9 ms·

Use of such themes and terms is increasingly mandatory for academics, even in the hard sciences: https://unherd.com/thepost/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-is-t

Use of such themes and terms is increasingly mandatory for academics, even in the hard sciences: https://unherd.com/thepost/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-is-tearing-academia-apart/ https://unherd.com/thepost/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-is... What happened to Bret Weinstein at Evergreen State College (before he became a pundit speaking far outside his subject area) is now happening to everyone. There is less and less room for a Weinstein or a Thomas Sowell in American academia. It’s my belief that this coerced monoculture of identity politics and ideology will significantly degrade the quality of American universities, to say nothing of K-12 education. The long term effects on American economic competitiveness and the ability to attract foreign students will be severe. Given the perverse incentives of US university funding, this ride only ends when Chinese and Indian grad students look elsewhere and the federal government turns off the guaranteed loans faucet. I don’t see the latter happening without dramatic political upheaval. Until then, colleges will continue not caring whether they’re preparing students well for the workforce or merely puffing them full of the latest political buzzwords.

jnovek 4y ago
…why would identity politics lead to this series of events? Because it somehow restricts speech? China has very restricted speech compared to America and Chinese researchers manage to publish just fine.
- deepdriver 4y ago
  China has a history of brain drain to the West for exactly this reason (and others, like quality of living): https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2010-11/BrainDrain/China.html https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2010-... Speaking based on my own experience with young Chinese colleagues in academia and industry, this flow was already reversing before 2020 kicked idpol into hyperdrive. And never mind the anti-Asian hate crimes, where we aren’t allowed to notice or discuss common characteristics of the perpetrators (not that it stops folks from noticing or discussing). Michael Burry of Big Short fame recently found the Justice Department burying relevant data on the perpetrators: https://twitter.com/michaeljburry/status/1556003057699209218 https://twitter.com/michaeljburry/status/1556003057699209218
  - rychco 4y ago
    This seems particularly alarming to me. Why would it be hidden?
    - barry-cotter 4y ago
      People keep noticing patterns that others would prefer not to e noticed. If data isn’t collected it can’t be used to argue against your politics. For a non-US example see how the French state does not collect data on ethnicity or religion. It makes it more difficult to see how [social outcome] is uniquely distributed whether it be highest level of education, likelihood of convict of a crime or anything else of interest.
      - conviencefee999 4y ago
        This was done in Japan during the second world war. They unified under the idea of a singular identity similar to in China of the Han ethnicity which mind you is over 2000 years old and for the most part the Han people do not live in China but rather migrated to Korea. When you can pretend ethnic groups do not exist you can systemically and permanently create castes which make those who are visibly different from others into members of an invisible caste which they cannot escape. In the US the Technology industry made the same mistake when it allowed the Hindu Caste to take over the immigration policies during the 90s to early 80s.
        imbnwa 4y ago
        >They unified under the idea of a singular identity similar to in China of the Han ethnicity which mind you is over 2000 years old and for the most part the Han people do not live in China but rather migrated to Korea >In the US the Technology industry made the same mistake when it allowed the Hindu Caste to take over the immigration policies during the 90s to early 80s. Would you have links to more expansive elaborations on these, have never heard these and they're intriguing
        4y ago
giraffe_lady 4y ago
So far the play more seems to be "demonize 'wokeness' and use it to drum up support for undermining and defunding institutions, then blame their failures on the wokeness alone." > Until then, colleges will continue not caring whether they’re preparing students well for the workforce or merely puffing them full of the latest political buzzwords. What colleges should care about re their students' preparedness for different vocations remains a somewhat open question: that their role is to prepare students for the workforce is a popular view but not the only mainstream one. If you're going to caricature one end of that spectrum as "puffing them full of buzzwords" then the other should be described as vocational training. I think most people would agree that a college education should have some amount of both professional preparedness and abstract learning for its own sake. Why so many outsiders feel so invested in where these institutions find balance here is confusing and unsettling to me. There are something like five thousand colleges in the US, many of them originally founded explicitly to pursue or reject a specific ideal of what is worth learning and how. I didn't pay attention to any of those controversies, conflicts and schisms and iirc neither did the national media.
- deepdriver 4y ago
