Needed: Counterpart to 'Woke'

[Bomb#20]

If someone opposes anti-fascism, they are a fascist by definition.

Definitions don't make them a fascist. For instance, some people are philosophically or religiously opposed to politics, period.
You can say that such people are aiding and abetting fascists with their pacifism, make them fascist by definition. But that doesn't alter their philosophical/religious opposition to fascism.

Ok fair point. But I'll revise it to they're helping fascists.

Funny story about that. The pacifists who did the most ever to help fascists were the Italian Socialist Party. They had an internal dispute over which was more important, pacifism or stopping German imperialism, and the pacifists won. They kicked Mussolini out of the party because he wouldn't shut up about wanting Italy to join the Allies and fight the Germans. If they hadn't had such a hard-assed "Socialists are anti-war, so if you're pro-war you're anti-socialist by definition" attitude, he probably wouldn't have been soured on the Socialist Party and gone on to invent Fascism.

 

[ZiprHead]

Anyway if you're looking at the current state of the world and your reaction is "but those woke people!", no, actually you're the imbecile.

Without the "woke" riots that started in 2014, but which were still going strong in 2016, I think that Hillary would have pulled off a victory.
No "woke" people "burning this bitch down" in Missouri and elsewhere, no Trump presidency either.

The riots in 2014 was where the word was "first adopted"??? That's what you said.

 

[Derec]

The riots in 2014 was where the word was "first adopted"??? That's what you said.

Wrong. I said that that is when this word first entered the mainstream lexicon.

 

[Bomb#20]

If someone opposes anti-fascism, they are a fascist by definition.

Definitions don't make them a fascist. For instance, some people are philosophically or religiously opposed to politics, period.
You can say that such people are aiding and abetting fascists with their pacifism, make them fascist by definition. But that doesn't alter their philosophical/religious opposition to fascism.

It's not just pacifism, either. This whole "You're for me or you're for my enemies" manner of thinking ignores that there are more than two sides. Look at the Spanish Civil War. The Communists and the Anarchists were fervent about their philosophical opposition to fascism, they were each convinced they really were the pinnacle of anti-fascism, and they fought each other so much Franco was able to roll them up. They both thought the other were aiding and abetting fascists. They both were right.

 

[Bomb#20]

Anyway if you're looking at the current state of the world and your reaction is "but those woke people!", no, actually you're the imbecile.

It's not a race. Imbecilic MAGAts do not make imbecilic wokes any less imbecilic. A plague on both your houses.

 

[Gospel]

The current trend in conservative media involves taking expressions popular in communities of color and twisting them against those same communities. Why would anyone choose to act like "flip farmers"—my term for conservative figures like Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity?

Thug: In hip-hop, 'thug' evolved into a symbol of resilience and survival in the face of systemic challenges, thanks to figures like Tupac. But conservative media has racialized it, often using it as a dog whistle for Black men.

Woke: Once a term for social and racial awareness, 'woke' has been reframed by conservative media to mock political correctness.

Nigger: Perhaps the most powerful example, this term was claimed as "nigga"—a term of camaraderie within Black communities that transforms a painful history into one of unity and resilience. Conservative media knows better than to fuck around and find out with this one.

Minorities often turn negatives into positives, while turning positives into negatives is the job of the flip farmers. I suggest we avoid it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What's wrong with MAGA?

Or sheep. Or zombie.

 

[pood]

Anyway if you're looking at the current state of the world and your reaction is "but those woke people!", no, actually you're the imbecile.

It's not a race. Imbecilic MAGAts do not make imbecilic wokes any less imbecilic. A plague on both your houses.

Evidence needed that wokes are “imbecilic.” It won’t be forthcoming.

 

[pood]

It is news to me that racial and social awareness is imbecilic.

 

[TomC]

Anyway if you're looking at the current state of the world and your reaction is "but those woke people!", no, actually you're the imbecile.

It's not a race. Imbecilic MAGAts do not make imbecilic wokes any less imbecilic. A plague on both your houses.

Evidence needed that wokes are “imbecilic.” It won’t be forthcoming.

I disagree.
Part of the problem is that our media culture rewards people for making imbecility public statements. So they're easily found.

One imbecilic statement I clearly remember from the Floyd riots was a panel of BLM leadership describing the looting going on as reparations. This wasn't just some rando in a Xitter post, it was from the people invited by a TV station to describe their take on the situation, on air.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

It is news to me that racial and social awareness is imbecilic.

Filtered through the fabric of MAGA there is nothing that cannot be made imbecilic, including the truth, facts, science …
The destruction of reason, giving license to the unreasonable, is happening before our eyes regardless of electoral outcomes.

 

[Gospel]

One imbecilic statement I clearly remember from the Floyd riots was a panel of BLM leadership describing the looting going on as reparations. This wasn't just some rando in a Xitter post, it was from the people invited by a TV station to describe their take on the situation, on air.
Tom

Are you sure they weren’t just random people the TV station picked up? I ask because it’s clear you don’t value the opinion of random individuals. Personally, I call looting theft, and it’s definitely not just (if at all) official members of BLM that was out there Stealing.

