6 ms·

It isn't just that they're alert to it, they're hyper alert to it. They even see it where it doesn't exist, and they "white knight" for it, trying to prevent p

It isn't just that they're alert to it, they're hyper alert to it. They even see it where it doesn't exist, and they "white knight" for it, trying to prevent people from giving offense even if nobody is actually offended. They take "being a good person" so far that they make life hard for others instead. The root of their beliefs is good: All people are worthy of respect and shouldn't be judged based on things out of their control. But the lengths they go for that is just too much. They often refuse to even consider that there may be other factors that need to be taken into account as well and shout down everything that doesn't align with their view. That makes it hard to fight against them. They've set themselves up to be seen as always being in the right, but because they refuse to have nuance, they often aren't.

feurio 5y ago
Can you give an example, please? ("They take "being a good person" so far that they make life hard for others instead.", for example is a bit vague - that could apply to pious Christians, you're not against Christians, are you?)
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  Not the OP, but "holier than thou" is not a positive human type.
  - feurio 5y ago
    Neither is it exclusive to the woke, or anyone else. What I would really like to see is a concrete example, which so far everyone has declined to give. It's customary to provide some actual evidence to back up claims. "Your honor, the defendant killed the victim in cold blood" "I see, proceed with your evidence" "Meh, go find it for yourself."
    - lnxg33k1 5y ago
      But the judge, the prosecutor and the lawyers are all paid to give the judge stuff, we're here having a conversation, but I am not sure what kind of proof do you want and what should we do, like it's not that newspapers write article about wokes being wokes, just maybe go around on twitter or go on twitter and write something controversial like "#FuckBLM" and see what comes at you, not sure what do you want or I mean I know what do you want, but don't know how long do you want me to reply to you, or others, like I am very patient in conversations, but I feel like don quixote and as a non native speaker I feel like you're misunderstanding what I say, genuinely or not, I guess someone here thinks not, but I think I am done, its been a few hours, you've been told things, you've been given links, and now I think it's time for you to go to explore the world by yourself... fly free
      - feurio 5y ago
        But why would I go onto Twitter and say that, unless I was a massive racist? And why, as a doughty protector of free speech would I not be perfectly fine with anyone using their own right of freedom of speech to reply to me? Robustly. Is it just that you want freedom without consequences? Because you're a racist? No accusing - just "asking questions". You gave me one link - to Wikipedia, which you then seem to have an issue with the definition provided therein. And no examples. Still no examples. Here's a link for you - about the most sensible thing I can find about woke from Oliver Dowden, Chairman of the UK Conservative party who has been talking to right wing "think tanks" (lobbying groups) in the US this week. Well, actually not him, but it might as well be. I particularly like the bit where he refuses to define what woke is - seems to be all the range. Enjoy: https://twitter.com/mattgreencomedy/status/1493611118899695626 https://twitter.com/mattgreencomedy/status/14936111188996956...
        baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        Ok, I'll bite. Google "Grievance studies affair". It provides a chilling look into how wokes are corrupting science in order to advance their political agenda. Is this example sufficient for you?
        5y ago
    - inglor_cz 5y ago
      It is not exclusive to the woke, no. "I am a better parent / patriot / Christian / anti-racist / Aryan / communist / whatever than you." seems to be remarkably universal. Some people just love to create ladders of virtue and vice. But at certain times, one of those prevails. IDK if you were alive immediately after 9/11. That was a period of unabashed jingoism. Now, 20 years later, this fever has long subsided, but there is a wave of wokism now. In 2042, there will be something different, but people generally react to contemporary trends.
