11 ms·

It started with some interesting analysis of the war in Ukraine. By the time it started trying to parse out the hidden meaning behind Biden's reference to a "n

by comex 4y ago

It started with some interesting analysis of the war in Ukraine. By the time it started trying to parse out the hidden meaning behind Biden's reference to a "new world order", I was getting a little suspicious. Then it started complaining about censorship, making an argument I'm sympathetic to but which seemed largely irrelevant. (Meanwhile it picked Hillary Clinton of all people to quote.) And then it pivoted all the way to full-scale complaining about wokeness. Edit: In particular, the article quotes Biden claiming that "democratic progress is under assault" in "so many places, including [..] the United States." Biden is presumably trying to make a point about domestic issues ranging from the January 6th riot and Trump's attempt to contest the election results to Republican voter suppression laws – all issues on which there can be debate, but which are clearly related to democracy or the lack thereof, and not directly related to 'wokeness'-type social issues. But the article uses the quote to support the proposition that: "it has to be Woke. Otherwise it is not a real Democracy, but something else." Sigh. That's Substack for you.

hemreldop 4y ago
johnny22 4y ago
it made sense to me. If they make human rights as the main talking point to push this realignment, it'll certainly involve rights for marginalized folks. If their definition of democracy requires rights for all, then you can't be a democracy and not be "woke". I certainly agree with that. Of course by that definition i am of course "woke" myself.
- JakeAl 4y ago
  Wokeness explicitly applies and relies an ideology of Marx's Conflict Theory, a paradigm that divides the world into oppressors and the oppressed and focuses on framing individuals as members of a group to label them as such. The woke are incapable of making important distinctions and treating people as individuals outside of such groups. Distinction is the basis of rationality. Equality requires that, and demands that individuals supercede groups in the application of law and opportunity. That's why wokeness does not focus on individual equality, but group equity, putting the collective ahead of the individual and exiling individuals when they stand for themselves and not a given group. Democracy as Aristotle explained, is the majority ruling over the minority. In other words, mob rule. Democracy is only good when it is not ruling and making decisions that serve everyone, and not just the majority, equally. This he called a polity. "The right kind of democracy, if you will, is a polity: An ideal democracy that governs for the interests of all, not just the leadership." https://fs.blog/aristotles-politics/ https://fs.blog/aristotles-politics/
  - johnny22 4y ago
    if it makes you feel better, define it however you want. I'm not interested in engaging in a conversation about how you choose to define it. Telling me your definition didn't actually add anything to what i said.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
    Aristotle is not the word of god on democracy, and in general the Greek version of democracy leaves a lot to be desired by contemporary standards. When you quote him saying "the interests of all", it's about as disingenous as quoting the founding fathers of the USA talking about freedom for all people (well, except the slaves, and the women and ...) Your definition of "woke" is one that has been applied to a set of concerns, ideas and strategies from the outside. It is how those who wish to reject those concerns, defeat those ideas and strategies define it. You're quite welcome to do that - it's not as if this is the first time this has happened. But "woke" (an almost absurd term that seems rarely by anyone outside of the conservative right at this point) doesn't have anything to do with the way you define it to the people you actually consider "woke". I think that's worth reflecting on. As for fears of the majority ruling over the minority, it's far from clear whether that is actually worse, given at least a reasonable legal system, than the minority ruling over the majority, a condition that one could make a reasonable case for defining the current political system in the USA.
    - systemvoltage 4y ago
