Clear critical analysis of 'woke' culture

[Wildcattt555]

On 1/7/2023 at 7:12 AM, Victor van Rijn said:

 

gaslighting usually  refers to interpersonal situations.   to see " wokeness"  as an almost sentient entity  that has fundamentally bad intentions rather than occasionally negative expressions in society is a very flawed *interpretation of what is happening.     there is a backlash on both the right and left extremes with even the most benign  social justice intent. white people not being able to accept black lives matter as a slogan because they " claim" they cant understand that specializing a race in a slogan for social justice doesnt inherently demean their own race. But this backlash is not really a backlash on the name BLM, or wanting to be racist, but a fear that the blm movement will be forced to deprive them of limited resources to help Black people and fuel the movement( you know, politics),  it is not racism disguised as anti racism, but  a venting of potentially valid issues they have within  consequences of the movement, and often fear disguised as racism or anger  

all these issues have a hidden crux. what truly ought to be done to make ammends for slavery? its not ignore it entirely and its not give everyone huge sums of financial reparations , its somewhere in between, and it is incredibly difficult to both agree on shat that solution is, and implement it.   i have heard people get mad for uber eats having a " black owned restaurants category displayed prominently on the front page  . like, really is that too much reparation..  society isnt inherently evil and gaslighting itself because we dont have a brilliant solution to heal our national shame..

again  the name BLM  or the black lives matter movement or sj in general is not consciously created with the intention to deceive or "gaslight."     no , society isnt gaslighting itself.   shes not even using that term right if it were true  as gaslighting refers to denying someones objective reality, not a simple deception. all deception is not gas lighting.  

 

yes all of these tag along movements latching on to the emotion of blm and almost implying they have suffered a comparable  wrong really muddies things, but there is no " intent" that creates the madness.   it could, like most things, be a giant conspiracy that all these movements were created to fight against the " racist homophobic  patriarchy and  against themselves for attention and resources to create chaos, but it can and likely did happen organically.

 

 shoehorning every aspect of social justice into " marxist dynamics/ subversion tactics is also another popular yet horribly flawed take.  attributing every social evil to a corporate or governmental power play is the very definition of a conspiracy theorist. this is why alex jones thought he could just say he was playing a character. because he is just playing a character. (he doesnt really see everything in terms of a hegelian dialectic. that is absurd.  if he did he wouldnt be able to manipulate people who are actually in that mind state) but all this conflict arises because people cant sift through what is happening in real time with any sense of understanding so they flock to a "side" out of embarrassment fear and political requirement 

it is so complex that you either become naive and credulous, or  dismissive and  paranoid  of the " official narrative."  

 

it is very difficult to even articulate the problem, let alone the solution:

its literally at its core  a disagreement on the perception and  structure of reality itself...appraising  the relative importance of  LITERALLY competing injustices and distilling their estimated  impact  into a heirarchy of historical ill...all   tainted by trauma and emotion( because injustice causes emotion not cognition)

...rather than the required intellect, and attempting to divide up current resources that in no way could even be supposed to be sufficient for this impossible theoretical task.but even using the resources available in a " fair" way which gives any degree of satisfaction  to various groups with history of slavery  or genocide or extreme prejudice ...is not achievable. trying is making it worse.   trying is good the outcome is bad  

 

     the road to hell is paved with good intentions.  

Edited January 8, 2023 by Wildcattt555

[Rafael Thundercat]

I cant avoid paying attention to the way Teal breath while she speaks. Is not even about the message but the Breathe pattern. Girl, please, just breath. 

[Danioover9000]

@Gesundheit2

6 hours ago, Gesundheit2 said:

So now you're using lack of importance and irrelevance to cancel the truth. I'll add that to the list.

By the way, who in the world said anything about cancelling the left?! Can you point to such a being or quote them here? You're just imagining that cuz you're afraid that your worldview might not be as great as you want it to be. You're scared of refining your worldview and coming up with a better one that sees the problems with wokeism and transcends them. You're scared of your ideal version.

   No, I'm saying there are greater dangers in the world than getting canceled and censored, like the following that mankind has done:

1. invented nuclear energy, that no other animal has done.