  Overfunding via federally-guaranteed loans is what led to bloated administrations and tuition fees in the first place, so yes it ought to be rolled back. A lot of the “woke” stuff comes from diversity equity and inclusion staff who are part and parcel of the bloat, and constantly seeking to justify their own position: https://www.fox28spokane.com/study-shows-university-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-programs-ineffective-overstaffed/ https://www.fox28spokane.com/study-shows-university-diversit... You're also begging the question by implying ideological coercion is just "abstract learning."
  - revolvingocelot 4y ago
    >>I think most people would agree that a college education should have some amount of both professional preparedness and abstract learning for its own sake >You're also begging the question by implying ideological coercion is just "abstract learning." I'm actually fucking astonished. Peak orange website -- the "liberal" in "liberal arts" doesn't actually refer to a political standpoint. It refers to exposure to a broad selection of Western intellectual tradition, the better to help students become more informed citizens, and to help prevent/allow detection of gross category errors/intentional facetious conflations like the parent post.
psi75 4y ago
> It’s my belief that this coerced monoculture of identity politics and ideology will significantly degrade the quality of American universities, to say nothing of K-12 education. The long term effects on American economic competitiveness and the ability to attract foreign students will be severe. I don't disagree with you, but I think one of the understated tragedies is that this shrill weirdo extremism (usually an ideology of privileged mainstream people with white savior complexes; note, for example, that most Latinos consider "Latinx" ridiculous) distracts people from the populist, inclusive platform of legitimate leftists (as opposed to corporate centrists taking virtue-signaling stances while not changing anything they actually do). The staunch but watered-down (from an economic perspective) "leftism" that is becoming mandatory on college campuses is a product deliberately engineered by Kapital to make upper-middle-class liberals and leftists (yes, there's a huge difference, but 85% of the country sees us as the same) look a certain way, and one that doesn't suit our goals. Thing is, our society is still as racist, sexist, religiously bigoted, and classist as ever; it's just that the rich have gotten good at using chatter about these issues (chatter of a kind that will never actually progress toward solving them, because that's not what capital wants) to divide people. It doesn't advance the objectives of liberals or of leftists to have wankers going on about how "math is racist" (it isn't). It just makes us look like idiots.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  This stuff is not the product of advocacy for capitalism or the free-market. It's literally watered-down Maoism, of the kind that would've been common in Europe and elsewhere starting in the 1970s - complete with its promise of a Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and its resolute getting rid of everything that's old, traditional and therefore privileged, bourgeois or otherwise "counter-revolutionary". The whole ideological stance of so-called social justice is really, really old-hat to those who are familiar with this stuff, but North American populist leftists remained a naïve, susceptible population for rather obvious reasons - ideological conflict was not nearly as salient there in the past decades as it would've been elsewhere in the West.
  - simoom22 4y ago
    Yeah, I hate when woke liberals and college administrators go on about their Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and subverting the bourgeois counter-revolution, good grief.
norwalkbear 4y ago
Maybe it'll end when men stop going to college. Apparently men are going to college at lower and lower rates. This could be interesting if it's a sign of loss of faith in the state and education system.
- JohnClark1337 4y ago
ml_basics 4y ago
What happened to Bret Weinstein at Evergreen State College?
- prometheus76 4y ago
  Here's Bret explaining it on Joe Rogan's show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-st73zhZL3A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-st73zhZL3A Benjamin Boyce (he was an Evergreen student at the time) did a much broader scope documentary here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQAJ-7t4QOo&list=PLRdayXEOwuMG9DG66Bvx6YbUnhw-buS5K https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQAJ-7t4QOo&list=PLRdayXEOwu...
- barry-cotter 4y ago
  He got chased by a mob of students with baseball bats for refusing to absent himself during the “Day of Absence” when woe people weren’t allowed on campus. For the maximally charitable to Evergreen College version of events see Wikipedia. > In May 2017, student protests disrupted the campus and called for a number of changes to the college. The protests involved allegations of racism, intolerance and threats; brought national attention to Evergreen; and sparked further debate about free speech on college campuses.[18] During the protests, protesters entered one of Weinstein's classes (which he had held in a public park) and confronted him, loudly accusing him of racism, demanding that he resign, and forcing the class to break up.[19][20] Weinstein was advised by the Chief of Campus Police to temporarily stay away from campus for his safety.[21] > Weinstein and his wife, Heather Heying, brought a lawsuit against the school, alleging that the college's president had not asked campus police to quell student protesters.[22][23] Weinstein also said that campus police had told him that they could not protect him, and that they had encouraged him to stay off campus. Instead, Weinstein held his biology class that day in a public park.[24][25] A settlement was reached in September 2017 in which Weinstein and Heying resigned and received $250,000 each, after having sought $3.8 million in damages.[18] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Weinstein https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Weinstein
