Counter-reactionaries working to staunch the wokee cultural tide

    For those of you who don't know yet, I'll be launching a website next week that should help shed a whole lot of light on Critical Social Justice. Getting excited to show you some of what I've been working in for the last few months.https://t.co/mgEe1wFSpj

    — James Lindsay, being effective again (@ConceptualJames) February 22, 2020

    Between New Discourses and Cynical Theories, it's going to be a good year for explaining what's going on with Wokeness and helping people understand what it is.https://t.co/wVQYt2SsDQ

    — James Lindsay, being effective again (@ConceptualJames) February 22, 2020

    Comments

    Abigail Shrier is author of Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.


    intriguing if not fully formed and too broad:


    A bit like Lenin(?) - the purpose of the Revolutionary is to foment revolution, not to govern. The Revolution can only be failed by not pushing for more revolution.

    Still, Stoller feels like a set of too long coffee cup aphorisms.




    There is contrast to draw between Nonviolence & Antiracism.

    In some ways they're related. In others antiracism threatens the progress nonviolence built.

    Yet all antiracism isn't the same.

    Thoughts on Kendi, DiAngelo & reclaiming the philosophy of MLK:https://t.co/OJ9kdaCwWy

    — John Wood, Jr. (@JohnRWoodJr) December 8, 2020


    great casual convo on humor and calling "racism" in current pop culture

    CONTINUES....!






    Color lines. As if that's never been tried.


    I think: good snark.


    intriguing point but also depressing if those are the only two alternatives:

    I doubt very much he would think those are the only two, though, as he himself doesn't do either.


    just an assortment I've been meaning to put here


    Strange: Schmidt, Lipsitch and Gould sounds more like a law firm than a white eugenics initiative. But I'm not sure they go far enough - Soylent Green would be the bioethical approach.


    excerpt from above

    [....] What’s going on here? The truth doesn’t matter, all that matters is “winning” the argument. Even caliper-wielding skull scientists are good “allies” as long as they come to the “right” conclusions.

    Where does this leave us? The point of scholarship is that facts are facts, no matter whether they support a particular argument at hand.  Beard should simply have admitted that it was unlikely that a person with such dark skin would have been a prominent Roman Briton because there were very few people with such dark skin in the Roman world at the time. Beard should also not have speculated that Septimius Severus may have been very dark-skinned, because that seems very unlikely, as his background was a mix of colonial Italian and Punic. Neither of these groups is brown, let alone black, in complexion [....]

    other recent

    I remember the following, I hated it

     


    One man, one vote requires a Constitutional amendment 

    Repairing Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act, while difficult with a Conservative SCOTUS might be easier.

    Good luck on both.


    One of these was intended as satire pic.twitter.com/MCeAC7GSAm

    — Wesley Yang (@wesyang) December 20, 2020


    new McWhorter vs. Kendi spat:

    the top peanut gallery remark, one of many:


    Kendi should point out that McWhorter uses the stereotype "Omar" to describe black youth.

    A great takedown of the Loury/McWhorter podcast on George Floyd protests

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0Y9b5FUqko



    This is the problem with tweet snippets, they are snippets

    If I recall correctly, this section of the book discusses nationalism vs assimilation 

    Obviously, nationalism at its extreme would exclude interracial marriage 

    The chapter gives an example of two black men who are friends 

    One is a corporate lawyer advancing towards partnership in a white firm who dresses in business attire

    The other a successful music executive who dresses in African attire

    The musician would never marry outside his ethnic group 

    The chapter notes that both men are committed to aiding high risk communities.

    That same chapter adds a third friend, a female who has a Black father and Middle Eastern mother

    She wants to join Doctors Without Borders and serve in the Middle East

    The book asks you the question if she should instead serve in the underserved Black community

    Critical Race Theory presents a series of situations and you get to determine what should be done

    (I looked at the Kindle version of the book again. My memory is correct)

    James Lindsay is a hack


    That "snippet" is 14 lines long & comes with page number, so you didn't have to "recall correctly". 

