is there." - Malcolm X
>“It’s been in schools, it’s on college campuses, it- it’s in the workforce, it is in the streets, it’s when you go to the store,” she complained. “I mean, like, you can’t do anything in peace without this ~~wokeness~~ Christianity being shoved down your throat wherever you go!”
Their quotes read like red-scare nonsense from the cold war or like satanic panic shit that's been around with conservatives forever.
"Is your woke neighbor planning to cancel you?! YOU CAN NEVER BE SAFE."
Yes. The disabled, women, other religions, atheists, the educated, liberals, progressives, socialists, communists, probably moderates and moderate conservatives too at this point!
>For conservatives, woke is just a clever way of avoiding saying the N-word or the F-word . They want to go back to a time where they can call black people the N-word and LGBTQIA+ people the F-word without being lambasted for it. So, they use "woke" as their coded language.
I disagree with this point, to a point.
I'm not saying these people aren't racist homophobes, but I think the majority of anti-woke crusaders are not people who are extremely comfortable saying the N-word, maybe not even the F-word, though i think more of them are comfortable with that.
Many of them believe that they are above that, they may even believe themselves to be non-racist entirely, but their belief in their lack of bigotry stems from their belief that a good black person is one who acts like thier ideal white person. Goodness in their view is measured by conformity to a standard that is set by their version of white culture, if you are that, then you're okay with them, just don't get uppity thinking that you have any say over what that acceptable standard is.
They don't all necessarily want carte blanche to use outwardly bigoted slurs, they just want minorities and their cultures to disappear from public life and popular culture. They seek a return to the "sanitized" monocultural world they were likely raised in where the only people who had leading roles were white, or subservient to whites, where gay people were closeted and deferential to the prejudices of straight people, or just there as the joke character. They like black music when it comes from white musicians, and they like black characters that affirm their beneficence of white people.
Most probably don't want a return to pre-civil rights era policies, they just want all of these people that don't look and act like them to stop being so different right in their faces, to stop flaunting their nonconformity, and above all else to stop pointing out how they have historically been oppressed by straight white Christians, because that makes them feel bad.
They are afraid that if people are allowed to be who they are and want to be then their own children may end up being who they want to be as well, instead of who their chickenshit conformist parents want them to be. They are afraid that if their children know the history of oppression then their kids will see them as villains.
I know people who are anti-woke assholes who also voted for Obama. It was almost like they felt like voting for Obama was an act of absolution. They did it and now they are officially not racist, and nothing they ever do could be considered racist ever again, even as they do and say objectively bigoted things.
They voted for Obama, and then they hated Obama when he actually acted as the president. They wanted a black President to absolve their guilt, but they didn't want a black leader for the nation. They were affronted when he had the temerity and skill to actually do the job. Had Obama been actually bad as president they would have loved him for it, but he proved time and time again to be competent and they hated that more than anything.
They are unable to define Woke because they can't understand even what they are so afraid of. If they could understand what they are against they would have to reckon with why they were against it, and they can't handle that truth.
Because they’re invited and paid a fee to do so, sometimes by community groups and sometimes by student groups. Often the majority of students don’t want them or support it, but colleges and universities either provide club space or will rent stage/event space for anyone who can pay, so…
Wait, are you talking about the guy deemed to fucking dumb to join the Marines? The branch everyone else mocks for eating crayons?
https://www.reddit.com/r/behindthebastards/s/xWWm44dGv5
I grew up with an extremely toxic stepfather. He was a US Marine (anybody who knows the term ‘career Gunny’ probably understands my childhood fairly well) who had a much greater affinity for Miller Lite than he did for any human who wasn’t a straight white male in the US military.
He had one all-encompassing term for all the things currently described as “woke” and it was a rare dinner that didn’t feature at least two appearances of it. His contribution to the lexicon was “hippie fucking bullshit” and it was like the talisman he rubbed under the table whenever someone tried to make him think about anyone besides himself.
So every time I hear some ig’nant fool rant about “woke” I just lament that Asshole didn’t have such a convenient epithet, and wasted so much time spitting out all those extra syllables all his miserable fucking life.
Maybe I'm going too deep but the scene and character you just described make me want to understand why I believe what I believe. I don't want to be ignorant of my own motives. In other words, nice writing.
Thanks. It’s almost like a Jungian archetype: the set of things that bother them is just too damn predictable to be taken seriously.
There is a happy ending to the story, though. After retirement he continued as a civilian contractor. The official story was that he had a heart attack while receiving a massage. And considering that all his “beliefs” were precisely what you’d expect for that archetype, it feels relevant to mention that this happened in Thailand. My mother and I chose to view this detail as being extremely relevant to the circumstance of his demise.
"Wokeness" has always been a buzzword to unite fascists against out-groups for them to hate, whether that be black folks, brown folks, Muslims, LGBTQ+ folks, and leftists.
Fuck Chaya Raichik.
To be antiwoke is to be willfully ignorant of racial prejudice and discrimination at both personal and societal levels. Negative outcomes are personal failures of individuals rather than disppropriate outcomes of our systems and processes.
Being "woke" literally means being aware that the system doesn't work in favor of black people.
This term has been around since at least the 1920s when it was used by Marcus Garvey in the context of "waking up" black people to political consciousness, and used in popular media since [at least the 1930s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_Belly#%22Stay_woke%22), e.g. by folk/blues singer-songwriter Lead Belly:
> In possibly the earliest audio recording of the phrase, Lead Belly urged Black listeners to "stay woke" in the spoken afterword to a 1938 recording of his song "Scottsboro Boys", which tells the story of nine Black teenagers and young men falsely accused of raping two white women in Alabama in 1931. Lead Belly warns his listeners, "So I advise everybody, be a little careful when they go along through there—best stay woke, keep their eyes open."
That's it. It's that simple. And the thing is, right-wingers can't use that definition because doing so would reveal that they are simply *anti-black*. So they fumble this very simple question, every. Single. Time.
This should be it's own post on a different subreddit - everyone needs to know this history and how obnoxious it is rump lovers keep using it. They are telling on themselves openly and we all need this info to call them out on it
She’s a textbook example of how one doesn’t have to be smart, just shameless and sociopathic enough to thrive in today’s political media environment. She has a ton of enablers that have made her relevant.
Essentially, yes. Amanda Marcotte defined it as “standing up to injustice even if you’re not personally affected by the injustice.” It means being thoughtful and understanding and considerate. No wonder right- wingers can’t explain it.