2. weaponized nuclear energy to wipe out millions of square miles, and make the zones radioactive and uninhabitable, no animal could do this.

3. invent and weaponize cyber technologies, such as cyber attacks and drones with guns and bombs, no animal could do this but humans.

4. Create algorithms, A.I programs that can win in board games, and can create deep fake accounts nearly accurately, no animal could copy.

5. CRISPER and genetic modification of organics, designing Nano technology and bio weapons such as viruses.

6. Created the internet, and many social media sites and forums, which creates furthermore echo chambers for ideological proliferation.

7. Invented guns and other weaponry in history, that no animal could have invented. 

8. Algorithms and A.I programs that auto correct your profile picture, make it more pretty, without your consent, thereby increase Narcissism worldwide for heavy internet users of social media websites.

9. Social complexity and our minds' capacities to re-imagine reality to suit our needs and wants.

10. Invented the car, which influenced how we designed city environments to be more car friendly.

11. Invented the plow, which changed our relationship to nature, declining animal worship and made agriculture more valuable than other ways of tribal life.

12. created the GPS system, which further changed how we thought about how we navigate, orientate and develop spatial awareness, which incentivized having a GPS if one is in unfamiliar territory versus looking in a map, or even paying more attention to landmarks.

13. Invented the mobile phone, and phones with touch screens and many pre installed apps, and ability to install other apps, and how nowadays very dependent we mostly are with using our phones for information intake and information gathering and how we obfuscate our original thinking in favor of quickly looking up answers.

14. Social media sites, and online streaming community echo chambers, which further degrades attention span, promotes predatory para social relationships between streamers and fans and even general viewers.

   Plus many other historical atrocities that mankind has committed that makes all this culture war between right and left today a childish tantrum, a walk in the park, a nothing burger. We may have a lot of technological development today, but we are still in the dark ages.

   If you want to speak your truth, fine, do so in a disciplined manner, and no more than that, don't be an Alex Jones or Donald Trump and be inflammatory with how you communicate, name calling and demonizing the other side, speak plainly and to the point and only defend necessary points, and nothing more, whilst trying to be good faith and charitable to the other side.

 

[mr_engineer]

1 hour ago, Girzo said:

Man, how are you not banned. There's is no need for "woke mob" to do anything because the ideas you spout go against basic human decency. It's normal, mediocre humans you go against with your defense of misogyny and hate speech.

If it were 1990s, people would still argue you with this that this is unacceptable in public. That's how out of touch are the things you say.

I'm not banned because I'm telling the truth. 

Why is 'basic human decency' a necessity to not be cancelled?! Why can't people who agree on their standards of decency congregate together and live peacefully with each other, without imposing their moral standards onto others?! The principle of 'agree to disagree' is something at Stage Orange that the woke mob has not integrated or understood. The point of doing that is to live together and work together, without slitting each other's throats, like Stage Blue fundamentalists would. That's what wokeness is turning into, honestly. Fundamentalism. 

A government is not supposed to be idealizing how people behave and holding people to idealized standards. They're supposed to hold a bare minimum standard of decency, which is so bare minimum that if it's above the legal line, it's fine. If it doesn't physically hurt someone, it's fine. Government is not supposed to get involved in 'emotional-safety' and 'protecting each other from insults' and stuff. This is something that individuals should be able to protect themselves against. It's your own responsibility to do this! 

Practically, this is very simple. If you're a Black person, the solution to racism is not to go cancel racists. It's to not mess with racists, not feed racist trolls. You know why?! Because there is an abundance of decent people on the planet, who aren't racist. So, it's not smart, to go find the one racist person and to mess with them. It's a basic principle of solving the problem of evil in the world - the more you resist it, the stronger it gets. Precisely because, it's an illusion. 

[Consept]

17 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

Practically, this is very simple. If you're a Black person, the solution to racism is not to go cancel racists. It's to not mess with racists, not feed racist trolls. You know why?! Because there is an abundance of decent people on the planet, who aren't racist. So, it's not smart, to go find the one racist person and to mess with them. It's a basic principle of solving the problem of evil in the world - the more you resist it, the stronger it gets. Precisely because, it's an illusion. 