photochemsyn 4y ago
The most fundamental change in American academics over the past 40 years is their wholesale corporatization and the resulting loss of academic independence, coupled to a fundamental change in culture towards secrecy instead of openness (as per the desire to protect profitable intellectual propery aka 'trade secrets'). This is perhaps more prevalent in the science and engineering divisions, but the social wing is now acting more like a corporate propaganda division. Notably, 'academic wokeness' doesn't extend to criticizing another trend in the USA, the destruction of the middle class and the economic division of the country into aristocrats and serfs. This is mirrored in 'corporate inclusivity' - i.e. the apparent goal is to make the ethnic-racial-religious-gender makeup of the wealthiest 1% identical to that of the poorest 15%, while maintaining the economic divide. The whole thing reeks of psychological manipulation and state/corporate propaganda.
- tristor 4y ago
  I think it's more direct than that, most of the people preaching academic wokeness are actively against the existence of a middle class and see the middle class as an enemy, because the middle class is the successful outcome of balanced capitalistic policies. By forcing the divide, it allows them secure power by speaking to the serfs and using their support to bolster themselves, while they maintain a privileged position amongst the elite. This has always been the case with academics, and why academia preached the very means of their own downfall in the earlier part of the 20th century in those nations that decided to take up arms against the bourgeoisie. You're also absolutely correct that anybody with an understanding of political philosophy is appalled at the replacement of the more dire and obvious economic challenges that come with class stratification with endless ink being spilled about DEI that doesn't include any acknowledgement of economics or class. It's obvious that most of the DEI work, especially in the academy, is a distraction from truer economic divides which exist within Western society, and that the ideology acting as a replacement for personal religion does not have any measuring boundaries to allow for a balanced perspective.
- zozbot234 4y ago
  > the destruction of the middle class Except that poor people in the U.S. have far more material comforts than many in the "global middle class". The real untold story is the destruction of social capital in the U.S. and the tight-knit community structures and institutions that used to maintain and foster it - which is also the more relevant factor behind the very real, enduring marginalization of the lower classes.
alsaaro 4y ago
Bret Weinstein voluntarily resigned his position at Evergreen; Thomas Sowell is still a member of Stanford's Hoover Institution. If you want a case of an academic being drummed out of academia for their beliefs, the best example is that of Nikole Hanna Jones, the woman behind the 1619 Project, a MacArthur Fellow, and Pulitzer Prize winner who was denied tenure primarily at the request of a wealthy conservative donor. As for a monoculture, I don't agree, but I concede, American universities have, in modern times, leaned liberal. American universities are also the envy of the world, and objectively are the best on the planet. If it isn't broke, why fix it? And why trust the same people who gave us Donald Trump to fix anything?
- 0xdeadfa65 4y ago
  This comment is the perfect storm of all things pernicious with a lot of modern discourse I see surrounding wokeism. Let's see; * liberal interpretation of the word "voluntary," * presenting Nikole Hanna Jones as a martyr for social justice when in reality she is no such thing, * no mention of the political allegiance or ideology of the people behind those awards as if they were objective and neutral third-parties (they're not), * no elaboration on the 1619 Project and its MANY faults, chief among them being its status of more of a work of fan-fiction than historical reality as attested by the author herself, * exaggerating the degree to which American universities are neutral; they are not, they are fully captured institutions of the left for better or worse (note that I am neutral on this point) * mandatory mention of Donald Trump for maximum effect, * all of the above presented with an aggravating demeanor of a petulant apologist for bad politics, all while pretending to be some sort of centrist(?) (or at least that is how I interpreted your attitude. I could be wrong. Let me know.) If you do consider yourself some kind of leftist or at least an advocate for social justice, can you stop with this manner of addressing your purported adversaries online? I can't think of anything more frustrating than crypto-wokeists. It fans the flames of animosity and strengthens the spirit of reaction. You're not fooling anyone with this plausibly-deniable posturing. Of course I could be wrong myself and read into your comment more than you intended :).
- boppo1 4y ago
  >why trust the same people who gave us Donald Trump to fix anything? What? Where did anyone say anything about 'people who gave us Donald Trump'?