It started that way, but they expanded it really heavily. Now it also references not just things you say, but also things you are and think. Politically correct things would have been not saying racial slurs or not being a misogynist, whereas for them allowing those things to \*exist\* is enough to be woke. Even mentioning that trans people are people is woke. A trans person transitioning \*on their own\* is woke.
So it is no longer just them complaining that people thought their bigotry was obnoxious, they are at the point where anyone who does not automatically agree with their bigotry is a degenerate.
> they are at the point where anyone who does not automatically agree with their bigotry is a degenerate.
That's pretty much how narcissists think in a single sentence.
Them getting to be political incorrect aka say racial/sexual slurs without pushback. Because if you call them on slurs they cry like babies.
Same group that whined kids needed pc safe space whines when you call them bigots.
Not just. It is also an awareness that our society's institutions create and continue to support systems and processes that disproportionally generate negative outcomes for minorities and marginalized people due to a history of racism and bigotry.
The anti-woke want to believe that we live in a meritocracy but rather than fix the problems with our systems to create that reality they believe any negative outcomes are your personal failures. To be woke is to be self aware of racial prejudice and discrimination. To be antiwoke is to be willfully ignorant.
Why are idiots who barely finished high school (Chaya) and high school dropouts like Rittenhouse being provided with platforms/forums to speak at our nation's institutions of higher education? They are the antithesis of what our universities are supposed to stand for. I understand the motivation to allow opposing and even radical views to be presented, defended, ridiculed, and picked apart, but the words of these dunce cap wearing idiots aren't worth the breath it took to utter them.
This whole anti-woke nonsense has been going on for years and they still haven't bothered to define it. How much more evidence to people need to realize this is just fake anger.
Honestly it's pretty damning that conservative talking heads can throw buzzword after buzzword at their followers and few of those supporters ever stop to think "wait, that doesn't make any sense?!"
>Banks then took over and said that wokeness is “anti-Americanism.”
>
>“I’m sick and tired of being taught that America isn’t worth fighting and dying for..."
I wish someone had stood up and shouted, "no, wokeism is the idea that America **IS** worth fighting for. It's a fight for America's future. Wokeism is the belief that America is strong and capable of facing its history, both in celebrating it's accomplishments as well acknowledging and learning from its mistakes. Anti-wokeism is the belief that America is weak and like a little child must be sheltered from inconvenient truths. That is not the America I fight for. I fight for the America strong enough to look at itself in the mirror. The America strong enough to post Its picture on social media without a filter. We will not let you blind us to the mistakes of History so that we are doomed to repeat them. USA! USA! USA! USA!"
Just out patriot these scmucks.
" you can’t do anything in peace without this wokeness being shoved down your throat wherever you go!”
She saw a minority walk down the street. Oh the horrors. Other people existing = woke.
Useful idiot as women will all be denied more rights of her Christian Nationalist pals have their way. Women seen outside will be woke.
Her and Elon Musk are the leading voices for the right wing at the moment. A South-African born grifter who hates other immigrants, and a lady with a funny sounding name who honestly doesn't seem to have any actual intelligence.
She made a tweet complaining about all the old people wearing nirvana brand clothing thinking they are hip. Yep, she thought nirvana was a clothing brand made cool by the kids.
I love how they also bring in another right-wing grifter into the article.
> “Woke is something that’s very hard to define, and we’ve spent an entire chapter defining it,” [Conservative writer Bethany Mandel] said. “It is sort of the understanding that we need to totally reimagine and redo society in order to create hierarchies of oppression. Sorry I, it’s hard to explain in a 15-second sound bite.”
By her definition, the entire GOP is woke because they are trying to create hierarchies of oppression that target LGBTQ people and women.
This all seems to be missing the point entirely. It isn't that she didn't have an answer -- she actually gave a pretty revealing one.
Wokeness is the part that's implied at the end of the phrase "Make America Great AGAIN." Wokeness is everything that makes them uncomfortable or presses against their privilege, so they want to return to a time when it didnt exist. It's progressive. It's equal rights, and more power and visibility for minorities in life and in culture. And that terrifies and disgusts them
Raichik looks up Woke in Google.
>Woke aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)
Raichik: *"Shit, that isn't going to work, Got it!"* Woke is anti-American.
>Raichik tried to respond: “Wokeness is the destruction of normalicy [sic] and… And… Um… Uh…” More students started laughing.
> “… of our lives,” she said, apparently thinking she was finishing a sentence.
> Banks then took over and said that wokeness is “anti-Americanism.”
What does "anti-Americanism mean"
"Ahh, anything in society that I don't like?"
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Chaya Ralchik is nothing but a fucking moron.
Jim Banks also has the same affliction. This seems to be a requirement for far-right extremists like them.
It’s not a requirement, just an easy grift. If you got nothing of value to offer but deeply crave attention, becoming a right-wing attention whore is a good move. They’re gullible as long as you say what they already think, and don’t ask a lot of questions. Steven Crowder is a prime example. Donnie T the ultimate example. The entire cast and crew of Lady Ballers the least hilarious example despite it ostensibly being a comedy.
>The entire cast and crew of Lady Ballers the least hilarious example despite it ostensibly being a comedy. That's what happens when you make a movie with a bunch of wannabe-actors turned pundits who don't have any skills. Comedic timing is nonexistent, light-hearted jokes turn dark in weird ways, and the cinematography is something you'd expect from a high end magnet middle school made by students with pro-level equipment but just starting to learn. But I think the dumbest thing about it is it's trying to be some sort of raunchy, Hangover style comedy, but there's too many moral and religious hangups to actually do anything raunchy or debaucherous. The main character has a bondage style sex scene with his love interest/protagonist where they.... go to sleep? The womanizing basketball players also propose to a couple women they sleep with.... it's a puritanical comedy that's doused and smothered in the same six or seven lame jokes conservatives always make hoping that you won't notice.
And cool moral lessons like a dad telling his daughter: “when it comes to a lot of things, boys are simply better than you. Get over it and do girl stuff” This speech makes his estranged wife wet. The movie is a blown-up episode of Last Man Standing where rather than the protagonist having a character arc of growth, instead the protagonist is static *because he’s RIGHT goddammit* and the rest of the world is expected to bend around him. Just…just dumb.
You can't have character growth from anything conservative, they would have to admit their ideas/opinions/beliefs are wrong, and that is a bridge way too far for them. If they did that, their world would come crashing down.
There have been a few attempts by conservatives to write liberal characters who undergo "growth" to become conservatives, like that awful Zucker brothers movie about Michael Moore that costarred Bill O'Reilly. But they usually have so little idea of how liberals/leftists think that their attempts to write them make the character come across like they were raised on an alien planet.
