Woke is white arrogance

[Trausti]

“Gay” used to mean happy. Then it was coopted to mean something else.

 

[Patooka]

This thread has cemented my belief that being against "wokeness" is a really fucking pathetic hill to die on. Good luck with your outrage.

 

[Derec]

That sounds like you're saying there is no actual definition.

No. I am saying that it is not trivial.

That makes the term a kind of dog whistle, doesn't it? The meaning can only be discerned by those who get the underlying message.

Wrong.

So someone who is involved with social justice issues but not 'excessively' so isn't woke?

Someone whose understanding of social justice issues isn't twisted but rather straightforward isn't woke either?

Right. Kaep may be a type specimen of woke. He is excessively involved - he was literally grandstanding - and his ideas are very twisted.

Do not think I have not noticed you ignored the rest of my post though.

 

[untermensche]

This thread has cemented my belief that being against "wokeness" is a really fucking pathetic hill to die on. Good luck with your outrage.

All of these seemingly random ideas and phrases are carefully constructed using focus groups to incite irrational anger.

The total sheep on the right are played for fools everyday.

And never fail to prove they are the sheep their masters think they are.

 

[TomC]

He expressed an opinion at his place of work, while wearing his work uniform. He should have expressed his opinions (i.e. that police and prisons should be abolished etc.) on his own time.

To me, this was the only real problem. There's plenty of behavior that's perfectly acceptable, just not at work. And if I understand correctly, at least some of the management changed their minds. At which point, my only real objection went away. I saw Kaep as more like a Christian that makes his work fellows uncomfortable by going on and on about Jesus and getting everyone Saved. It's an opinion he is free to hold, but not make it an issue in the office. Same thing here.

And the fact is, Kaep has the money, looks, and fame that could make him a huge draw. He could have raised conciousness with rallies and interviews and all kinds of stuff. Using the team was counterproductive. Hypocritical as it is, the same guys who'll go fetch beer and snacks during the anthem will be pissed off by someone on the field behaving in a disrespectful way.

This just isn't that hard to understand..
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

He expressed an opinion at his place of work, while wearing his work uniform. He should have expressed his opinions (i.e. that police and prisons should be abolished etc.) on his own time.

To me, this was the only real problem. There's plenty of behavior that's perfectly acceptable, just not at work.

You are speaking in generalities that may apply more to Average Joes working slave wages who are "at-will" employees, often being fired without cause. NFL players' employment has different features than Average Joe's employment, such as a negotiated contract. And because there is a negotiated contract, this makes the behavior in question a contractual, legal question, not a question about generalities that apply to Average Joes. The nature of the legal technicalities are quite off-topic for this thread, but to sum up THE OTHER THREAD devoted to this topic, Kaep's behavior did not violate his contract, but the management or owners did violate the contract and that is why Kaep ended up winning.

Hypocritical as it is, the same guys who'll go fetch beer and snacks during the anthem will be pissed off by someone on the field behaving in a disrespectful way.

When you find hypocrisy, you need to identify the consistency, not merely the inconsistency. In this case, it's not about disrespect--the idea of disrespect comes from the fact most of these guys are minorities showing they have rights, even if the anti-wokesters claim it is about something else, like KNEELING--but when bikers kneel for Trump, suddenly it's okay and not disrespectful or when Catholics kneel in church, that's not disrespectful--and that is why the consistency needs to be examined. There is a clear and consistent message about race but it goes beyond race where the Reich wing propaganda tries to create a wedge issue around an economic divide--the target is white people who have less economically. So not only do they want Kaep to look like an uppity jerk, they also want to create a narrative of spoiled white rich kids who have an easy life in college partying who are "the Woke." And it's also why they create narratives of the white suburbs living in fear of BLM coming to put graffiti on their houses and rape their women.

It should be very clear looking at the op that this wedge is being used because it makes "Woke" out to be a "white" thing. The "arrogance" is the elitism associated with a class narrative. That is what is consistent here.

 

[TomC]

You are speaking in generalities that may apply more to Average Joes working slave wages who are "at-will" employees, often being fired without cause. NFL players' employment has different features than Average Joe's employment, such as a negotiated contract.

Forgive my ignorance of sports contracts.
But I was given to believe that the team kept their contract until it ended. Then didn't renew or renegotiate. But they did pay him everything that they had agreed to pay. The contract was nearly over at the time Kaep started this.

