Critical Social Justice / Woke-sekoilu

[zupi]

Heitellään taas joitain Seerutin twiittejä, kun mimmillä on aika hyviä mietteitä.

https://mobile.twitter.com/seerutkchawla

People who can't even govern themselves have the audacity to think they can govern the world.
4.24 ap. · 18. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

It's not helpful to tell people that normal life experiences qualify as 'trauma'.
4.48 ip. · 18. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

You can't debate reality with someone whose mission is to convert people in to believing in their illusions.
10.07 ip. · 18. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Nothing says 'social justice' like white middle class college kids attempting to destroy the reputations of black & brown people who don't believe in the bullshit you 'learned' in college.
6.26 ap. · 21. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Identity politics is used to deliberately obfuscate class-based struggle. While punching down hard & cruelly, but pretending they're punching up.
6.34 ap. · 21. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Jordan Peterson didn't 'radicalise' anyone- he just interrupted indoctrination with actual facts & data. That's extremely inconvenient for the ones indoctrinating you.
5.15 ip. · 22. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Blindly hating men, hating conservatives, hating white people- it's the same psychological mechanisms that produce racism. Dehumanisation.
5.08 ip. · 24. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

If you're easily offended, you're easily manipulated. You turn yourself into a wind up toy that anyone can use.
7.57 ip. · 25. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Almost all woke academic theory can be summed up as pathological overthinking, arriving at the wrong conclusion, and then over using the thesaurus.
1.43 ap. · 27. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

It's WILDLY unethical that detransitioners aren't met with the same affirmation & institutional support as transitioners.
3.53 ip. · 27. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

It's not the responsibility of strangers on the internet to: •Make you feel safe •Cater to your individual experience •Alter themselves to make you feel more comfortable •Validate you •Anything else you demand of them. They are strangers. On the internet.
9.23 ip. · 28. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

So many people seem shocked to discover that life is really hard, they incorrectly assess this as an aberration & then find things to assign blame to.
6.16 ap. · 10. toukok. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Remember when people had personalities not identities?
1.11 ap. · 30. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Actual mental illness is still very much stigmatised. Instead, what had been de-stigmatised is self-indulgence, self-absorption, fragility, entitlement & learned helplessness.
2.15 ap. · 30. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

A serious social issue of this age is that people say what they imagine will make them sound like a nice person- instead of saying what they actually think.
6.24 ip. · 30. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

"Punctuality is white supremacy" Have you realised we are in the dystopia yet?
8.37 ip. · 30. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

What we're living through feels incredibly surreal, dystopian, because what we know to be objective reality is contradicted by the dominant culture. The Great Gaslightenment.
11.38 ip. · 31. heinäk. 2021·Twitter for iPhone

[zupi]

Uusi, ehkä vähän selkeämpi versio.

[tweet]1421602608465252353[/tweet]

Vanha:
https://hommaforum.org/index.php/topic,131511.msg3315716.html#msg3315716

[zupi]

Helena vähän taas avautuu sekopäisistä sadistisista wokstereista hyvistä ihmisistä. Huomaatteko muuten jotain yhtäläisyyttä erään toisen ryhmän toimintaan?

[tweet]1422619230818684930[/tweet]

such a manipulative cult. they tell you all of your problems are bc you're trans, guilt tripping, grooming and gaslighting you every step of the way, and then when the pain and regret and awareness that you were taken advantage of hits, they want u to feel guilty about that too

not even going to bother explaining why getting a "reconstruction" is not the same as never having your breasts removed by an industry vulture in the first place, they know it's not the same. i bet on some level they know it's flat out evil too. they just don't care

"get a reconstruction" "go to voice therapy" "being hairy doesn't make you any less of a woman"

thanks genius. problem solved. none of us have ever thought of these things before. (hymiö)

no amount of money spent on compensation will ever make up for having your body integrity taken away from you by medical industry vultures and groomers who targeted you when you were 13 and vulnerable.

human beings aren't mr potato heads who can just be operated on every other year to have different body parts taken off and put back on.

[justustr]

Helena vähän taas avautuu sekopäisistä sadistisista wokstereista hyvistä ihmisistä. Huomaatteko muuten jotain yhtäläisyyttä erään toisen ryhmän toimintaan?