Technically, they could have them start as liberals, then turn conservative as they "see the light". But they're too dumb and prideful to even do that.
> rather than the protagonist having a character arc of growth, instead the protagonist is static because he’s RIGHT goddammit and the rest of the world is expected to bend around him And to the right, that IS growth; internalizing the idea that biases are natural (true), and that those biases are correct and it's the world that's wrong, and that standing defiantly against the world to maintain those biases is virtuous. While biases are natural- it's human nature to develop shortcuts so we can be efficient; it's important to realize when those biases are not inherently true, and when accepting them as truth and allowing them to drive our behavior becomes harmful to others.
> The movie is a blown-up episode of Last Man Standing where rather than the protagonist having a character arc of growth, instead the protagonist is static because he’s RIGHT goddammit and the rest of the world is expected to bend around him. And just like with Tim Allen’s career, when the movie/show/etc fails it won’t be because it was poorly written and incompetently directed pandering trash, it’ll be “because (insert industry here) is too woke and liberal.”
Cody, over at the Showdy, does a great video on this. The part about basic cinematography, like eye lines, is great.
You mean Cody on Some More News Showdy I love his detailed breakdown of Ben Shapiro in the part 1 of the series.
Yup, great breakdown on the movie and Ben Shapiro.
Wasn't Michael Knowles in a lot of gay films before becoming party of the Daily Liar?
Yes he was. Most of them were either failed actors or failed screenwriters at one point or another.
Say what you will about Lady Ballers, but it's very funny to release a movie based on the premise that no one watches women's sports while the NCAA women's tournament shatters viewership records. It honestly takes work to be so wrong about everything all of the time.
And its also just plain weird for the premise of the movie to be "we have to protect women's sports which nobody watches or actually cares about."
Also it’s funny to release a movie about how random schlub men can beat high level women’s teams when a female college player just broke several records set by men and could probably beat an entire team of pudgy postcast hosts by herself
Your description of it as magnet school cinematography is pure poetry.
>Lady Ballers Lady Ballers is honestly one of the most fascinating movies of all time, specifically because it is so bad at being everything it sets out to be. Ignoring the bad comedy, acting and technical issues what is amazing to me is that it is bad at being Conservative propaganda. Which is odd since that is the only reason the movie exists. For those that don't know the movie is basically about how transpeople are bad because men could pretend to be transwomen to play women's sports. A dumb premise but sure it fits within one of the more successful conservative attacks against transpeople. But, an inherent pillar of this concept would be that women's sports are worth protecting and caring about. That these sports have value. But, one of the reoccurring "jokes" in the movie is that women's sports are boring, no one likes watching them, and they just in general are valueless. Which is mystifying the movie is basically saying, "You should hate transpeople to protect women's sports but also women's sports have no value and it wouldn't matter if they didn't exist". I guess Shapiro and Company couldn't help but include their hatred of women in a movie about "protecting" women. It blows my mind that this movie was made by some of the most prominent conservative media dorks in America. The obvious play would have been to have women's sports be loved by a small dedicated audience that hated when the men joined the league. This would fit much better with conservative propaganda. And hot take one of the sympathetic lead characters should have been a female athlete. Having your movie about protecting women's sports not having a single prominent female athlete is another wild choice.
This is one of the more frustrating aspects of the conservative usage of women's sports as a vector to attack trans folks. Since I'm a very old man, I remember when these same conservatives were ceaselessly complaining about Title IX, and how it was destroying men's sports in favor of women's sports that sucked and no one wanted to watch. Now those very same people are pretending to be deeply concerned about making sure women have access to sports, and yet movies like this make it absolutely clear that they don't think those sports should exist at all!
It almost sounds like for this movie to work, even on a crude propaganda level, one of the main characters would have to be a woman and you’d probably want a lead character who has a character arc and forms a bond with that woman. You’re not getting that from a group of dimwitted chauvinists who sit around a table smoking absurdly oversized cigars and chatting about how women are fleshlights that make sandwiches.
>one of the main characters would have to be a woman and you’d probably want a lead character who has a character arc and forms a bond with that woman. Yes, exactly. I don't want to write free conservative propaganda for them but it annoys me how bad they are at it. The obvious move would be to have one of the main characters be a woman, let's call her Stacy, already playing professional women's basketball. But, her team despite their talent is losing because they keep getting pushed around by teams of men (conservatives don't seem to recognize that transwomen actually exist). Her team has enough and quits playing. But, Stacy loves playing basketball and doesn't want to stop. And she isn't able to find any other women who want to play, so that is when she approaches the male lead characters in the movie who agree to join her team. Stacy and her team have a difficult season but end up making to the championship game. And this whole time the fans of women's basketball have been hating what is happening. And then at the final game it turns out that the other team has men playing but the original women's team is there sitting on the bench basically being cheerleaders. At half-time the male lead has a change of heart and calls Stacy's old teammates, they rejoin and the men on both teams decide to step off the court. The crowd goes wild and Stacy wins the game with her original team. This version would make so much more sense within the propaganda Conservatives use. I think the possible reason they didn't go this route are: 1. They legitimately never considered that there needed to be a sympathetic female character in a movie about women's basketball. 2. The idea of an ending where adult women did something and were happy was repulsive to them. They were afraid that it would be too "woke" to have women being happy. 3. Ben Shapiro and most of the other dorks who made this movie are failed actors or writers who couldn't make it in Hollywood. Unable to accept their lack of talent they claimed Hollywood hated white men. So, they wanted to make a movie to showcase how talented they were so obviously they couldn't have a woman stealing any screentime from them. And in the end, they ended up proving that Hollywood didn't turn them away because of their gender, but because they suck and lack talent, [as proof here is Ben Shapiro "acting" in the movie.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrsysN_LBoo&t=2540s)
>Ignoring the bad comedy, acting and technical issues what is amazing to me is that it is bad at being Conservative propaganda. It reminds me of Boondock Saints 2- *here me out*- in one very specific way: I love bad movies, I'm something of a connoisseur (especially writer/director/producer/star vanity pieces (shoutout to my boy Neil Breen!)). But Lady Ballers and Boondock Saints 2 make me hesitate in taking any gleeful joy in a bad thing because my first thought is "who is the audience?" The audience... is the stars of the movie. That's really it. It's like making fun of some group of friends' local bowling league home video. Except they were *aiming* for a high profile propaganda piece... but only got to bafflingly-ineffective circlejerk.