Is that incorrect?
Tom

 

[Politesse]

This thread has cemented my belief that being against "wokeness" is a really fucking pathetic hill to die on. Good luck with your outrage.

All of these seemingly random ideas and phrases are carefully constructed using focus groups to incite irrational anger.

The total sheep on the right are played for fools everyday.

And never fail to prove they are the sheep their masters think they are.

Is it really all that different from "bolshevism", "politically correct", "liberal", and all the other terms they've used over the years to try and scare people into voting for them?

 

[KeepTalking]

Imagine that, Fox News sensationally misrepresented a story

Did not. The guy hates white people, as does the Afrikaner he approvingly quotes.

Note that the university (being a Catholic one) was only defending him stating that he did not mean the suicide (being against the Catechism) part literally. They did not even attempt to defend him on his anti-white racism, because they can't.

Continuing to misrepresent the story after a thorough examination of how it was misrepresented is not helping your argument at all.

 

[KeepTalking]

The Ferguson insurrectionists did not invent it, but they certainly popularized it. Before then, it was an obscure term, but with the Ferguson riots, it exploded in use.



You are missing a step here. Between the term being an obscure one and it being one used to ridicule the lunatic left, it was taken up by black extremists rioting in Ferguson, which led to it becoming a well-known word.

The revisionist history is strong in you, Derec.

Nope. With you. The way you tell it, it was the so-called "right wing" that took up an obscure term from the 60s to ridicule the far left, instead of the "right wing" taking up a term that was already taken up by far-left Ferguson rioters and their supporters.

That's the way you do it when you totally aren't a conservative, eh? Just can't bring yourself to admit you were wrong.

I never said it was an obscure term, and where I come from it has been in constant use for those decades, gradually gaining more and more use as a compliment until the right-wing (I mean the totally not right-wing like Derec) noticed and had to turn it into a pejorative.

 

[laughing dog]

He expressed an opinion at his place of work, while wearing his work uniform. He should have expressed his opinions (i.e. that police and prisons should be abolished etc.) on his own time.

To me, this was the only real problem. There's plenty of behavior that's perfectly acceptable, just not at work. And if I understand correctly, at least some of the management changed their minds. At which point, my only real objection went away. I saw Kaep as more like a Christian that makes his work fellows uncomfortable by going on and on about Jesus and getting everyone Saved. It's an opinion he is free to hold, but not make it an issue in the office. Same thing here.

And the fact is, Kaep has the money, looks, and fame that could make him a huge draw. He could have raised conciousness with rallies and interviews and all kinds of stuff. Using the team was counterproductive. Hypocritical as it is, the same guys who'll go fetch beer and snacks during the anthem will be pissed off by someone on the field behaving in a disrespectful way.

This just isn't that hard to understand..
Tom

Your posts are evidence to the contrary.

 

[laughing dog]

Imagine that, Fox News sensationally misrepresented a story

Did not. The guy hates white people, as does the Afrikaner he approvingly quotes.

You have produced no evidence to support your conclusion, and your link is from Fox!!!

Note that the university (being a Catholic one) was only defending him stating that he did not mean the suicide (being against the Catechism) part literally. They did not even attempt to defend him on his anti-white racism, because they can't.

Perhaps they correctly perceived he did not display any anti-white racism.

 

[TomC]

He expressed an opinion at his place of work, while wearing his work uniform. He should have expressed his opinions (i.e. that police and prisons should be abolished etc.) on his own time.

To me, this was the only real problem. There's plenty of behavior that's perfectly acceptable, just not at work. And if I understand correctly, at least some of the management changed their minds. At which point, my only real objection went away. I saw Kaep as more like a Christian that makes his work fellows uncomfortable by going on and on about Jesus and getting everyone Saved. It's an opinion he is free to hold, but not make it an issue in the office. Same thing here.

And the fact is, Kaep has the money, looks, and fame that could make him a huge draw. He could have raised conciousness with rallies and interviews and all kinds of stuff. Using the team was counterproductive. Hypocritical as it is, the same guys who'll go fetch beer and snacks during the anthem will be pissed off by someone on the field behaving in a disrespectful way.

This just isn't that hard to understand..
Tom

Your posts are evidence to the contrary.

Why would you post that without backing it up with anything?

Exactly what are my posts evidence of? Contrary to what?

Please be specific.
Tom

 

[laughing dog]

Your posts are evidence to the contrary.