That is quite an oversimplification of the solution for racism. What you're not taking into account is that there are many vulnerable people who can be influenced negatively by others promoting ideologies. For example, someone speaking about rhetoric like black people are sub-human, could be picked up by vulnerable white men, but this will only happen if the platform is made available to share these ideas. There has to be protection for these people, it's the same reason why you would have protection for kids, you have to have a criminal check etc to be allowed to work with kids why should this be different for speaking to people who are liable to fall into s cultist rabbit hole? 

Given that most these platforms are private businesses there is absolutely a duty of care to their users. 

[mr_engineer]

7 minutes ago, Consept said:

That is quite an oversimplification of the solution for racism. What you're not taking into account is that there are many vulnerable people who can be influenced negatively by others promoting ideologies. For example, someone speaking about rhetoric like black people are sub-human, could be picked up by vulnerable white men, but this will only happen if the platform is made available to share these ideas. There has to be protection for these people, it's the same reason why you would have protection for kids, you have to have a criminal check etc to be allowed to work with kids why should this be different for speaking to people who are liable to fall into s cultist rabbit hole? 

This is benevolent racism. That they're a 'protected class', that they're fundamentally inferior to white people, which is why they have to be 'protected'. That they can't protect themselves, that they don't have that self-respect. This paradoxically drives home the idea that maybe they are sub-human...? 

Also, don't forget the issue of black people dehumanizing and demonizing white people as a group of people, stereotyping them as racist. This is the real issue right now. This also fuels black people's racism! 

7 minutes ago, Consept said:

Given that most these platforms are private businesses there is absolutely a duty of care to their users. 

By discriminating between groups of people and dividing and ruling them...? 

[Consept]

13 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

This is benevolent racism. That they're a 'protected class', that they're fundamentally inferior to white people, which is why they have to be 'protected'. That they can't protect themselves, that they don't have that self-respect. This paradoxically drives home the idea that maybe they are sub-human...? 

Also, don't forget the issue of black people dehumanizing and demonizing white people as a group of people, stereotyping them as racist. This is the real issue right now. This also fuels black people's racism! 

You missed what im saying, im not saying that black people in this example need to be protected. I am specifically saying that white people who are susceptible to falling down the rabbit hole of racism need to be protected. Let me use another example, Al-qaeda, specifically look for vulnerable people in the west to radicalise them so that they can join their cause. I personally while working with young people was in a seminar where they stated the problem of young people getting radicalised and how they were targeted and how to deal with it. They didnt draw any distinctions on which form of radicalisation was worse they actually used examples of islamic terrorism and far right terrorism, they are both 2 sides of the same coin. Now what you have to understand is that there are going to be a certain amount of vulnerable people who will fall victim to online attempts to radicalise them, it just is what it is and so its a matter of handling this as best as possible as it has real world consequences for a lot of people and at the very least its highly irresponsible to allow it to happen on a platform. Is it the only solution? No of course not, work has to be done with families and vulnerable people, that is probably more important, but platforming people who are actively trying to recruit people into these ideologies is extremely dangerous. 

Can i ask do you have any experience working with vulnerable people or any experience of the consequences of allowing hateful rhetoric designed to recruit?  

[Kid A]

Of all the problems in the world, wokeness being the thing you're focusing so heavily on and being emotionally invested in... As a white man from a rich family, It's so hard to comprehend how I couldn't see my own self-bias/self-deception when I was like this some years ago. What started my way out of it was becoming conscious of how destructive it was for my life. Makes me think of the movie American History X, when the principal asks Edward Nortons character if becoming a neo-nazi actually has improved his life.  
I wish everyone who are anti-woke the best of luck getting out of it. Can't recommend it enough!

[mr_engineer]

@Consept The only thing I will tell you is this - the human brain is not this simple computer-like thing, that's programmable. A human being is a living, conscious being with personal motivations and goals. A human being forms their own worldview, their own interpretations. And, they have their own reasons for behaving a certain way. So, it's not that if some random person with a radical ideology comes along, two humans listening to it are going to respond the same way. They're going to respond very differently! To further illustrate my point, let's say an alcoholic abusive father has two sons. One son will become an alcoholic like his father, the other son will develop a vehement hatred towards alcohol and will never touch it. Common scenario. 