Kyllä. Viittaat varmaan edustamiisi denialisteihin? Hyvien ihmisten metodithan on täsmälleen samat kuin salaliittohörhöillä: valehtelu, vääristely ja toiston voima. Kun samaa soopaa jauhetaan riittävän pitkään ja riittävän monesta tuutista niin väitteet ikään kuin muuttuu todeksi. Myös vihollinen on yhteinen: nk. normaali väestö.

Liittoutumisen paikka?

[Lalli IsoTalo]

Tämä taitaa sopia tänne. Sasia halveksin, mutta kirjoitus on aika hyvä.

Kimmo Sasi: Koemmeko 1970-luvun radikalismin uudelleen?
04.08.2021
...
EEC-sopimus oli suuri saatana, joka uhkasi viedä Suomen väärään suuntaan. Opetuksen haluttiin antavan oppilaille viranomaisten määräämän uuden "totuudellisen" tiedon. Pirkkalassa uutta aineistoa päästiin kokeilemaankin. Suomalaista elämänmuotoa ja kansallisuusaatetta vastaan hyökättiin ja sotaveteraanien arvostus haluttiin romuttaa, koska he olivat taistelleet väärän asian puolesta. Kaikkien piti tietää, että sosialismi oli luonut uuden ihmisen, joka oli sivistyksellisesti ja biologisesti korkeammalla tasolla.

Liikkeen metodit olivat mielenkiintoisia. Piti löytää suuri vaarallinen vastustaja. Se oli äärioikeisto. Ihmisten leimaaminen äärioikeistolaisiksi oli tehokas ase.
...
Toinen tärkeä keino oli itsesensuuri. Sodan seurauksena oli ymmärrettävää, että voittajaa, Neuvostoliittoa ei saanut arvostella. Mutta ääriliike onnistui pitkälle laajentamaan itsesensuuria siten, että Neuvostoliiton yhteiskuntajärjestelmää, sosialismia, ei saanut arvostella.
...

Käsitteille annettiin uusi sisältö. Kansandemokratia oli liberaalia demokratiaa korkeampi hallintomuoto, koska siinä tiedostava luokka johti yhteiskuntaa kansan parhaaksi. Päätöksiä ei voinut jättää kansalaisten arvaamattomien oivallusten varaan. Sosialistiset ihmisoikeudet olivat parempia, koska niillä ei saanut vaarantaa yhteiskunnan etua. Sosiaaliset oikeudet korvasivat vapausoikeudet. Talous kasvoi ja ympäristö parani, koska tilastot kertoivat niin. Kaikki pohjautui uuteen ylivoimaiseen tieteellisen sosialismin teoriaan, joka ainoana ymmärsi maailman väistämättömän kehityksen ja kapitalismin tuhon.

Kun yhteiskunnallinen kehitys ei mennyt toivottuun suuntaan, luotiin epäluottamusta edustukselliseen demokratiaan. Valtaa vaadittiin kaduille ja erilaisille uusille elimille, mieluiten neuvostoille.
...
Politiikan polarisoituminen, keskustelun kärkevyys ja uhkakuvien luominen osoittavat, että elämme jälleen kuohunnan aikakautta.
...
Kärkevimmät ilmastoaktivistit pelottelevat maailmanlopulla. He eivät usko markkinatalouden kykyyn ratkaista ohjauksen ja kuluttajakäyttäytymisen ansiosta maapallon lämpenemisongelmaa. He eivät huomioi asioiden mittasuhteita maiden välillä ja päästöjen synnyssä. He syyllistävät ihmiset ja haluavat demonstratiivisesti kontrolloida heidän käyttäytymistään. He haluavat päättää ihmisten ruokavaliosta, joka on tärkeä ihmisen itsemääräämisoikeudelle. Maailman ilmatieteen laitoksen pääjohtaja Petteri Taalas onkin verrannut radikaaliliikettä 1970-luvun taistolaisiin.
...
Metodit näillä uusilla liikkeillä, jotka kohtaavat punavihreydessä, ovat tuttuja. On vastustaja, äärioikeisto. Leimaaminen on tapa käydä taistelua vastustajaa vastaan. On vain yksi oikea tulkinta, jonka vain radikaalein johtaja tuntee. Viha vastustajaa kohtaan on oikeutettua. Oikeaoppinen tavoite oikeuttaa keinot. Se oikeuttaa toimimaan myös lain vastaisesti. Armahduksen saa, kun sitä kutsuu kansalaistottelemattomuudeksi.