Why would you post that without backing it up with anything?

I gave the presumption of rationality on the part of the reader.

Exactly what are my posts evidence of? Contrary to what?

Please be specific.
Tom

Your posts are evidence that it is hard to understand because your posts are evidence you don't get it.

. Mr. Kaepernick was not offered a contract of any type by any team in the NFL despite the clear evidence he was sufficiently skilled to be a NFL quarterback. There is no evidence he priced himself out of the market. There is no evidence that his teammates or prospective teammates were uncomfortable with his beliefs or actions. None.

If you had bothered to read the Wikilink I posted twice, you'd have read that after his lawsuit was settled, one coach admitted it was a mistake to have not offered him a contract. Given Mr. Kaepernick's bona fides and the relative dearth of quarterback skill in the NFL, it is reasonable to conclude that the NFL owners colluded to keep him out of the NFL. The rationale for doing so is not known. But it is reasonable to conclude that it was not for football reasons. And, even though you have been asked repeatedly to produce evidence that it was for financial reason, you have produced none.

My conjecture is that the NFL over-reacted to a small but vocal minority of jackasses, bigots and Trumptards - it was easier to quiet that mob and send a message to the players by making an example of Mr. Kaepernick (a high profile player) than to live up the ideals of the United States of America. Of course, that is just a guess on my part.

Your responses on this topic show no recognition of any of that.

 

[TomC]

I gave the presumption of rationality on the part of the reader.

Like Limbaugh, Trump, and MTG.

People who feel free to say things without bothering to support it, because "rational people" already know the truth.

Tom

 

[Toni]

I gave the presumption of rationality on the part of the reader.

Like Limbaugh, Trump, and MTG.

People who feel free to say things without bothering to support it, because "rational people" already know the truth.

Tom

Actually, Trump, Limbaugh, and MTG and many others absolutely count on the unwillingness and inability of some people to actually read or understand what they read or to think rationally.

I do find your posts pretty inconsistent and often not easy to understand.

 

[TomC]

Your posts are evidence that it is hard to understand because your posts are evidence you don't get it.

That's not at all specific.
Your posts are solid evidence that you don't read my posts.

Feel free to be specific about your claims, and not just assume that that the TFT community will support your assertions.
Tom

 

[TSwizzle]

The woke have canceled Roy ‘Chubby’ Brown;

Roy 'Chubby' Brown fans have branded those who called for the Sheffield gig to be cancelled as "snowflakes".

North Yorkshire comedian Roy 'Chubby' Brown's show in the city was axed after thousands signed a petition calling for it to be cancelled. Sheffield City Hall then decided his comedy was not suited to the venue and scrapped the show.

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/sheffields-fury-woke-decision-axe-21464729

This statement pretty much captures the putrid essence of woke;

Councillor Terry Fox, leader of Sheffield City Council, added: “The council wholeheartedly supports Sheffield City Trust’s decision to remove the booking for Roy Chubby Brown’s January show. Sheffield is a City of Sanctuary, with diverse communities and the content of this show is unlikely to reflect Sheffield’s inclusive values.”

What a trumpet.

 

[laughing dog]

I gave the presumption of rationality on the part of the reader.

Like Limbaugh, Trump, and MTG.

People who feel free to say things without bothering to support it, because "rational people" already know the truth.

Tom

As usual, you miss the point. The presumption of rationality on the part of the reader means one assumes the reader can figure out what is being said, regardless of whether it is true or not.

I noticed you did not address the part that you asked for.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The NFL blackballed him because almost all the owners are old white men.

His problem was that he played politics instead of just football. Any controversial message would have been a problem no matter where the owners stood on that position.

He wasn't playing politics. He was playing football. He expressed an opinion quietly and respectfully. It was an opinion the rightwingers didn't want to hear so they raised a huge stink and scared off potential employers.

Kaepernick knew going down on one knee during the anthem was likely to result in some pretty stiff consequences up to and including the end of his career, which is why he's admired for having courage as well as convictions. What I'd like to know is, is he woke?

He's not considered white in American culture, wasn't being arrogant or overbearing, and appears to be very sincere. He only seems to fit the first definition of 'woke' but according to DrZoidberg the first definition isn't definitive.

He used football for his message, not for their message.

If you get your boss in the news other than in a good way, expect it to be career-limiting.

Whether his bosses agreed with his position or not is irrelevant.