    The female in this case "should" serve or do whatever she wants to do, which could include helping out Indonesians or endangered animals in the Amazon, or climb aboard a Greenpeace boat protesting global warming, or stay at home raisingng kids & teaching piano in Ohio or making jewelry in New Mexico or being a frontline nurse who dies in a pandemic.


    I did remember the nationalism versus assimilation part 

    I remembered the discussion about the friends

    Re-read to verify

    The fictional woman is as free or as limited as you want her to be

    James Lindsay remains a hack.


    I wanted to have that snippet on this thread. It's a a good one. THAT'S ALL.

    Has nothing to do with James Lindsay's opinions, I'm done with the thoughts of James Lindsay, I've digested where he's at. I stole his quote for my own records.

    AND FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME, I AM NOT INTERESTED IN DEBATING THESE THINGS WITH YOU. IT'S NOT POLITICAL TO ME, THIS THREAD IS SIMPLY MY NOTES ON CULTURE CHANGE HAPPENING. IT'S NOT FOR OPINIONS OF ANONYMOUS PEOPLE or their arguments about it. I really don't care what you think about it, you're anonymous rmrd on dagblog. Zero interest.  

    It's to record what the movers and shakers on the issue are saying and doing

    Just sort of like a wikipedia entry, get it?

    If you would like to discuss any point, you are certainly welcome to copy it from this thread as is anyone else and start a discussion or debate ON YOUR OWN BLOG TO DO THAT.

    I purposely keep it buried and out of the way, not anywhere the public can see it because I do NOT WANT THE KIND OF INTERACTION YOU WANT to make of this. 

    Other people get it because they contribute either new examples or analysis. It's not personal or political to them and it's not personal or political to me. You want to make personal arguments with these folks, take it elsewhere, PUHLEEZ.

    And if you want to argue with James Lindsay, go over to twitter and argue with him. GEEZ.


    You posted the tweet snippet from James Lindsay

    I commented on the tweet snippet 

    I called James Lindsay a hack

    No need for me to track down James Lindsay.

    I did not mention you at all.


    Tracked James Lindsay. Trump voter. Tweeter. ("one might add peacefully", yeah, with 25,000 armed National Guard)

    "The administration has changed hands (peacefully, one might add, given the hysteria around the circumstances). So, in light of his decision to vote for Donald Trump in the 2020 election, what does James Lindsay have to say about Trump now? If you want to find out, check him out here in his short-form subscribers-only podcast, James Lindsay OnlySubs, where he discusses his current opinions on the 45th president of the United States."

    James, another insignificant hack, seeking significance.


    I know NCD. This thread is not about arguing politics, or the validity of the main player's points. It has never been, except  when others have dragged me aggravatingly off thread. It is about RECORDING related cultural history, for good or ill from some of the main participants in the movement for and against. I'd appreciate it if people took political arguments about this elsewhere. I really don't want to do that and don't give a shit what any of you think on topic. I'm simply following what's happening in case I have to have a serious debate on it with a colleague. Quips here and there are fun but taking it so seriously, I have no interest, zero.

     Suffice it to say Lindsay became a main player and then was dragged further right by all the attacks. He's obstinate and reactionary now when he used to argue reason type libertarian.

    People were always welcome to comment or contribute, but no dragging it off the main purpose please. Borrow from what I find and start your own rant if you want to rant about Lindsay or anyone else. I simply want to follow what he's doing, who's staying with him, who's leaving him etc. And less so now in preference to many others, as je's degraded into repetition and anger (big argument with original co-author in one instance, for example, and I don't even find a need to post him much anymore

    AND JESUS H. CHRIST IN THIS CASE IT WASN'T ABOUT LINDSAY! I TRULY JUST WANTED THAT QUOTE ON HERE.

    does that mean because Karl Rove tweets a quote from Krugman, I can't use it? GEEEZZ

    IT IS WHAT IT IS. THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING IN OUR INTELLECTUAL AND ACADEMIC CULTURE That's all. PLEASE STOP PRESUMING MY OPINION ON ANY OF THIS, none of you really know it and I see no benefit in sharing it.