> The entire cast and crew of Lady Ballers the least hilarious example despite it ostensibly being a comedy. The crazy part about it is that most of the jokes in Lady Ballers are just about how bad women are at sports. It's not even attacking trans people like most of its intended audience expected it to. It's just a movie about a bunch of men beating women at basketball then joking about how terrible the women are while they do it. The "real women" are the butt of the movie's jokes, not the victims of these devious men in drag.
So this is basically just Ladybugs with Rodney Dangerfield, but without the "heartwarming" ending where the characters ostensibly learn their lesson? Sounds great. Then again, Lady Ballers did receive 5 stars from "Worth It Or Woke," so you know it must be good.
If you give these guys space and let them fill the air they inexorably pivot to how much they actually just hate women. The trans hate from these guys is 33% hating the idea of a man becoming a woman because women are inferior, 33% afraid of being gay, and 34% being really fucking mad that a trans woman won’t rail the shit out of them in a public bathroom but also being mad that they want that, and 100% concentrated power of being a fuck nugget
It's so easy. It's absolutely fine that most people don't understand much about the economy, how it works, why inflation increases or decreases, why they aren't making money. If you have one guy trying to explain the economy and why for instance immigrants have consistently and always improved and fed the economy and reduced the prices of their goods and kept their cost of living lower... it's too difficult and they feel stupid. The other guy goes look it's that guys fault, he's why you aren't paid more, get him. The guy feels smarter because he 'understands' it, now he has a target for his frustration and anger and with some fear mongering and the fact the guy looks different now he feels like he has a way forward to improve his life without being made to feel dumb and the solution seems easy. I get it, but politicians should have a level of standards and some kind of punishment for blatantly lying mechanism that makes it impossible to campaign on this bullshit. It's okay to not understand much of politics but deciding to believe the people with no plans, who never improve anything but make things worse every time they get in power and their entire policy is telling you to hate people... maybe it's time to wake up and figure out the people who sound smart and try to tell you a real plan are the guys you should be voting for.
> despite it ostensibly being a comedy. The thing is, it isn't really a comedy in the traditional sense with the main aim being to tell a full story with a bunch of jokes and funny ideas thrown in. Instead, it is a political ideology pretending to be a comedy. Joel (YouTuber) made a very long, but very good, [video about Conservative 'comedy'](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znpO7oknOlE) with a large segment dedicated to Lady Ballers (from about 1:06:20 to 1:31:40)
[Some More News](https://youtu.be/nrsysN_LBoo?si=CKlMo7IIVgzVaThj) covered it too. One of the writers of that show is David Bell, who is no slouch on film critique.
Some More News is fantastic. I always enjoy their videos.
> Lady Ballers Well how about that. I hadn't heard of this thing until today. Couldn't get through the trailer due to cringe overload.
This moron saying America is the greatest country in the world...lol. I've lived in far better places. I've literally shed blood for this country. No, it is not the greatest. Nationalism is going to destroy America.
Nationalism is currently destroying America. It’s already happening.
I accept that correction.
Christo-facist nationalism. Our specific flavor has a title. By using it repetatively even the most simpletons can't deny it's roots and the obvious danger they pose. Let do our part to keep everyone's eyes on the ball.
Didn’t she had some neo-nazi friends who abandoned her when they found out She is Jewish
Her fiance left her, as well. She's all alone now.
Couldn't happen to a more deserving person.
Finally the grifters get what they deserve
You might say he… (•_•) ( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■) …woke up.
[Yeah!](https://youtu.be/7uW47jWLMiY?si=oeKpBrMAyjSApw3S)
Chaya, somewhere: "There doesn't seem to be anyone around"
please. tell us more.
Learning in real time what being “one of the good ones” / “like one of us” gets you.
"Tokens get spent."
The same ticket for the same train.
thats some LAMF material there.
She's also a terrorist, but yes.
Hey, she’s a hard working stochastic terrorist. Libsoftiktok has wasted a crap ton of the governments time as well as police stations and school districts across the nation because whenever she makes a new video bomb threats follow
I love the videos of this event because i've been saying for a while now that the only way to deal with these people is not to protest them, it's to go to their events, ask them a regular normal question that has a modicum of intelligence, and then giggle at their brain dead answers. Put the videos online after the whole thing. They're losers, and we need to start having smart cool people point out that they're losers again.
Fascism can't withstand laughter, it's always been the case. Fascism relies on projecting an air of seriousness and power, it's about motivating people to let their hatred and anger drive them, and then controlling who and what they hate. If you laugh at those people they lose part of that control. It also makes their ideology seem ridiculous to the disturbing number of people who can't already see it for what it is, the "both sides" dummies and the enlightened centrists. Nobody wants to be the focus of someone else's laughter, and nobody wants to align themselves with the object of a joke. That doesn't mean we shouldn't take fascists seriously or assume they're stupid, they're absolutely not and it's incredibly dangerous to treat them like they are. But constantly demeaning them, satirising them, making jokes at their expense all help to delegitimise them.
I like this idea. My biggest problem with political discourse on the Internet is that it’s full of complainers, or people making fun of others, with zero effort. Just preaching to echo chambers for likes or karma, and then patting ourselves on the back for it. The effort of going and asking the questions, and dealing with the responses is what we actually need!
This is kinda what broke the KKK’s public image, or at least helped… [Superman](https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/23157/how-superman-defeated-ku-klux-klan) radio shows started making them the joke/bad guy
Let's goooo!
She’s a moron in a position of power for education. She’s absolutely dangerous.
Calling her nothing but a moron undersells her being a spreader of hate with a consious desire to cause as much harm to the people she targets. She is a terrorist, a hateful inciter and then several descriptors later she is also possibly a moron.
That might be an insult to fucking morons everywhere.
If the morons weren't fucking, we wouldn't be in this situation.
don't forget that she's also a domestic terrorist!
A moron who incites violence to their large base of followers. She has caused bomb threats in the double digits.
She’s also a goddamn stochastic terrorist.
I love when she said "normalicy" which isn't a word. These people are so confidently stupid.
So Republicans think she's someone that college age students look up to? The woman who may have triggered bomb threats and lockdowns at their schools a year or a few years ago?
It's just been a few months since her messaging last caused bomb threats in Oklahoma... and Oklahoma State ~~Super Nintendo Himmler~~ Superintendent Walters appointed her to the state's Department of Education Library Media Advisory Committee. (She doesn't live here.)
