4 ms·

> basing your desire for repeal on "probably" and "likely"? I'm talking about the current executive order. What's there to evaluate except "likely"s and "proba

> basing your desire for repeal on "probably" and "likely"? I'm talking about the current executive order. What's there to evaluate except "likely"s and "probably"s? My support for repealing parts of the civil rights laws is mostly based on Richard Hanania's argument about how it lead to wokeness.

slg 4y ago
> argument about how it lead to wokeness. Ok, so there was no point in responding to you.
- cato_the_elder 4y ago
  > Ok, so there was no point in responding to you. Maybe, as your comment had little content (except showing contempt). But there might be a point in reading Hanania's argument: https://richardhanania.substack.com/p/woke-institutions-is-just-civil-rights https://richardhanania.substack.com/p/woke-institutions-is-j...
  - slg 4y ago
    My most recent comment was not about the merits of the argument for repeal. It was about the way you used the term "wokeness". You didn't say something like "wokeness has gone too far." That would grant some ethical ambiguity to the word. You used it as something that is inherently bad and needs to be avoided. People who do that generally have an awful definition for the word and are usually already so set in their ways that there is no point to debate the issue.
    - cato_the_elder 4y ago
      > You used it as something that is inherently bad and needs to be avoided. Yes, that's indeed what I think. > already so set in their ways that there is no point to debate the issue. So I'm not allowed to use words with negative connotations (or have values different than yours) lest I be deemed "set in my ways"?
      - slg 4y ago
        >So I'm not allowed to use words with negative connotations (or have values different than yours) lest I be deemed "set in my ways"? It is not just a word with negative connotations. It is that you revealed your definition of the word as purely negative. Ask a person how they define "woke" and they will reveal a lot about their politics.
        beepbeepcabbage 4y ago
        cato_the_elder 4y ago
        > It is that you revealed your definition of the word as purely negative. It is. I'm not sure in what sense that would be a revelation though. > Ask a person how they define "woke" and they will reveal a lot about their politics. Well, yes, we probably have different politics.

slg 4y ago

> argument about how it lead to wokeness. Ok, so there was no point in responding to you.

cato_the_elder 4y ago
> Ok, so there was no point in responding to you. Maybe, as your comment had little content (except showing contempt). But there might be a point in reading Hanania's argument: https://richardhanania.substack.com/p/woke-institutions-is-just-civil-rights https://richardhanania.substack.com/p/woke-institutions-is-j...
- slg 4y ago
  My most recent comment was not about the merits of the argument for repeal. It was about the way you used the term "wokeness". You didn't say something like "wokeness has gone too far." That would grant some ethical ambiguity to the word. You used it as something that is inherently bad and needs to be avoided. People who do that generally have an awful definition for the word and are usually already so set in their ways that there is no point to debate the issue.
  - cato_the_elder 4y ago
    > You used it as something that is inherently bad and needs to be avoided. Yes, that's indeed what I think. > already so set in their ways that there is no point to debate the issue. So I'm not allowed to use words with negative connotations (or have values different than yours) lest I be deemed "set in my ways"?
    - slg 4y ago
      >So I'm not allowed to use words with negative connotations (or have values different than yours) lest I be deemed "set in my ways"? It is not just a word with negative connotations. It is that you revealed your definition of the word as purely negative. Ask a person how they define "woke" and they will reveal a lot about their politics.
      - beepbeepcabbage 4y ago
      - cato_the_elder 4y ago
        > It is that you revealed your definition of the word as purely negative. It is. I'm not sure in what sense that would be a revelation though. > Ask a person how they define "woke" and they will reveal a lot about their politics. Well, yes, we probably have different politics.