     


    Thanks 

    Lindsay's mindset on CRT was very clear

    Another guy mentioned here frequently, Zaid Jilani, did a puff piece on Josh Hawley.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/man-in-the-arena

    Now Jilani is back arguing that Hawley should not be punished for his part in encouraging the myth that the Biden election needed more verification in an article in "the American Conservative".

    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/dont-burn-down-democracy-to-save-it/

     




    I could not possibly care less what pronoun you use to address me on dagblog. I hope you'll respect that.


    oh come on, be honest, you like the mystique of the unknown


    there's a new Atlantic article on Chloe Valdary:


    48 HOURS WARNING: I HAVE DECIDED I AM GOING TO UNPUBLISH THIS THREAD

    SO I DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE STARTING ARGUMENTS WITH THE QUOTES OF THE PEOPLE I QUOTE ON IT as If I am them and they are me.

    GIVING YOU TIME TO TAKE WHAT YOU WANT OFF OF IT


    Can just trim the segue on James Lindsay


    thanks but that's not the main problem. the main problem is one person making this political about all the players and then tempting others here to argue about it with him and they do that instead of ignore him even though I asked him to stop many times.

    And  clearly wrongfully presuming I have an agenda of  blaming "the woke" for everything in the world, that I am doing this to somehow convince someone that everything is their fault.

    IT'S NOT POLITICAL TO ME, IT'S CULTURE CHANGE, I want to watch which way it goes.

    Makes me realize how politics colors how many look at things here, how they look at everything politically, as if yelling "Republicans are evil" long enough and loud enough one can change reality. 

    And that depresses the heck out of me in itself. I don't think like that! I think knowledge is power that I can use for my own benefit. I don't labor under the delusion that I can change things by arguing on the internet that one side is evil or stupid, I'm interested in deconstructing what's going on, I don't labor under the delusion that I can change things by yelling n dagblog. I was just using this like a Note Taking device as I ran across things of related interest over time, and others like Emma and you contributed some in that spirit.

    I really don't understand people who don't understand that.!!! DID THEY FLUNK COLLEGE or what? You don't say to the professor: why did you include Hitler in your 20th C history course, he was evil, we should leave him out.

    Let's be blunt: I really could care less what rmrd thinks about McWhorter or Kendi or Lindsay I care what McWhorter and Kendi thinks. And I still do care what Lindsay thinks, he's got a lot of followers, it's just that he's gotten repetitive and simplistic as the same old attackers and attacks wear on him. WHICH IS EXACTLY LIKE WHAT RMRD DOES.the whole political preachy approach eventually dumbs everyone down to lowest common denominator.


    just adding a few more names for reference purposes. seeing more and more "black" folks not afraid to join this club, like these two:

    Do you believe there is a country that black Americans would do better as a group in? https://t.co/AN6N51HPCJ

    — Pls Don't @ Me or Quote Me (@veetocorleone) June 27, 2021


     

    — Barrington Martin II (@_BarringtonII) June 28, 2021

    He won't reply

    — Pls Don't @ Me or Quote Me (@veetocorleone) June 28, 2021

    and her:

    Ladies and gentlemen, we present Africa Brooke: pic.twitter.com/srBR9UXcBj

    — Free Black Thought (@FreeBlckThought) June 26, 2021


    pic.twitter.com/hFVNI1kgYh

    — Free Black Thought (@FreeBlckThought) June 26, 2021

    and her:

    and them:

    The only real solution is to get out of the game. https://t.co/ss426rhBYR

    — Free Black Thought (@FreeBlckThought) June 24, 2021

    and other colors:

    Dear White People —

    Please ignore the people of color claiming to speak on my behalf, claiming that I'm terrified of you (I’m not), claiming that I live in fear of you (I don’t), claiming that we have nothing in common (we do), and claiming that we can’t come together (we can).

    — Keiko (@keikoinboston) June 27, 2021


    The US has a larger immigrant population than any other country, yet the Left continues to
    stress America’s inherent racism. If we’re such a comparatively racist, oppressive country, why do immigration numbers continue to increase across the board?

    — Kenny Xu (@kennymxu) June 27, 2021

    Pages

    Latest Comments