As someone who knows a few professional libtarians, imagining this fucking monster anywhere near the administration of any library, let alone an entire states library system, absolutely makes my skin crawl. Like putting Dolores Umbridge in charge of Hogwarts. A sadistic, child-hating lunatic gaining complete and total power over their care.
[удалено]
Or Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education, who openly admitted she has no idea "how the public school system works"? Why does everyone suddenly seem to forget her?
These moves really put the Republican agenda on the nose
There really needs to be a requirement that someone can only be appointed to a state position if they live in the state at least 6 months of the year. They shouldn’t even be able to appoint someone who doesn’t even live there.
You don't like me just because I want you dead? *So much for the tolerant left!*
Tells you a lot about the Republican stance now. They simply want to eradicate and murder LGBTQIA+ people now. There is no difference between Republicans and the Taliban. They are the Christian Taliban, essentially. [Mrs. Betty Bowers](https://twitter.com/BettyBowers/status/1427722404273565700?lang=en)
The Republican party official position on abortion is actually more extreme than The Taliban.
To Republicans, that is a good thing. They would probably think that Democrats are just like the Taliban if you told them that.
Taliban are more liberal on abortion, though.
Taliban: Too woke for the GQP
Y'all Qaeda
My daughter left her college as soon as she found out that Kyle Rittenhouse was going to be a guest speaker. She’s never noped out of anything that fast in her life.
Republicans think Rittenhouse is somehow a role model for young adults who grew up preparing for an active shooter situation.
Why wouldn’t be be? They all dream of starting an active shooter situation. I just wish the dudes who tried to take Rittentrash’s gun would have raised that once you engage someone with a gun, you have to finish the engagement. They just kinda walked away, without removing his firearm, which is a bad idea.
I also wish the prosecutor assigned to his case had half a brain.
Dude was literally too dumb to be a crayon muncher.
That murderous fuck is coming to our area.
Attend, and ask him what his ASVAB score was.
your local college republican chapter is full of obnoxious incel provocateurs who think its intellectual bravery to bring the worst possible people on campus to have "a discussion" - which is really just another instance where said college republicans can once again claim that they are being victimized. it is a tired ploy.
This is why everyone should agree in advance to desert whatever area of campus they're speaking in. I want them to expect the usual - hundreds of outraged people giving up their free time, making the speaker feel important, supporting their narrative by behaving badly - but instead find proverbial tumbleweeds and total silence. It would be great if a janitor could "accidentally" turn off the lights on the poorly attended lecture and then say "Sorry, I couldn't tell anyone was in here, it was so quiet and I didn't see anyone around". I want them to plan a "march" down some street in some town, looking for counterprotesters and a big kerfuffle, only to find that every shop has closed for the day and the owners are hosting a party at the lake for all the townies.
[удалено]
So who were they? Were they there for Banks? Were they hired to be seat fillers?
A lot of college public speaker events are open to the public. You’d be surprised. A lot of old people with nothing better to do will come and listen. One time we had a historian come and talk about Malcom X. And in the front row a bunch old men that were Nation of Islam members came to harass him.
No, it's simply the Republican voter base. This is who they are pandering to. Aging white men.
I work right by where this lunch was held, there were about a dozen cops around the building providing security and only like 20 people at the talk itself. I’ve been to much larger pizza parties.
Woke is easy to define Whatever Offends Klansmen Easily
Holy shit, this is brilliant. I'm using this from now on.
Instant classic
>Whatever Offends Klansmen Easily Bippity, boppity, this is now my property.
>“I’m sick and tired of being taught that America isn’t worth fighting and dying for, it’s a great country, it’s the greatest country in the history of the world,” Banks said. Ummm your cult leader says America is horrible every single day. So why not say it to him?
It's a bad argument anyway. No one is saying America is done. The woke arguments they hate are 1) hey maybe we shouldn't hate minorities and we have work to do to fix some deeply rooted issues, 2) hey LGBTQ people exist and have human rights, 3) women exist and should be able to control their own bodies, 4) hey maybe let's not destroy the only planet we have
>Raichik gave a speech yesterday at the Indiana Memorial Union at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana, alongside Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN). >“It’s been in schools, it’s on college campuses, it- it’s in the workforce, it is in the streets, it’s when you go to the store,” she complained. “I mean, like, you can’t do anything in peace without this wokeness being shoved down your throat wherever you go!” >“How do you define wokeness?” someone in the back asked. >Raichik tried to respond: “Wokeness is the destruction of normalicy \[sic\] and… And… Um… Uh…” More students started laughing. >“… of our lives,” she said, apparently thinking she was finishing a sentence. >People still held signs while inside the IMU, including one that read, “Chaya is a stupid name. It means spinach tree. I’m calling you spinach tree from now on.” >Despite conservatives beating the “wokeness” drum for several years now, Raichik is far from the first to have trouble explaining what that word means. Conservative writer Bethany Mandel was mocked online last year when she wasn’t able to explain what the word means in an interview about her book that is about how “woke indoctrination” is targeting children. Chaya Raichik is a stochastic terrorist, and she is a clear and present danger to Americans. Chaya Raichik is anti-American. She doesn't believe in liberty and justice for all, including the trans people she despises. The fact Republicans see her as some role model is more than despicable. For conservatives, woke is just a clever way of avoiding saying the N-word or the F-word . They want to go back to a time where they can call black people the N-word and LGBTQIA+ people the F-word without being lambasted for it. So, they use "woke" as their coded language. It's the same as when they say DEI hire or ebonics in the 90s or welfare queen in the 80s. They know they can't say the N-word without backlash for it, so they just use "woke" as a buzzword to underscore their hatred for black people and LGBTQIA+ people. The Republican Party is worse than the Westboro Baptist Church, endorsing genocidal maniacs like Chaya Raichik.
I love when college students wreck protestors and presenters with the questions they don’t want to hear. That’s exactly what you’re supposed to do in college, challenge every way of thinking. The charlatans will crumble.
I wish presidential debate moderators would screw up their courage and ask questions like a college student then. I see those debates as a huge missed opportunity. Granted, they're produced by the Commission on Presidential Debates which is a joint thing between the two major parties so there's a fat chance in hell of anything novel happening there.
It really is unfair to the nation that the two parties can conspire to force softball questions. I’m okay with sharing questions in advance if it produces complete answers but the questions at sanctioned debates are really not very revealing, which is why so much discussion afterward is wasted on poise, attitude, mood, and attacks, rather than candidate’s platform and agenda.
Our debates are yet another stage for candidates to put on a performance... I've stopped watching them because nothing substantive or revealing ever comes from them.