The education-system wrongly believes that 'knowledge is words', that 'the map is the territory'. It is not. And, people's behavior can be controlled and predicted based on what's being indoctrinated into them. This is because generally, if you educate someone with certain knowledge and put them in a job with a certain job-description, they will do a similar job. This is not true with 'knowledge' that's more subjective, like morality. Simply because our mental-associations on this front aren't with a material reality, they're with how we feel about something. Which depends on personal motivation. 

Now, how do we solve the problem of radicalization?! Here's how - the people propagating the radical ideology have a certain niche. They have that position in that niche, precisely because there is a kernel of truth in what they're saying. The solution to this problem is to integrate that kernel of truth and to then out-compete them. Someone who understands what they're saying and disagrees with the dysfunctional aspects of what they're doing, needs to step up and out-compete them in that niche. Brute-force repression doesn't work, it worsens the issue. 

[something_else]

1 hour ago, mr_engineer said:

I'm not banned because I'm telling the truth

Actually what you are often doing is writing lots of words without really fundamentally making any points at all. I’m actually impressed how well you are able to do that.

I’m not sure if it’s intentional or not either. It is definitely a very effective tactic for trolling people and dragging them into messy arguments.

[mr_engineer]

16 minutes ago, something_else said:

Actually what you are often doing is writing lots of words without really fundamentally making any points at all. I’m actually impressed how well you are able to do that.

I’m not sure if it’s intentional or not either. It is definitely a very effective tactic for trolling people and dragging them into messy arguments.

I don't believe in fundamentalism. I'm happy to have that show in my writing. I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks! 

[Ulax]

Never argue with stupid people. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience

[Girzo]

@mr_engineer You are in the wrong, which you can see if you really look and see that scamming people openly like Tate or saying anti-semetic things like Kanye is not allowed in the mainstream media/public discussion.

No-one really supports that, and for good reasons. It's a good moment for you to self-reflect why you don't see it and how can you open your mind. Don't tell us to change the world to your liking. Think about why the world is the way it is. Thinks about others too, that they are not 1:1 copies of you.

[Danioover9000]

@Danioover9000

4 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

@Gesundheit2

   No, I'm saying there are greater dangers in the world than getting canceled and censored, like the following that mankind has done:

1. invented nuclear energy, that no other animal has done.

2. weaponized nuclear energy to wipe out millions of square miles, and make the zones radioactive and uninhabitable, no animal could do this.

3. invent and weaponize cyber technologies, such as cyber attacks and drones with guns and bombs, no animal could do this but humans.

4. Create algorithms, A.I programs that can win in board games, and can create deep fake accounts nearly accurately, no animal could copy.

5. CRISPER and genetic modification of organics, designing Nano technology and bio weapons such as viruses.

6. Created the internet, and many social media sites and forums, which creates furthermore echo chambers for ideological proliferation.

7. Invented guns and other weaponry in history, that no animal could have invented. 

8. Algorithms and A.I programs that auto correct your profile picture, make it more pretty, without your consent, thereby increase Narcissism worldwide for heavy internet users of social media websites.

9. Social complexity and our minds' capacities to re-imagine reality to suit our needs and wants.

10. Invented the car, which influenced how we designed city environments to be more car friendly.

11. Invented the plow, which changed our relationship to nature, declining animal worship and made agriculture more valuable than other ways of tribal life.

12. created the GPS system, which further changed how we thought about how we navigate, orientate and develop spatial awareness, which incentivized having a GPS if one is in unfamiliar territory versus looking in a map, or even paying more attention to landmarks.

13. Invented the mobile phone, and phones with touch screens and many pre installed apps, and ability to install other apps, and how nowadays very dependent we mostly are with using our phones for information intake and information gathering and how we obfuscate our original thinking in favor of quickly looking up answers.

14. Social media sites, and online streaming community echo chambers, which further degrades attention span, promotes predatory para social relationships between streamers and fans and even general viewers.

   Plus many other historical atrocities that mankind has committed that makes all this culture war between right and left today a childish tantrum, a walk in the park, a nothing burger. We may have a lot of technological development today, but we are still in the dark ages.