      > Your definition of "woke" is one that has been applied to a set of concerns, ideas and strategies from the outside. It is how those who wish to reject those concerns, defeat those ideas and strategies define it. You're quite welcome to do that - it's not as if this is the first time this has happened. But "woke" (an almost absurd term that seems rarely by anyone outside of the conservative right at this point) doesn't have anything to do with the way you define it to the people you actually consider "woke". I think that's worth reflecting on. I found it to to be the exact opposite. GP has written of the best descriptions of wokeness and gets to the core issue without beating about the bush.
- fundad 4y ago
  Exactly, I think being woke means people who don’t agree with you used cuter euphemisms than in my day. It used to be 2 words.
thematrixturtle 4y ago
I don't think it's so much complaining about wokeness itself as noting the US's unfortunate habit to attempting to force this down the throats of other countries, which seems likely to go down as well as, well, every other time the US has tried to force an abstract ideology down another country's throat (eg. democracy in Iraq or Afghanistan).
- ncmncm 4y ago
  US trying to get behind the International Criminal Court prosecuting Russian war criminals, while insisting that similar actions against well-demonstrated US war criminals would merit military action against it, is particularly rich. I am still waiting to see capital charges filed under US law against instigators and eager participants in the torture regime. Just turning the perps over to the ICC, upon conviction in the US, would satisfy me, such that returning them to the US after prosecution there would be followed by their immediate execution. Keelhauling would be too good for them.
- systemvoltage 4y ago
  The US is exporting this culture at an ever increasing pace: https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-media-are-turbocharging-the-export-of-americas-political-culture https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-me... This comes as no surprise since tech is mostly lopsided politically.
labster 4y ago
The first half was interesting, and I think the conclusions hold in broad strokes. But the second half was so speculative and occasionally bonkers that it made me question the first half. A progressive elite controls policy in Washington? We can’t even get a vote on a national health plan or immigration reform or loan forgiveness. I’ve left the Democratic Party in California because the old guard just bulldozes through everything. I was finally forced out to avoid a baseless defamation lawsuit. And I’m moderate: they treat the woke crowd worse. By moderate, I mean I would vote for moderate parties if I lived in western Europe, but the only choices in the US are center-right and right-populist. Back to the article, I don’t think this bipolar cabal to remake the world order exists, and I won’t change my opinion until data can flow to the US under a GDPR-equivalent. German military spending can also be seen as a way for Europe to not be reliant on US military guarantees, and a future where Europe can choose between the China and the US on its own power.
- mechanical_bear 4y ago
  Stop trying to forcibly move the Overton window. Repeating a lie enough doesn’t make it true.
  - labster 4y ago
    How many Democratic Party meetings have you been to? I’ve been to hundreds. While they pay lip service to supporting racial equality, they won’t actually do anything that would make business suffer, except for the environment. They are a pro-business party not interested in actual economic equality, while Republicans are a pro-business party interested in promoting economic inequality. I don’t mind the pro-business side really, I’m just saying are no elected leftist parties in America.
    - fundad 4y ago
      Exactly, a party can’t serve monied interests AND workers certainly not workers of all races.
  - fundad 4y ago
flower-giraffe 4y ago
>And then it pivoted all the way to full-scale complaining about wokeness. I thought the article seemed very credible, and I also picked up on the author’s possible anti work sentiment. I don’t think the analysis is any less credible and it is certainly worth the hour it takes to read.
- johnny22 4y ago
  > I don’t think the analysis is any less credible and it is certainly worth the hour it takes to read. I think that changes how one would interpret the later section rather than earlier ones.
- fundad 4y ago
  Wanna bet? I’m glad people called it out.