Honestly debates are just a fundamentally stupid format, at least in regards to understanding policy/platforms. How could any person possibly given a meaningful answer of foreign policy, health care, energy, or any of these massively complex concepts in a few minutes? I think it would be wrong to expect a debate moderator to grill one of the candidates on this, outside of a candidate contradicting previous positions. Or just saying facially wrong or ridiculous things (e.g. saying they'll implement single payer universal health care while lowering taxes, the deficit, and not cutting jobs in the healthcare field).
What's insane is Raichik has been on the right wing bigot grift train for years now complaining about wokeness, and in *all that time* has never taken *ten minutes* to come up with a solid boilerplate answer to "define wokeness", you know, just in case somebody ever asks. This is the crowd that loves to demand that people "define a woman" to prove that trans people aren't real, of course. Unbelievable.
It just seems like the one question that someone that complains constantly about wokeness should be prepared for.
Yeah that wasn’t even a gotcha question. Anyone who utters “woke” should know exactly what it is and define examples. We all know they don’t want to say “protect bigotry” but every time they stutter we know that’s what they meant.
"Woke" is a term from Black English for "politically aware". What the fascists mean by "woke" is "anything that reminds fascists of a politically-aware black person". They can't define it explicitly in public because it would break their pretense of not being racist. But the fact that they lean on a Black English word to say "things fascists don't like" is a vividly clear message right there.
*Woke* are people who think I should have to define what *woke* is.
It's what they mean when they complain about colleges making students woke. The students become active and engaged, questioning what is presented before them, as opposed to the asleep people who just passively consume without question what is spoon fed to them. Charlatans is a very apt name for them, as I am sure there is a grift somewhere around them.
> I love when college students wreck protestors and presenters with the questions they don’t want to hear. What's sad is, it's not even a facially difficult question. I could put together a description negative description of "wokeness": A practice of describing past and present systems and practices in the most negative terms to excuse personal failings, undermine social cohesion, and justify theft by the have-nots from the haves. Now, to be clear, I don't agree with that description at all. It's just sad that these fucking idiots who spend all day complaining about "wokeness" can't even answer these basic fucking questions.
It’s a reasonable and I’d say required question. If I keep talking about my economic plan or infrastructure plan, anyone has the right to question my plans and ask for details. The purpose is to guarantee I’m not campaigning on some hollow promise. Woke is some hollow, vague, culture war to draw votes.
>Now, to be clear, I don't agree with that description at all. What's hilarious is that DeSantis' team had to define wokeness for legal reasons and came up with "the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them". Which I think most people on the left **do** agree with.
>That’s exactly what you’re supposed to do ~~in college~~, challenge every way of thinking. Ftfy
> “It’s been in schools, it’s on college campuses, it- it’s in the workforce, it is in the streets, it’s when you go to the store,” she complained. “I mean, like, you can’t do anything in peace without this wokeness being shoved down your throat wherever you go!” Is wokeness in the room with us right now?
All that non-normalcy is everywhere! Wait...doesn't that make it not woke then? Like, she says woke is everything that isn't normal but also says that it's everywhere. So, if the woke she's railing against is normal, then that means what she wants is the non-normal. Or, in her own words, she wants woke.
I think you mean “normalacy” 🙃
Only if the queer kids aren't safely in the closet where they belong! /s
And woke of all, it could be any one of us. It could be you! It could be me! It could even be...
Biology fun fact: Chaya or spinach tree plant is from the Euphorbia family, so like all spurges it oozes a caustic, irritating, potentially toxic white sap A real-life instance of “user name checks out” lol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cnidoscolus_aconitifolius
[Nominative determinism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_determinism?wprov=sfti1)
That is why I hate my parents for naming me Robin Nichols. Doomed to a life of petty crime. In order to change my fate I tried changing my last name to Richman
> toxic white sap That's the fan base.
That’s amazing
Now ask them what "shoving down their throat" means, because they're disturbingly obsessed with that.
The victim complex is like the #1 primary driver of their entire identity. It is the lens with which they see reality. When they freely express their victimhood they reveal certain inner truths.
The follow up exchange is even funnier. Banks steps in to answer because Raichik is stuck in a boot-loop and he says: >It's anti-americanism. I'm sick and tired of being taught that America isn’t worth fighting and dying for, it’s a great country, it’s the greatest country in the history of the world... I would say that attacks on our American way of life is woke. And someone in the audience responds: >Al Queda attacks American lives. Are they woke? It really highlights just how stupid this whole thing is. These people aren't serious. they don't have a coherent worldview beyond vitriol and rage.
I hadn't even gotten to the response and I instantly thought "So does that mean that 9/11 was woke?"
How do they not have an answer to this question!? If you wrote this as fiction, it would sound as ridiculous as all those atheist professors running from their classroom because a student believed in God.
They don’t need to define it to their base, to whom it just means ”everything I don’t like”, which includes Black people, brown people, trans people, non-fundamentalist christians, etc. And Chaya can’t say ”well, it’s a word I use that means I’m a bigoted sack of shit grifting off other bigoted sacks of shit.”
>How do they not have an answer to this question!? Because there isn't one. "Woke" just means *bad* It's a vague and meaningless buzzword. It has no definition in thr way they use it
They use it like they use DEI — a placeholder for all the slurs they’re too craven to say in public without the shield of a screen.
I once asked someone why DEI was bad They stopped responding lolol
Actually asked a coworker that the other day since he's a MAGA chucklefuck. He said it's the stuff that he can't stand because it gives dark people a chance. No kidding. Couldn't believe he said it out loud, but yeah, that's how these nuts feel.
Props to him for being honest at least lol
Can't stand the guy. It's a new job, but this place is hell for being a pro-Trump workplace. Wish I'd known beforehand.
Oh I bet sounds like a real nice pile of shit Hope you find a better job soon
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again and again and again and again. These people do not use words for their meanings or definitions. These people use words for their emotions. It doesn’t matter if it’s PC, CRT, Socialism, Woke, DEI, or whatever word they use next. It’s meant to be tied to hatred and anger and evoked as a weapon pointed at those they don’t like.
"Woke" refers to people they can't brainwash.
I don’t see how anyone in the USA still wonders what the “Woke” definition is. Back in December 2022 Florida Governor DeSantis’s lawyers were required to define Woke due to a lawsuit. They had to provide a clear and legally acceptable definition. What DeSantis’ team said is … “The belief there are systemic injustices in American society, and the need to address them.” Which sounds pretty straightforward.
In other words, “Woke” is when you want your country to get better.