jnovek 4y ago

…why would identity politics lead to this series of events? Because it somehow restricts speech? China has very restricted speech compared to America and Chinese researchers manage to publish just fine.

deepdriver 4y ago
China has a history of brain drain to the West for exactly this reason (and others, like quality of living): https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2010-11/BrainDrain/China.html https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/2010-... Speaking based on my own experience with young Chinese colleagues in academia and industry, this flow was already reversing before 2020 kicked idpol into hyperdrive. And never mind the anti-Asian hate crimes, where we aren’t allowed to notice or discuss common characteristics of the perpetrators (not that it stops folks from noticing or discussing). Michael Burry of Big Short fame recently found the Justice Department burying relevant data on the perpetrators: https://twitter.com/michaeljburry/status/1556003057699209218 https://twitter.com/michaeljburry/status/1556003057699209218
- rychco 4y ago
  This seems particularly alarming to me. Why would it be hidden?
  - barry-cotter 4y ago
    People keep noticing patterns that others would prefer not to e noticed. If data isn’t collected it can’t be used to argue against your politics. For a non-US example see how the French state does not collect data on ethnicity or religion. It makes it more difficult to see how [social outcome] is uniquely distributed whether it be highest level of education, likelihood of convict of a crime or anything else of interest.
    - conviencefee999 4y ago
      This was done in Japan during the second world war. They unified under the idea of a singular identity similar to in China of the Han ethnicity which mind you is over 2000 years old and for the most part the Han people do not live in China but rather migrated to Korea. When you can pretend ethnic groups do not exist you can systemically and permanently create castes which make those who are visibly different from others into members of an invisible caste which they cannot escape. In the US the Technology industry made the same mistake when it allowed the Hindu Caste to take over the immigration policies during the 90s to early 80s.
      - imbnwa 4y ago
        >They unified under the idea of a singular identity similar to in China of the Han ethnicity which mind you is over 2000 years old and for the most part the Han people do not live in China but rather migrated to Korea >In the US the Technology industry made the same mistake when it allowed the Hindu Caste to take over the immigration policies during the 90s to early 80s. Would you have links to more expansive elaborations on these, have never heard these and they're intriguing
        4y ago

giraffe_lady 4y ago

So far the play more seems to be "demonize 'wokeness' and use it to drum up support for undermining and defunding institutions, then blame their failures on the wokeness alone." > Until then, colleges will continue not caring whether they’re preparing students well for the workforce or merely puffing them full of the latest political buzzwords. What colleges should care about re their students' preparedness for different vocations remains a somewhat open question: that their role is to prepare students for the workforce is a popular view but not the only mainstream one. If you're going to caricature one end of that spectrum as "puffing them full of buzzwords" then the other should be described as vocational training. I think most people would agree that a college education should have some amount of both professional preparedness and abstract learning for its own sake. Why so many outsiders feel so invested in where these institutions find balance here is confusing and unsettling to me. There are something like five thousand colleges in the US, many of them originally founded explicitly to pursue or reject a specific ideal of what is worth learning and how. I didn't pay attention to any of those controversies, conflicts and schisms and iirc neither did the national media.

deepdriver 4y ago
Overfunding via federally-guaranteed loans is what led to bloated administrations and tuition fees in the first place, so yes it ought to be rolled back. A lot of the “woke” stuff comes from diversity equity and inclusion staff who are part and parcel of the bloat, and constantly seeking to justify their own position: https://www.fox28spokane.com/study-shows-university-diversity-equity-and-inclusion-programs-ineffective-overstaffed/ https://www.fox28spokane.com/study-shows-university-diversit... You're also begging the question by implying ideological coercion is just "abstract learning."
- revolvingocelot 4y ago
  >>I think most people would agree that a college education should have some amount of both professional preparedness and abstract learning for its own sake >You're also begging the question by implying ideological coercion is just "abstract learning." I'm actually fucking astonished. Peak orange website -- the "liberal" in "liberal arts" doesn't actually refer to a political standpoint. It refers to exposure to a broad selection of Western intellectual tradition, the better to help students become more informed citizens, and to help prevent/allow detection of gross category errors/intentional facetious conflations like the parent post.