   If you want to speak your truth, fine, do so in a disciplined manner, and no more than that, don't be an Alex Jones or Donald Trump and be inflammatory with how you communicate, name calling and demonizing the other side, speak plainly and to the point and only defend necessary points, and nothing more, whilst trying to be good faith and charitable to the other side.

 

 

[hoodrow trillson]

1 hour ago, KH2 said:

He's got troll face as his profile pic?

Virgin face* lol

Edited January 8, 2023 by hoodrow trillson

[Consept]

@mr_engineer 

You didn't actually answer my question, have you worked with vulnerable young people and seen the effects radical propaganda has on them? Or are all your 'solutions' just from watching certain online talking heads? 

Also just to confirm, is your solution to radicalisation, let them be exposed to terrorist propaganda, but also show them your propaganda that combats it? This is pretty much how it goes today and there are a lot of problems, you are somewhat underestimating the scale of this problem just to hold up your free speech absolutism. 

[mr_engineer]

 

40 minutes ago, Girzo said:

@mr_engineer You are in the wrong, which you can see if you really look and see that scamming people openly like Tate or saying anti-semetic things like Kanye is not allowed in the mainstream media/public discussion.

Fine, then. They're going to go to alt-media/fringe sources and post there. You happy with that?! This is just how the world works, don't complain about it. Right?! 

40 minutes ago, Girzo said:

No-one really supports that, and for good reasons.

Wrong. The mainstream doesn't support it. And, they have a communist woke agenda to silence everyone who disagrees with them. 

40 minutes ago, Girzo said:

It's a good moment for you to self-reflect why you don't see it and how can you open your mind.

I see it all, thanks for the concern. 

40 minutes ago, Girzo said:

Don't tell us to change the world to your liking. Think about why the world is the way it is. Thinks about others too, that they are not 1:1 copies of you.

This is exactly what I'd say to the woke mob. 

28 minutes ago, hoodrow trillson said:

Virgin face* lol

Says the guy with the anime profile pic. 

Edited January 8, 2023 by mr_engineer

[mr_engineer]

8 minutes ago, Consept said:

You didn't actually answer my question, have you worked with vulnerable young people and seen the effects radical propaganda has on them? Or are all your 'solutions' just from watching certain online talking heads? 

I don't like classifying people as 'vulnerable'. The whole point I was making earlier is that people have their agendas and they choose to believe certain things based on that. I believe in respecting people's intellectual sovereignty and not in 'protecting them from dangerous ideas'. 

10 minutes ago, Consept said:

Also just to confirm, is your solution to radicalisation, let them be exposed to terrorist propaganda, but also show them your propaganda that combats it? This is pretty much how it goes today and there are a lot of problems, you are somewhat underestimating the scale of this problem just to hold up your free speech absolutism. 

You almost understood my solution. The detail you missed, is that when you create your propaganda, you don't just look at the BS in the opposing side's propaganda. You integrate the kernel of truth in their propaganda, so that you get to capture their audience. This is not being done today. And I believe that this is the long-term solution. 

[Consept]

13 minutes ago, mr_engineer said:

I don't like classifying people as 'vulnerable'. The whole point I was making earlier is that people have their agendas and they choose to believe certain things based on that. I believe in respecting people's intellectual sovereignty and not in 'protecting them from dangerous ideas'. 

ok.... so have you worked with anyone, maybe young people who maybe interested in potentially dangerous ideologies? I think you know what im asking but you seem to be avoiding the question

[mr_engineer]

Just now, Consept said:

ok.... so have you worked with anyone, maybe young people who maybe interested in potentially dangerous ideologies? I think you know what im asking but you seem to be avoiding the question

There's no such thing as a 'dangerous ideology'. It's not the ideology itself that's dangerous, that's just words. It's what people make it mean and it's what they do with it. It's actions that are dangerous, not ideologies. 

For that matter, woke people support taking away people's body-sovereignty in response to a pandemic. Does this mean that I'm gonna classify woke ideology as a 'dangerous ideology'?! I could, by your logic. But, I won't, cuz I see that it's not the ideas that are dangerous, it's the actions.