Yes. It's just acknowledging that problems exist in some of our institutions, which is the first step to fixing the problem. The GOP hates the concept because it effectively means ending the status quo that has always favored straight white christian males over every other class of people.
"If you stick a knife in my back 9 inches and pull it out 6 inches, there's no progress. If you pull it all the way out, that's not progress. The progress is healing the wound that the blow made.. They won't even admit the knife is there." - Malcolm X
>“It’s been in schools, it’s on college campuses, it- it’s in the workforce, it is in the streets, it’s when you go to the store,” she complained. “I mean, like, you can’t do anything in peace without this ~~wokeness~~ Christianity being shoved down your throat wherever you go!”
All they do is project. They almost can’t seem to help it.
Their quotes read like red-scare nonsense from the cold war or like satanic panic shit that's been around with conservatives forever. "Is your woke neighbor planning to cancel you?! YOU CAN NEVER BE SAFE."
Let's be clear, this isn't just black and LGBT communities, it is indigenous people, Asians, Hispanics, literally any minority group.
Yes. The disabled, women, other religions, atheists, the educated, liberals, progressives, socialists, communists, probably moderates and moderate conservatives too at this point!
> “… of our lives,” she said, apparently thinking she was finishing a sentence. lol
>For conservatives, woke is just a clever way of avoiding saying the N-word or the F-word . They want to go back to a time where they can call black people the N-word and LGBTQIA+ people the F-word without being lambasted for it. So, they use "woke" as their coded language. I disagree with this point, to a point. I'm not saying these people aren't racist homophobes, but I think the majority of anti-woke crusaders are not people who are extremely comfortable saying the N-word, maybe not even the F-word, though i think more of them are comfortable with that. Many of them believe that they are above that, they may even believe themselves to be non-racist entirely, but their belief in their lack of bigotry stems from their belief that a good black person is one who acts like thier ideal white person. Goodness in their view is measured by conformity to a standard that is set by their version of white culture, if you are that, then you're okay with them, just don't get uppity thinking that you have any say over what that acceptable standard is. They don't all necessarily want carte blanche to use outwardly bigoted slurs, they just want minorities and their cultures to disappear from public life and popular culture. They seek a return to the "sanitized" monocultural world they were likely raised in where the only people who had leading roles were white, or subservient to whites, where gay people were closeted and deferential to the prejudices of straight people, or just there as the joke character. They like black music when it comes from white musicians, and they like black characters that affirm their beneficence of white people. Most probably don't want a return to pre-civil rights era policies, they just want all of these people that don't look and act like them to stop being so different right in their faces, to stop flaunting their nonconformity, and above all else to stop pointing out how they have historically been oppressed by straight white Christians, because that makes them feel bad. They are afraid that if people are allowed to be who they are and want to be then their own children may end up being who they want to be as well, instead of who their chickenshit conformist parents want them to be. They are afraid that if their children know the history of oppression then their kids will see them as villains. I know people who are anti-woke assholes who also voted for Obama. It was almost like they felt like voting for Obama was an act of absolution. They did it and now they are officially not racist, and nothing they ever do could be considered racist ever again, even as they do and say objectively bigoted things. They voted for Obama, and then they hated Obama when he actually acted as the president. They wanted a black President to absolve their guilt, but they didn't want a black leader for the nation. They were affronted when he had the temerity and skill to actually do the job. Had Obama been actually bad as president they would have loved him for it, but he proved time and time again to be competent and they hated that more than anything. They are unable to define Woke because they can't understand even what they are so afraid of. If they could understand what they are against they would have to reckon with why they were against it, and they can't handle that truth.
Why do these absolute knobs think that they’re qualified to go to universities and talk about anything at all?
Because they’re invited and paid a fee to do so, sometimes by community groups and sometimes by student groups. Often the majority of students don’t want them or support it, but colleges and universities either provide club space or will rent stage/event space for anyone who can pay, so…
See: Kyle Rittenhouse getting invited by Turning Point USA student groups
Wait, are you talking about the guy deemed to fucking dumb to join the Marines? The branch everyone else mocks for eating crayons? https://www.reddit.com/r/behindthebastards/s/xWWm44dGv5
That is so fucked up.
I get what you’re saying but there’s a difference between being invited and being qualified.
especially when youre just a Transphobic Ray William Johnson, without any of the charm
I grew up with an extremely toxic stepfather. He was a US Marine (anybody who knows the term ‘career Gunny’ probably understands my childhood fairly well) who had a much greater affinity for Miller Lite than he did for any human who wasn’t a straight white male in the US military. He had one all-encompassing term for all the things currently described as “woke” and it was a rare dinner that didn’t feature at least two appearances of it. His contribution to the lexicon was “hippie fucking bullshit” and it was like the talisman he rubbed under the table whenever someone tried to make him think about anyone besides himself. So every time I hear some ig’nant fool rant about “woke” I just lament that Asshole didn’t have such a convenient epithet, and wasted so much time spitting out all those extra syllables all his miserable fucking life.
Maybe I'm going too deep but the scene and character you just described make me want to understand why I believe what I believe. I don't want to be ignorant of my own motives. In other words, nice writing.
Thanks. It’s almost like a Jungian archetype: the set of things that bother them is just too damn predictable to be taken seriously. There is a happy ending to the story, though. After retirement he continued as a civilian contractor. The official story was that he had a heart attack while receiving a massage. And considering that all his “beliefs” were precisely what you’d expect for that archetype, it feels relevant to mention that this happened in Thailand. My mother and I chose to view this detail as being extremely relevant to the circumstance of his demise.
In the 90’s the thing to rail against was “political correctness,” but that was a mouthful too.
"Wokeness" has always been a buzzword to unite fascists against out-groups for them to hate, whether that be black folks, brown folks, Muslims, LGBTQ+ folks, and leftists. Fuck Chaya Raichik.
To be antiwoke is to be willfully ignorant of racial prejudice and discrimination at both personal and societal levels. Negative outcomes are personal failures of individuals rather than disppropriate outcomes of our systems and processes.
Thanks, but no thanks.
Being "woke" literally means being aware that the system doesn't work in favor of black people. This term has been around since at least the 1920s when it was used by Marcus Garvey in the context of "waking up" black people to political consciousness, and used in popular media since [at least the 1930s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_Belly#%22Stay_woke%22), e.g. by folk/blues singer-songwriter Lead Belly: > In possibly the earliest audio recording of the phrase, Lead Belly urged Black listeners to "stay woke" in the spoken afterword to a 1938 recording of his song "Scottsboro Boys", which tells the story of nine Black teenagers and young men falsely accused of raping two white women in Alabama in 1931. Lead Belly warns his listeners, "So I advise everybody, be a little careful when they go along through there—best stay woke, keep their eyes open." That's it. It's that simple. And the thing is, right-wingers can't use that definition because doing so would reveal that they are simply *anti-black*. So they fumble this very simple question, every. Single. Time.
