The Atlantic: A View of American History That Leads to One Conclusion
- Thread starter Colonoscopy
- Start date
Anyone making reference to someone else being in a cult to be dismissive is truly ironic
Boy am I pissed at myself for reading this whole post. Stupidest thing I’ve ever read, and it’s not even close.Sigh...In my best Jeff Foxworthy voice:
If someone asks you what a woman is and your first three words are "Well, uhhh, um", you might be woke.
If someone asks you when the country was founded and you ask back "Technically? Or what our oppressors taught us in school", you might be woke.
If you use the word "patriarchy" more than once a decade, you might be woke.
If you ever tweeted the words "Make him famous" you might be woke.
If you equate words to violence, you're definitely woke.
If you treat every slight offense as the worst thing to ever happen, you might be woke.
If you think a social worker instead of a cop should be sent to the projects to deal with a domestic dispute, you're probably a woke idiot.
If you keep calling people "courageous" for being a little different, you're probably woke.
If you constantly yell at people for "where they get their news from", you're probably woke or a far right lunatic.
If you're
...you're a goddamned woke fool.
Hope this helps.
You should have saved your bitch baby "Goodbye to the board" post from years ago when OiT made you fill your shorts. That was way stupider and definitely funnier.
My working definition is quite close to Merriam-Webster's version:
woke: aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)
Imagine believing this concept is somehow a negative. A certain political party isn't on board with this concept and refuse to acknowledge the kernel of truth that underlies the term. Instead they try to redefine the term as though it's a bad thing for our society as a whole and frame it as though those who do acknowledge these known historical injustices are somehow trying to tear down our country and thrust guilt upon innocent children for past inequities and brutalities. So they prefer to continue to ignore obvious societal problems because they are difficult to reform, redefine the term to frame it as a negative to be used against others and "protect" the children from an education that includes the ugly warts that were for most of our history ignored and not taught. Now that's a fatalistic view if I've ever seen one, just give up because it's hard and uncomfortable for some.
The woke concept is the exact opposite of that attitude. Facing facts both historical and contemporary, looking for ways to address those existing inequities and hoping that through reform gains can be made to address inequities that exist because not only can we as a society do better, we absolutely have to be better and that it will benefit all of us by doing so. True optimism.
woke: aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)
Imagine believing this concept is somehow a negative. A certain political party isn't on board with this concept and refuse to acknowledge the kernel of truth that underlies the term. Instead they try to redefine the term as though it's a bad thing for our society as a whole and frame it as though those who do acknowledge these known historical injustices are somehow trying to tear down our country and thrust guilt upon innocent children for past inequities and brutalities. So they prefer to continue to ignore obvious societal problems because they are difficult to reform, redefine the term to frame it as a negative to be used against others and "protect" the children from an education that includes the ugly warts that were for most of our history ignored and not taught. Now that's a fatalistic view if I've ever seen one, just give up because it's hard and uncomfortable for some.
The woke concept is the exact opposite of that attitude. Facing facts both historical and contemporary, looking for ways to address those existing inequities and hoping that through reform gains can be made to address inequities that exist because not only can we as a society do better, we absolutely have to be better and that it will benefit all of us by doing so. True optimism.
So, you think the "woke movement" is the only one in political history to avoid being co-opted by fringe actors, turning it into something completely different? BLM, Occupy Wall Street, The Tea Party, conservatives, liberals, patriots, the OK sign and everything else has been hijacked and taken over by the worst elements in each area because the ass holes are the loudest. And you think "wokism" should be any different?
Nothing that catches on in popularity starts out as a shitty thing. It's when shitty people with shitty agendas latch onto its popularity and try to cash in on making it theirs...ultimately ruining the entire thing. You think Occupy Wall Street was about shitting on police cars in public? Of course not. But that's what it's defined as now. You know why? Because people under the banner of Occupy Wall Street shit on police cars ion public.
That's precisely what YOU are doing here.
Naming anything you don't like or don't agree with as "woke". And if you watch how the 'wingers use the term, most of their claptrap has nothing to do with social injustices.
Two hours later and obviously, no irony.
Because that's different than dismissing all of the things you know that are stupid as "not woke".
There is no "woke movement", there are just people who are more thoughtful. Usually it's younger people and when the old people hear them they get defensive because they think it's an indictment about their generation.
"You young people accepting people for who they are??? In my day we could make fag jokes and even the fags laughed! Woke nonsense!!!"
Yeah...that's totally the complaint against wokism. Can't call people fags anymore. Good grief.
I'm trying to understand the basic premise. Is the author saying THIS was how it should be taught?
And this is just stupid. We're finally taking a look at the darker aspects of our past and this writer thinks that's a bad thing because it will "punture..our misguided myths"? As for the rest, THERE IS A STRAIGHT LINE from past to present and anyone who denies that is an idiot. From slavery to ending reconstruction to convict labor to FHA and GI loan denials for blacks to redlining to Jim Crow to lynching and the KKK...that's a f'n straight line to the problem of black poverty today.
That's not what I think at all. I'm well aware that the loudest and often worst of views on any random subject is what splashes all over the media/social media. It's unfortunate because it allows those who are against these oftentimes honorable concepts to undermine them because the fringe elements associated with them are such an easy target. Everything you listed has honorable and worthwhile intentions behind them, but we allow the war between various factions to dominate the discussion instead of focusing on the good that can come from substantive discussion and ultimately reform our society for the betterment of all.
Perhaps it's just the human condition that we must be in a perpetual state of opposition, fighting is far more interesting and attention grabbing than building fences and consensus.
LMAO!!!
Uh; no. When something doesn't fit the definition I'd posted, it's not "woke".
Here's another nugget from the lady who (like you) could not define it
Similar threads