      - feurio 5y ago
        Indeed. And alive immmediately before 9/11. And in the 90s, and the 80s. And the 70s. Jingoism subsided? Really? MAGA, America First, The BNP, Britain First. Its really not gone away. And surely an increase in empathy, tolerance and understanding is to be welcomed. Unless your definition of woke is something else - no-one who is "anti-woke" will actually tell me what they think it means, just vague insinuations that "they do x" with no concrete examples.
        inglor_cz 5y ago
        Compared to levels of 2001-2003, the jingoism knob was definitely turned down. Even the popularity of "America first" is an indication thereof: people are no longer interested in forcible export of democracy and American power abroad. The Zeitgeist of the Bush era was one of empire building. The Zeitgeist of the current era is one of de-globalization. This is a huge difference. The former one was certainly more bloody. As to the woke, whose self-definitions you seem to be taking at face value. (Why?) Tell me how destroying an old man's career over a 33 years old article [1] can be labeled as an increase in empathy, tolerance and understanding. Or running a Twitter death gauntlet on a random Mexican driver [2]. These incidents embody "wokeness" to me, not a nicely sounding definition that was constructed to make the movement look better than it actually is. You seem to put a lot of trust into nicely sounding definitions. Always look at practice: do those people practice what they preach? Anyone can put together nicely sounding definitions and theories. In theory (= the Constitution), the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, where I grew up, had solid protections of personal freedoms and human rights. In practice, it didn't. It was a totalitarian state that just didn't want to state "we rule you and we will crush any dissent" in writing. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-resignation-idUSKBN24334J https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-resignation-idUSKB... [2] https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-over-alleged-racist-gesture-says-he-was-cracking-knuckles/2347414/ https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-ove...
- kbelder 5y ago
  It feels like you're being disingenuous. If you've spent time on HN and other forums, I have a hard time believing you don't understand the terminology he's using. It's especially pernicious, because the OP is not a native English speaker, and so he may believe he's actually being difficult to understand, when he's really not.
  - feurio 5y ago
    I don't think so. I'm just stuggling to see why being alert to racial prejudice and discrimination is bad thing. If you would like to explain why it is, please do.
    - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
      This disingenuous line of argument is reminiscent of Antifa greenwashing that was common a few years ago. Feign ignorance, pretend you have no idea what kind of people identify as Antifa, and then ask "Isn't fascism bad? So why is it bad to be anti-fascist?" ...while Antifa is literally burning down cars and shops indiscriminately...
      - feurio 5y ago
        What is disingenuous about saying that the literal definition of woke seems like a good thing? I said nothing about Antifa - why are you creating a straw man? Stick to woke. If you would like to propose a new term that encompases the original defintion of woke and something else then feel free - hyer-woke, or something. Why do you want to change the defintion of words? And, are you a fascist?
        baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        > What is disingenuous about saying that the literal definition of woke seems like a good thing? You're pretending to be wholly unfamiliar with the subject of culture wars, when in reality you are very familiar with them. That's disingenuous. The other poster seemed to have endless patience with you pretending "not to understand" and "not know" things which you know and understand perfectly well. I don't know why you can't just stand up straight and argue for the things you believe in, instead of trying to play some mind games, lying and cheating? If your cause is worthy and your arguments are good, then surely you can achieve your goals without resorting to lies?