psi75 4y ago

> It’s my belief that this coerced monoculture of identity politics and ideology will significantly degrade the quality of American universities, to say nothing of K-12 education. The long term effects on American economic competitiveness and the ability to attract foreign students will be severe. I don't disagree with you, but I think one of the understated tragedies is that this shrill weirdo extremism (usually an ideology of privileged mainstream people with white savior complexes; note, for example, that most Latinos consider "Latinx" ridiculous) distracts people from the populist, inclusive platform of legitimate leftists (as opposed to corporate centrists taking virtue-signaling stances while not changing anything they actually do). The staunch but watered-down (from an economic perspective) "leftism" that is becoming mandatory on college campuses is a product deliberately engineered by Kapital to make upper-middle-class liberals and leftists (yes, there's a huge difference, but 85% of the country sees us as the same) look a certain way, and one that doesn't suit our goals. Thing is, our society is still as racist, sexist, religiously bigoted, and classist as ever; it's just that the rich have gotten good at using chatter about these issues (chatter of a kind that will never actually progress toward solving them, because that's not what capital wants) to divide people. It doesn't advance the objectives of liberals or of leftists to have wankers going on about how "math is racist" (it isn't). It just makes us look like idiots.

zozbot234 4y ago
This stuff is not the product of advocacy for capitalism or the free-market. It's literally watered-down Maoism, of the kind that would've been common in Europe and elsewhere starting in the 1970s - complete with its promise of a Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and its resolute getting rid of everything that's old, traditional and therefore privileged, bourgeois or otherwise "counter-revolutionary". The whole ideological stance of so-called social justice is really, really old-hat to those who are familiar with this stuff, but North American populist leftists remained a naïve, susceptible population for rather obvious reasons - ideological conflict was not nearly as salient there in the past decades as it would've been elsewhere in the West.
- simoom22 4y ago
  Yeah, I hate when woke liberals and college administrators go on about their Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and subverting the bourgeois counter-revolution, good grief.

norwalkbear 4y ago

Maybe it'll end when men stop going to college. Apparently men are going to college at lower and lower rates. This could be interesting if it's a sign of loss of faith in the state and education system.

JohnClark1337 4y ago

ml_basics 4y ago

What happened to Bret Weinstein at Evergreen State College?

prometheus76 4y ago
Here's Bret explaining it on Joe Rogan's show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-st73zhZL3A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-st73zhZL3A Benjamin Boyce (he was an Evergreen student at the time) did a much broader scope documentary here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQAJ-7t4QOo&list=PLRdayXEOwuMG9DG66Bvx6YbUnhw-buS5K https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQAJ-7t4QOo&list=PLRdayXEOwu...
barry-cotter 4y ago
He got chased by a mob of students with baseball bats for refusing to absent himself during the “Day of Absence” when woe people weren’t allowed on campus. For the maximally charitable to Evergreen College version of events see Wikipedia. > In May 2017, student protests disrupted the campus and called for a number of changes to the college. The protests involved allegations of racism, intolerance and threats; brought national attention to Evergreen; and sparked further debate about free speech on college campuses.[18] During the protests, protesters entered one of Weinstein's classes (which he had held in a public park) and confronted him, loudly accusing him of racism, demanding that he resign, and forcing the class to break up.[19][20] Weinstein was advised by the Chief of Campus Police to temporarily stay away from campus for his safety.[21] > Weinstein and his wife, Heather Heying, brought a lawsuit against the school, alleging that the college's president had not asked campus police to quell student protesters.[22][23] Weinstein also said that campus police had told him that they could not protect him, and that they had encouraged him to stay off campus. Instead, Weinstein held his biology class that day in a public park.[24][25] A settlement was reached in September 2017 in which Weinstein and Heying resigned and received $250,000 each, after having sought $3.8 million in damages.[18] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Weinstein https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Weinstein