 

[RVonse]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

 

[laughing dog]

MAGA stands for make America Great Again. What is so wrong with that? It once was a normal goal for an American to desire their country be great. Because if you don't think the country you live in should be great then pray tell us just why you think your country should suck? And if your goal is for the country you live in to suck, just what would you change to make it suck? More wokeness perhaps?

Well, that's rich. MAGA stands now for what it stood for 8 years ago: belligerence, calls for violence, insulting and obscene language about its opponents (hence the karma in labeling them as whatever infuriates them the most), xenophobic scare-mongering, homophobic scare-mongering, zany conspiracy theories about Democrats drinking baby blood, running child prostitution rings, etc., etc., etc. It is the last refuge of spineless Repub pols who, for a brief window in '15 and '16, and an even briefer one in '21, told the truth about this revolting movement and its leader. They are a stain on our history and traditions.

I'm honestly not that sophisticated as to be able to relate all those embellishments into the average person wearing a MAGA hat. I very much think it depends on the eye of the beholder. In your eyes they are obviously all lumped into the lowest scum on this planet. But in the eyes of the average MAGA hat wearer, all they are hoping for is an America that is great again. Some MAGA supporters like RFK jr probably do not like Trump much better than you but since the current trajectory got us to a place they do not like they are willing to wear a slogan that promises making America great again. So yet I think those people literally believe what MAGA stands for and when you infer something drastically different there exists a lot of confusion.

The left would do far better to promote a slogan (rather than MAGA) that actually addresses the xenophobic scare-mongering calls for violence that (Im guessing) 99% of everyone is against anyway. Communication would be much better anyway.

That all sounds very nice but it makes little sense. In what way does the average MAGA wish the USA to become great again? I ask, because e even the average MAGA supporter's real income is larger than it was 8 years ago. People have better access to health care on average. While we are not quite the envy of the rest of world, a big chunk of that is due to their savior, Donald Trump.

 

[Elixir]

When was America great?
That would be step 1 in trying to make any sense of MAGA.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

When was America great?
That would be step 1 in trying to make any sense of MAGA.

Uh oh you questioned America's greatness. That means you're woke.

 

[Elixir]

When was America great?
That would be step 1 in trying to make any sense of MAGA.

Uh oh you questioned America's greatness. That means you're woke.

What about MAGA? What's with this "again" shit if not questioning Murka's current greatness?

 

[Gospel]

I’d argue that there have been defining moments in American history when the nation achieved greatness and then grew even greater. However, the early versions of this 'greatness' excluded certain demographics, while later progress was marked by their inclusion. In my view, America still has the potential to be even better—though there will always be that persistent bug to address. That bug being our operating system’s inherent flaw: humans having the power VIA vote. As we know all too well, given enough time, humans have a special gift for finding ways to undermine even the best operating systems.

 

[robnisch]

It is 5 letters, but I like "dozed".

 

[Bomb#20]

Anyway if you're looking at the current state of the world and your reaction is "but those woke people!", no, actually you're the imbecile.

It's not a race. Imbecilic MAGAts do not make imbecilic wokes any less imbecilic. A plague on both your houses.

Evidence needed that wokes are “imbecilic.” It won’t be forthcoming.

Evidence needed that I claimed wokes are “imbecilic.” It won’t be forthcoming. I asserted the existence of imbecilic wokes. That is not a generalization about all wokes. If you wish to see evidence that imbecilic wokes exist, read on...

I’m anti-woke myself. It’s a stupid word for aware, and almost universally mis-applied.

Plus it is woke to be anti-fascist, but I guess if you're anti-woke you're pro-fascist then.

And it is woke to be anti-racist and anti-misogynist, so I guess you're pro both of those too if you're anti-woke.

Nobody forced GN to make a claim implying that Elixir is pro-fascist, pro-racist and pro-misogynist. GN made that imbecilic claim on his own initiative.

In other news, God is Love, so if you're pro-atheism you're anti-love.

Plus, Putin is anti-Nazi, so I guess if you're anti-Putin you're pro-Nazi then.

Already mentioned how it's woke to be anti-fascist. So... no.

By the way, Putin is against anti-fascists in case it wasn't completely obvious.

Regarding yourself as anti-X does not make people who oppose you pro-X. People can describe themselves any way they please, but it doesn't imply anything about reality, only about their often-blinkered self-perception. ... Woke people who infer that anti-woke people must be pro-misogyny because it is woke to be anti-misogynist are imbeciles.

As you can see, I didn't claim wokes in general are imbeciles. I claimed that the subset of woke people who infer that anti-woke people must be pro-misogyny because it is woke to be anti-misogynist are imbeciles. Nobody forced GN to infer that. He made that imbecilic inference on his own initiative.

Regarding yourself as anti-X does not make people who oppose you pro-X.

Yes it does. If someone opposes anti-fascism, they are a fascist by definition. Now go ... yourself, as you clearly don't understand logic at all.

Nobody forced GN to give the imbecilic answer "Yes it does." to "Regarding yourself as anti-X does not make people who oppose you pro-X." Nobody forced him to offer a transparent non sequitur as support for his imbecilic answer. He has amply demonstrated himself to be bad at logic. Nobody forced the guy who's bad at logic to make the imbecilic claim "you clearly don't understand logic at all" to somebody who clearly understands it quite a bit better than he does. He said all those imbecilic things on his own initiative.