The woke epidemic has hit a whole new level. You're looking at the new Helen of Troy and Achilles in the upcoming Odyssey movie. I don't even know what to say.
https://twitter.com/i/status/2052762952147644507
The woke epidemic has hit a whole new level. You're looking at the new Helen of Troy and Achilles in the upcoming Odyssey movie. I don't even know what to say.
This could and should be cross-posted with the AOC thread, but I find it more relevant here because this is really how the woke feel, and it is illuminating:
https://twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/2053279301735223555?s=20
The people applauding along and nodding, as if AOC is describing something so obvious that it is like the sun rising in the East, all believe that it is institutions and "systems" that churn out all our problems. They believe that if only we design our systems better, we can have no more prisons, no more crime, etc.
I think these people are very, very dangerous. AOC is here complaining that we shouldn't be focused on incarcerating rapists, but radically changing society so that "men" don't become rapists, throught different views about sex, "gender," etc. That is RADICAL.
But more importantly, it is false. Three things (all of which certainly show @arthur-dent, that I'm more conservative philosophically than I was at 20 or 30):
First, I think these people are ignorant to the point of being stupid about biology, evolution, and economics. They don't understand--or at least don't acknowledge in their public comments and writings--that there are real constraints on how humans can change and in what way.
Second, these people are wildly arrogant and ignorant about how well humans can design "systems of power" to achieve their stated goals without considering unintended consequences (which is a follow on to the notion of just how ignorant they are about history, and again, economics). That is, even if society could be changed in the ways they suggest to yield these amazing outcomes, why do they have faith that humans will be able to figure it out?
Third, a combination of one and two is this: even if humans could be changed in this way and even if we could, theoretically, be smart enough to figure it out, that process will take time and many iterations. In that transition time, these same flawed humans will be making these decisions, and as the woke are fond to point out, flawed humans design structures of power to benefit themselves--consciously or unconsciously.
So why should we turn all this power over to people like AOC and Ibram Kendi X and Ilhan Omar? Why would they be more virtuous in their design, when in fact, they argue that all language and arguments are systems of power in and of themselves (that's where the CRT comes in)? Are we really to believe that women of color are so much more virtuous than white men? Their response to that, by the way, is a resounding yes, and it is, at heart why it is completely right to call these people woke racists.
To me, the intelligent liberal response is to reject these people and eliminate them from the liberal political movement. Intelligent liberals need to recognize the strength of some of the conservative arguments, and shift efforts to reach the same goals as before--more equality in outcomes for people of different ethnicities and socioeconomic levels through persuasion and charity, equal treatment (NOT outcomes) of women, men, gay, straight etc. in the law, and a strong social/welfare safety net for those who need it--mainly very low IQ people, the mentally ill, and children. I still believe you can get democratic consensus on a lot of these policies without the need of woke illberalism. But as long as that illiberalism is a major force in the Dem party, we are getting further and further away from developing that consensus.
@bradstevens perfectly stated. Beautifully stated. AOC and her crowd are very very dangerous on so many levels. What is fundamental to who we are is accountability, personal responsibility, respect. With these folks there is zero. They teach finger pointing. Race. The amorphous systems. Not personal. Not parents. What is being inculcated through the youth that adhere to their beliefs is a disaster for society. It’s Kirkwood little 500 shootings. It’s 100 kids fighting at six flags in a takeover on opening day.
and it’s kids here breaking into cars last week at Busch with the apprehension of 14 year olds with guns turned right back onto the streets. Why? Bc the “system” never contemplated kids that young armed as part of their activities of daily living. Of 25,000 cases a year for 8 prosecutors. See AOC is Dunning in so many areas but stupid people like her used to just get a MSW and go run a nonprofit. Now they’ve become hyper political. Without being hyperbolic AOC and the left would oversee the tearing down of the country.
yet butch mark and the rest are obsessed with Trump. These people are closer and closer to getting elected and we will be cooked.
Spencer Pratt is the resistance!!! Bring forth the Aliens! Let him handle them.