photochemsyn 4y ago

The most fundamental change in American academics over the past 40 years is their wholesale corporatization and the resulting loss of academic independence, coupled to a fundamental change in culture towards secrecy instead of openness (as per the desire to protect profitable intellectual propery aka 'trade secrets'). This is perhaps more prevalent in the science and engineering divisions, but the social wing is now acting more like a corporate propaganda division. Notably, 'academic wokeness' doesn't extend to criticizing another trend in the USA, the destruction of the middle class and the economic division of the country into aristocrats and serfs. This is mirrored in 'corporate inclusivity' - i.e. the apparent goal is to make the ethnic-racial-religious-gender makeup of the wealthiest 1% identical to that of the poorest 15%, while maintaining the economic divide. The whole thing reeks of psychological manipulation and state/corporate propaganda.

tristor 4y ago
I think it's more direct than that, most of the people preaching academic wokeness are actively against the existence of a middle class and see the middle class as an enemy, because the middle class is the successful outcome of balanced capitalistic policies. By forcing the divide, it allows them secure power by speaking to the serfs and using their support to bolster themselves, while they maintain a privileged position amongst the elite. This has always been the case with academics, and why academia preached the very means of their own downfall in the earlier part of the 20th century in those nations that decided to take up arms against the bourgeoisie. You're also absolutely correct that anybody with an understanding of political philosophy is appalled at the replacement of the more dire and obvious economic challenges that come with class stratification with endless ink being spilled about DEI that doesn't include any acknowledgement of economics or class. It's obvious that most of the DEI work, especially in the academy, is a distraction from truer economic divides which exist within Western society, and that the ideology acting as a replacement for personal religion does not have any measuring boundaries to allow for a balanced perspective.
zozbot234 4y ago
> the destruction of the middle class Except that poor people in the U.S. have far more material comforts than many in the "global middle class". The real untold story is the destruction of social capital in the U.S. and the tight-knit community structures and institutions that used to maintain and foster it - which is also the more relevant factor behind the very real, enduring marginalization of the lower classes.

alsaaro 4y ago

Bret Weinstein voluntarily resigned his position at Evergreen; Thomas Sowell is still a member of Stanford's Hoover Institution. If you want a case of an academic being drummed out of academia for their beliefs, the best example is that of Nikole Hanna Jones, the woman behind the 1619 Project, a MacArthur Fellow, and Pulitzer Prize winner who was denied tenure primarily at the request of a wealthy conservative donor. As for a monoculture, I don't agree, but I concede, American universities have, in modern times, leaned liberal. American universities are also the envy of the world, and objectively are the best on the planet. If it isn't broke, why fix it? And why trust the same people who gave us Donald Trump to fix anything?

0xdeadfa65 4y ago
This comment is the perfect storm of all things pernicious with a lot of modern discourse I see surrounding wokeism. Let's see; * liberal interpretation of the word "voluntary," * presenting Nikole Hanna Jones as a martyr for social justice when in reality she is no such thing, * no mention of the political allegiance or ideology of the people behind those awards as if they were objective and neutral third-parties (they're not), * no elaboration on the 1619 Project and its MANY faults, chief among them being its status of more of a work of fan-fiction than historical reality as attested by the author herself, * exaggerating the degree to which American universities are neutral; they are not, they are fully captured institutions of the left for better or worse (note that I am neutral on this point) * mandatory mention of Donald Trump for maximum effect, * all of the above presented with an aggravating demeanor of a petulant apologist for bad politics, all while pretending to be some sort of centrist(?) (or at least that is how I interpreted your attitude. I could be wrong. Let me know.) If you do consider yourself some kind of leftist or at least an advocate for social justice, can you stop with this manner of addressing your purported adversaries online? I can't think of anything more frustrating than crypto-wokeists. It fans the flames of animosity and strengthens the spirit of reaction. You're not fooling anyone with this plausibly-deniable posturing. Of course I could be wrong myself and read into your comment more than you intended :).
boppo1 4y ago
>why trust the same people who gave us Donald Trump to fix anything? What? Where did anyone say anything about 'people who gave us Donald Trump'?