feurio 5y ago

Can you give an example, please? ("They take "being a good person" so far that they make life hard for others instead.", for example is a bit vague - that could apply to pious Christians, you're not against Christians, are you?)

inglor_cz 5y ago
Not the OP, but "holier than thou" is not a positive human type.
- feurio 5y ago
  Neither is it exclusive to the woke, or anyone else. What I would really like to see is a concrete example, which so far everyone has declined to give. It's customary to provide some actual evidence to back up claims. "Your honor, the defendant killed the victim in cold blood" "I see, proceed with your evidence" "Meh, go find it for yourself."
  - lnxg33k1 5y ago
    But the judge, the prosecutor and the lawyers are all paid to give the judge stuff, we're here having a conversation, but I am not sure what kind of proof do you want and what should we do, like it's not that newspapers write article about wokes being wokes, just maybe go around on twitter or go on twitter and write something controversial like "#FuckBLM" and see what comes at you, not sure what do you want or I mean I know what do you want, but don't know how long do you want me to reply to you, or others, like I am very patient in conversations, but I feel like don quixote and as a non native speaker I feel like you're misunderstanding what I say, genuinely or not, I guess someone here thinks not, but I think I am done, its been a few hours, you've been told things, you've been given links, and now I think it's time for you to go to explore the world by yourself... fly free
    - feurio 5y ago
      But why would I go onto Twitter and say that, unless I was a massive racist? And why, as a doughty protector of free speech would I not be perfectly fine with anyone using their own right of freedom of speech to reply to me? Robustly. Is it just that you want freedom without consequences? Because you're a racist? No accusing - just "asking questions". You gave me one link - to Wikipedia, which you then seem to have an issue with the definition provided therein. And no examples. Still no examples. Here's a link for you - about the most sensible thing I can find about woke from Oliver Dowden, Chairman of the UK Conservative party who has been talking to right wing "think tanks" (lobbying groups) in the US this week. Well, actually not him, but it might as well be. I particularly like the bit where he refuses to define what woke is - seems to be all the range. Enjoy: https://twitter.com/mattgreencomedy/status/1493611118899695626 https://twitter.com/mattgreencomedy/status/14936111188996956...
      - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        Ok, I'll bite. Google "Grievance studies affair". It provides a chilling look into how wokes are corrupting science in order to advance their political agenda. Is this example sufficient for you?
        5y ago
  - inglor_cz 5y ago
    It is not exclusive to the woke, no. "I am a better parent / patriot / Christian / anti-racist / Aryan / communist / whatever than you." seems to be remarkably universal. Some people just love to create ladders of virtue and vice. But at certain times, one of those prevails. IDK if you were alive immediately after 9/11. That was a period of unabashed jingoism. Now, 20 years later, this fever has long subsided, but there is a wave of wokism now. In 2042, there will be something different, but people generally react to contemporary trends.
    - feurio 5y ago
      Indeed. And alive immmediately before 9/11. And in the 90s, and the 80s. And the 70s. Jingoism subsided? Really? MAGA, America First, The BNP, Britain First. Its really not gone away. And surely an increase in empathy, tolerance and understanding is to be welcomed. Unless your definition of woke is something else - no-one who is "anti-woke" will actually tell me what they think it means, just vague insinuations that "they do x" with no concrete examples.
      - inglor_cz 5y ago
        Compared to levels of 2001-2003, the jingoism knob was definitely turned down. Even the popularity of "America first" is an indication thereof: people are no longer interested in forcible export of democracy and American power abroad. The Zeitgeist of the Bush era was one of empire building. The Zeitgeist of the current era is one of de-globalization. This is a huge difference. The former one was certainly more bloody. As to the woke, whose self-definitions you seem to be taking at face value. (Why?) Tell me how destroying an old man's career over a 33 years old article [1] can be labeled as an increase in empathy, tolerance and understanding. Or running a Twitter death gauntlet on a random Mexican driver [2]. These incidents embody "wokeness" to me, not a nicely sounding definition that was constructed to make the movement look better than it actually is. You seem to put a lot of trust into nicely sounding definitions. Always look at practice: do those people practice what they preach? Anyone can put together nicely sounding definitions and theories. In theory (= the Constitution), the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, where I grew up, had solid protections of personal freedoms and human rights. In practice, it didn't. It was a totalitarian state that just didn't want to state "we rule you and we will crush any dissent" in writing. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-resignation-idUSKBN24334J https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-resignation-idUSKB... [2] https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-over-alleged-racist-gesture-says-he-was-cracking-knuckles/2347414/ https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/sdge-worker-fired-ove...
kbelder 5y ago
It feels like you're being disingenuous. If you've spent time on HN and other forums, I have a hard time believing you don't understand the terminology he's using. It's especially pernicious, because the OP is not a native English speaker, and so he may believe he's actually being difficult to understand, when he's really not.
- feurio 5y ago
  I don't think so. I'm just stuggling to see why being alert to racial prejudice and discrimination is bad thing. If you would like to explain why it is, please do.
  - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
    This disingenuous line of argument is reminiscent of Antifa greenwashing that was common a few years ago. Feign ignorance, pretend you have no idea what kind of people identify as Antifa, and then ask "Isn't fascism bad? So why is it bad to be anti-fascist?" ...while Antifa is literally burning down cars and shops indiscriminately...
    - feurio 5y ago
      What is disingenuous about saying that the literal definition of woke seems like a good thing? I said nothing about Antifa - why are you creating a straw man? Stick to woke. If you would like to propose a new term that encompases the original defintion of woke and something else then feel free - hyer-woke, or something. Why do you want to change the defintion of words? And, are you a fascist?
      - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
        > What is disingenuous about saying that the literal definition of woke seems like a good thing? You're pretending to be wholly unfamiliar with the subject of culture wars, when in reality you are very familiar with them. That's disingenuous. The other poster seemed to have endless patience with you pretending "not to understand" and "not know" things which you know and understand perfectly well. I don't know why you can't just stand up straight and argue for the things you believe in, instead of trying to play some mind games, lying and cheating? If your cause is worthy and your arguments are good, then surely you can achieve your goals without resorting to lies?