by comex 4y ago

hemreldop 4y ago

johnny22 4y ago

it made sense to me. If they make human rights as the main talking point to push this realignment, it'll certainly involve rights for marginalized folks. If their definition of democracy requires rights for all, then you can't be a democracy and not be "woke". I certainly agree with that. Of course by that definition i am of course "woke" myself.

JakeAl 4y ago
Wokeness explicitly applies and relies an ideology of Marx's Conflict Theory, a paradigm that divides the world into oppressors and the oppressed and focuses on framing individuals as members of a group to label them as such. The woke are incapable of making important distinctions and treating people as individuals outside of such groups. Distinction is the basis of rationality. Equality requires that, and demands that individuals supercede groups in the application of law and opportunity. That's why wokeness does not focus on individual equality, but group equity, putting the collective ahead of the individual and exiling individuals when they stand for themselves and not a given group. Democracy as Aristotle explained, is the majority ruling over the minority. In other words, mob rule. Democracy is only good when it is not ruling and making decisions that serve everyone, and not just the majority, equally. This he called a polity. "The right kind of democracy, if you will, is a polity: An ideal democracy that governs for the interests of all, not just the leadership." https://fs.blog/aristotles-politics/ https://fs.blog/aristotles-politics/
- johnny22 4y ago
  if it makes you feel better, define it however you want. I'm not interested in engaging in a conversation about how you choose to define it. Telling me your definition didn't actually add anything to what i said.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
  Aristotle is not the word of god on democracy, and in general the Greek version of democracy leaves a lot to be desired by contemporary standards. When you quote him saying "the interests of all", it's about as disingenous as quoting the founding fathers of the USA talking about freedom for all people (well, except the slaves, and the women and ...) Your definition of "woke" is one that has been applied to a set of concerns, ideas and strategies from the outside. It is how those who wish to reject those concerns, defeat those ideas and strategies define it. You're quite welcome to do that - it's not as if this is the first time this has happened. But "woke" (an almost absurd term that seems rarely by anyone outside of the conservative right at this point) doesn't have anything to do with the way you define it to the people you actually consider "woke". I think that's worth reflecting on. As for fears of the majority ruling over the minority, it's far from clear whether that is actually worse, given at least a reasonable legal system, than the minority ruling over the majority, a condition that one could make a reasonable case for defining the current political system in the USA.
  - systemvoltage 4y ago
    > Your definition of "woke" is one that has been applied to a set of concerns, ideas and strategies from the outside. It is how those who wish to reject those concerns, defeat those ideas and strategies define it. You're quite welcome to do that - it's not as if this is the first time this has happened. But "woke" (an almost absurd term that seems rarely by anyone outside of the conservative right at this point) doesn't have anything to do with the way you define it to the people you actually consider "woke". I think that's worth reflecting on. I found it to to be the exact opposite. GP has written of the best descriptions of wokeness and gets to the core issue without beating about the bush.
fundad 4y ago
Exactly, I think being woke means people who don’t agree with you used cuter euphemisms than in my day. It used to be 2 words.

thematrixturtle 4y ago

I don't think it's so much complaining about wokeness itself as noting the US's unfortunate habit to attempting to force this down the throats of other countries, which seems likely to go down as well as, well, every other time the US has tried to force an abstract ideology down another country's throat (eg. democracy in Iraq or Afghanistan).

ncmncm 4y ago
US trying to get behind the International Criminal Court prosecuting Russian war criminals, while insisting that similar actions against well-demonstrated US war criminals would merit military action against it, is particularly rich. I am still waiting to see capital charges filed under US law against instigators and eager participants in the torture regime. Just turning the perps over to the ICC, upon conviction in the US, would satisfy me, such that returning them to the US after prosecution there would be followed by their immediate execution. Keelhauling would be too good for them.
systemvoltage 4y ago
The US is exporting this culture at an ever increasing pace: https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-media-are-turbocharging-the-export-of-americas-political-culture https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-me... This comes as no surprise since tech is mostly lopsided politically.

labster 4y ago

The first half was interesting, and I think the conclusions hold in broad strokes. But the second half was so speculative and occasionally bonkers that it made me question the first half. A progressive elite controls policy in Washington? We can’t even get a vote on a national health plan or immigration reform or loan forgiveness. I’ve left the Democratic Party in California because the old guard just bulldozes through everything. I was finally forced out to avoid a baseless defamation lawsuit. And I’m moderate: they treat the woke crowd worse. By moderate, I mean I would vote for moderate parties if I lived in western Europe, but the only choices in the US are center-right and right-populist. Back to the article, I don’t think this bipolar cabal to remake the world order exists, and I won’t change my opinion until data can flow to the US under a GDPR-equivalent. German military spending can also be seen as a way for Europe to not be reliant on US military guarantees, and a future where Europe can choose between the China and the US on its own power.

mechanical_bear 4y ago
Stop trying to forcibly move the Overton window. Repeating a lie enough doesn’t make it true.
- labster 4y ago
  How many Democratic Party meetings have you been to? I’ve been to hundreds. While they pay lip service to supporting racial equality, they won’t actually do anything that would make business suffer, except for the environment. They are a pro-business party not interested in actual economic equality, while Republicans are a pro-business party interested in promoting economic inequality. I don’t mind the pro-business side really, I’m just saying are no elected leftist parties in America.
  - fundad 4y ago
    Exactly, a party can’t serve monied interests AND workers certainly not workers of all races.
- fundad 4y ago

flower-giraffe 4y ago

>And then it pivoted all the way to full-scale complaining about wokeness. I thought the article seemed very credible, and I also picked up on the author’s possible anti work sentiment. I don’t think the analysis is any less credible and it is certainly worth the hour it takes to read.

johnny22 4y ago
> I don’t think the analysis is any less credible and it is certainly worth the hour it takes to read. I think that changes how one would interpret the later section rather than earlier ones.
fundad 4y ago
Wanna bet? I’m glad people called it out.