@bradstevens I see this as a bumper sticker in my neighborhood and yard signs: Rejoice in the birth of a brown skinned undocumented middle eastern immigrant
Its gonna get worse.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/penn-state-law-school-plans-to-focus-on-antiracism-over-next-5-years/
Law schools that focus on anti racism, diversity and inclusion in the legal profession cannot produce good lawyers. Excellent lawyers have a thorough understanding and working knowledge of key concepts like cause and effect, relevance, persuasion, nuanced analysis ( splitting hairs) and more. You get these skills through rigorous study under rigorous professors who pound Socratic teaching. You don’t acquire these skills by reading and lecturers. Once a lawyer is well-grounded in these skills, then allow them to advocate the social causes du jour. You can’t advocate a position without knowing how to be an advocate.
Teaching law has become pussyfied
If they truly "focus on anti-racism" in hiring and admissions, they're going to get sued a lot.Its gonna get worse.
https://www.thecollegefix.com/penn-state-law-school-plans-to-focus-on-antiracism-over-next-5-years/
Law schools that focus on anti racism, diversity and inclusion in the legal profession cannot produce good lawyers. Excellent lawyers have a thorough understanding and working knowledge of key concepts like cause and effect, relevance, persuasion, nuanced analysis ( splitting hairs) and more. You get these skills through rigorous study under rigorous professors who pound Socratic teaching. You don’t acquire these skills by reading and lecturers. Once a lawyer is well-grounded in these skills, then allow them to advocate the social causes du jour. You can’t advocate a position without knowing how to be an advocate.
Teaching law has become pussyfied
This could and should be cross-posted with the AOC thread, but I find it more relevant here because this is really how the woke feel, and it is illuminating:
https://twitter.com/ZaidJilani/status/2053279301735223555?s=20
The people applauding along and nodding, as if AOC is describing something so obvious that it is like the sun rising in the East, all believe that it is institutions and "systems" that churn out all our problems. They believe that if only we design our systems better, we can have no more prisons, no more crime, etc.
I think these people are very, very dangerous. AOC is here complaining that we shouldn't be focused on incarcerating rapists, but radically changing society so that "men" don't become rapists, throught different views about sex, "gender," etc. That is RADICAL.
But more importantly, it is false. Three things (all of which certainly show @arthur-dent, that I'm more conservative philosophically than I was at 20 or 30):
First, I think these people are ignorant to the point of being stupid about biology, evolution, and economics. They don't understand--or at least don't acknowledge in their public comments and writings--that there are real constraints on how humans can change and in what way.
Second, these people are wildly arrogant and ignorant about how well humans can design "systems of power" to achieve their stated goals without considering unintended consequences (which is a follow on to the notion of just how ignorant they are about history, and again, economics). That is, even if society could be changed in the ways they suggest to yield these amazing outcomes, why do they have faith that humans will be able to figure it out?
Third, a combination of one and two is this: even if humans could be changed in this way and even if we could, theoretically, be smart enough to figure it out, that process will take time and many iterations. In that transition time, these same flawed humans will be making these decisions, and as the woke are fond to point out, flawed humans design structures of power to benefit themselves--consciously or unconsciously.
So why should we turn all this power over to people like AOC and Ibram Kendi X and Ilhan Omar? Why would they be more virtuous in their design, when in fact, they argue that all language and arguments are systems of power in and of themselves (that's where the CRT comes in)? Are we really to believe that women of color are so much more virtuous than white men? Their response to that, by the way, is a resounding yes, and it is, at heart why it is completely right to call these people woke racists.
To me, the intelligent liberal response is to reject these people and eliminate them from the liberal political movement. Intelligent liberals need to recognize the strength of some of the conservative arguments, and shift efforts to reach the same goals as before--more equality in outcomes for people of different ethnicities and socioeconomic levels through persuasion and charity, equal treatment (NOT outcomes) of women, men, gay, straight etc. in the law, and a strong social/welfare safety net for those who need it--mainly very low IQ people, the mentally ill, and children. I still believe you can get democratic consensus on a lot of these policies without the need of woke illberalism. But as long as that illiberalism is a major force in the Dem party, we are getting further and further away from developing that consensus.
I'd be fine not having any prisons. Divide all crimes into three categories:
1. Pay a fine.
2. Penal transportation.
3. Execution.
Obviously, #2 requires some planning. I personally think we should retract Florida's statehood, build a huge wall along the entire state border, and use it as a giant penal colony.
Obviously, #2 requires some planning. I personally think we should retract Florida's statehood, build a huge wall along the entire state border, and use it as a giant penal colony.
We have Puerto Rico for that