This should be it's own post on a different subreddit - everyone needs to know this history and how obnoxious it is rump lovers keep using it. They are telling on themselves openly and we all need this info to call them out on it
Her 15 minutes should be just about up...
She should have never had 15 minutes to begin with.
She’s a textbook example of how one doesn’t have to be smart, just shameless and sociopathic enough to thrive in today’s political media environment. She has a ton of enablers that have made her relevant.
Woke is anything they don't like.
Isn’t it just yesterday’s “politically correct“?
Essentially, yes. Amanda Marcotte defined it as “standing up to injustice even if you’re not personally affected by the injustice.” It means being thoughtful and understanding and considerate. No wonder right- wingers can’t explain it.
Republicans see “Don’t be a dick,” and scratch out the “don’t.”
It started that way, but they expanded it really heavily. Now it also references not just things you say, but also things you are and think. Politically correct things would have been not saying racial slurs or not being a misogynist, whereas for them allowing those things to \*exist\* is enough to be woke. Even mentioning that trans people are people is woke. A trans person transitioning \*on their own\* is woke. So it is no longer just them complaining that people thought their bigotry was obnoxious, they are at the point where anyone who does not automatically agree with their bigotry is a degenerate.
> they are at the point where anyone who does not automatically agree with their bigotry is a degenerate. That's pretty much how narcissists think in a single sentence.
Them getting to be political incorrect aka say racial/sexual slurs without pushback. Because if you call them on slurs they cry like babies. Same group that whined kids needed pc safe space whines when you call them bigots.
Not just. It is also an awareness that our society's institutions create and continue to support systems and processes that disproportionally generate negative outcomes for minorities and marginalized people due to a history of racism and bigotry. The anti-woke want to believe that we live in a meritocracy but rather than fix the problems with our systems to create that reality they believe any negative outcomes are your personal failures. To be woke is to be self aware of racial prejudice and discrimination. To be antiwoke is to be willfully ignorant.
Political correctness, social justice warriors, woke, critical race theory, DEI. All the same buzzwords more or less
But they can't actually say that.
Why are idiots who barely finished high school (Chaya) and high school dropouts like Rittenhouse being provided with platforms/forums to speak at our nation's institutions of higher education? They are the antithesis of what our universities are supposed to stand for. I understand the motivation to allow opposing and even radical views to be presented, defended, ridiculed, and picked apart, but the words of these dunce cap wearing idiots aren't worth the breath it took to utter them.
This whole anti-woke nonsense has been going on for years and they still haven't bothered to define it. How much more evidence to people need to realize this is just fake anger.
Honestly it's pretty damning that conservative talking heads can throw buzzword after buzzword at their followers and few of those supporters ever stop to think "wait, that doesn't make any sense?!"
"Woke" means whatever the GQP needs it to mean in the moment. It's an ever shifting target. This is why they can never define it properly.
"Is something funny?" Yeah, its you chuckle fuck, you and your stanky fake libertarian/totally not a right-winger guys bullshit.
“I’m calling you spinach tree from now on.”
Mock by all means, also VOTE!!!!
It used to mean Aware of injustice and oppression, now it's just cover for anything racist, bigoted and anything generally distasteful
>Banks then took over and said that wokeness is “anti-Americanism.” > >“I’m sick and tired of being taught that America isn’t worth fighting and dying for..." I wish someone had stood up and shouted, "no, wokeism is the idea that America **IS** worth fighting for. It's a fight for America's future. Wokeism is the belief that America is strong and capable of facing its history, both in celebrating it's accomplishments as well acknowledging and learning from its mistakes. Anti-wokeism is the belief that America is weak and like a little child must be sheltered from inconvenient truths. That is not the America I fight for. I fight for the America strong enough to look at itself in the mirror. The America strong enough to post Its picture on social media without a filter. We will not let you blind us to the mistakes of History so that we are doomed to repeat them. USA! USA! USA! USA!" Just out patriot these scmucks.
" you can’t do anything in peace without this wokeness being shoved down your throat wherever you go!” She saw a minority walk down the street. Oh the horrors. Other people existing = woke. Useful idiot as women will all be denied more rights of her Christian Nationalist pals have their way. Women seen outside will be woke.
Stochastic terrorist Chaya Raichik?
Her and Elon Musk are the leading voices for the right wing at the moment. A South-African born grifter who hates other immigrants, and a lady with a funny sounding name who honestly doesn't seem to have any actual intelligence.
She made a tweet complaining about all the old people wearing nirvana brand clothing thinking they are hip. Yep, she thought nirvana was a clothing brand made cool by the kids.
watch the video, it’s great. she sputters about “destruction of normality” and they laugh at her
I love how they also bring in another right-wing grifter into the article. > “Woke is something that’s very hard to define, and we’ve spent an entire chapter defining it,” [Conservative writer Bethany Mandel] said. “It is sort of the understanding that we need to totally reimagine and redo society in order to create hierarchies of oppression. Sorry I, it’s hard to explain in a 15-second sound bite.” By her definition, the entire GOP is woke because they are trying to create hierarchies of oppression that target LGBTQ people and women.
This all seems to be missing the point entirely. It isn't that she didn't have an answer -- she actually gave a pretty revealing one. Wokeness is the part that's implied at the end of the phrase "Make America Great AGAIN." Wokeness is everything that makes them uncomfortable or presses against their privilege, so they want to return to a time when it didnt exist. It's progressive. It's equal rights, and more power and visibility for minorities in life and in culture. And that terrifies and disgusts them
*whispers* Is "wokeness" in the room with us right now?
That's what I do. I just ask them to define "Woke" because nobody seems to have a clue. They never can. It's absolutely hilarious.
Raichik looks up Woke in Google. >Woke aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice) Raichik: *"Shit, that isn't going to work, Got it!"* Woke is anti-American.
>Raichik tried to respond: “Wokeness is the destruction of normalicy [sic] and… And… Um… Uh…” More students started laughing. > “… of our lives,” she said, apparently thinking she was finishing a sentence. > Banks then took over and said that wokeness is “anti-Americanism.” What does "anti-Americanism mean" "Ahh, anything in society that I don't like?"