Vaarallisimmat vaikutukset on itsesensuurilla. Media toimii jälleen kuten 1970-luvulla. Nuorempi radikaali toimittajakunta ajattelee, että heidän tehtävänsä on edistää niitä asioita, jotka ovat "oikeita" tällä hetkellä ja tuomita niiden vastustajat.
...
Miksi 1970-luvulla demokratia ja sananvapaus vaarantuivat? Syy oli se, että joukossamme oli aivan liian paljon "hyväntahtoisia hölmöjä". He innostuvat muiden vietäviksi, luulevat tekevänsä hyvää, eivätkä ymmärrä perusasioita. Toivottavasti tilanne pian normalisoituu. Jos radikalismi ajaa liberaalin demokratian kaaokseen, se antaa Kiinan kaltaisille totuuden tietävien johtajien maille vahvan otteen koko maailmasta.

Kommentteja:

Robban:
Jo pitkään ovat kirjat taas palaneet rovioilla ja mukaan on otettu sananvapaus, musiikki, elokuvat, tv-sarjat, sarjakuvat, historian henkilöt, kaupalliset tuotteet, sanat ja sanonnat kuten Ylen sensuroima kantasuomalainen sana. Hyväksyttävää on yhteiskunnallinen hyödyttömyys, pyöräily, maoilu, joukkoliikenne, kaupunkiasuminen, miekkarit, pride, islam, vihreä siirtymä ja eläminen oleskeluyhteiskunnassa muiden toverien antamien sääntöjen mukaan.

Jarmo Piironen:
... Yhden oleellisen sanan unohdit mainita ja se on "etuoikeutettu". Tällä sanalla voidaan vaientaa kaikki intersektionaaliseen politiikkaan kohdistuva kritiikki. Etuoikeutetulla ei ole oiketutta puhua, ainoastaan kuunnella ja ottaa opiksi. Käsite etuoikeutettu saa absurdeja piirteitä. Työtön britti mies kun on etuoikeutettu suhteessa Sussexin herttuattareen, jolloin hänellä ei ole oikeutta arvostella kuningasperheeseen kuuluvan amerikkalaismiljonäärin käytöstä, vaan se leimataan rasismiksi.

Pentti Pakarinen:
Sosialismi on teurastanut yli 100 miljoonaa ihmistä Kiinassa, Venäjällä, Kamputseassa, jne. Jonain päivänä näiden uhrien haamut nousevat vielä vaatimaan hyvitystä. Sen seurauksena vasemmistolaisuudelle voi vielä tulla tukalat paikat. Toivottavasti kuitenkin kaikki tämä ei tuhoa sananvapautta maailmassa, sikäli mikäli meillä silloin enää sananvapautta on. Sananvapaus on väistämättä supistuva oikeus, joka voi kadota vielä kokonaan vihervasemmiston syöveriin. Suomessa näin on tapahtumassa kovaa vauhtia.

Lopuksi totean, että 1970-luvun alussa, kun oli kaikenlaisia opiskelijavaaleja, Helsingin kauppakorkeakoulun suurin puolue olivat kommunistit. Näin meille ensimmäisen vuosikurssin opiskelijoille silloinen rehtori kertoi.

[L. Brander]

Tämä taitaa sopia tänne. Sasia halveksin, mutta kirjoitus on aika hyvä.

https://www.verkkouutiset.fi/koemmeko-1970-luvun-radikalismin-uudelleen/#a7a9b88b]
Kimmo Sasi: Koemmeko 1970-luvun radikalismin uudelleen?
...

Ihan hyvä teksti, jossa ei nyt kuitenkaan mitään uutta. Sasi jättää huomiotta hänen itsensä ja kokoomuksen panoksen ikävän tilanteen mahdollistamiseksi. Kokoomus ei ole ainoastaan tehnyt yhteistyötä radikaalivasemmiston kanssa eduskunnassa ja hallituksissa. Kokoomus on määrätietoisesti yrittänyt kaventaa ilmaisuvapautta, ylistänyt internationalismia globalismin, EU:n ja sen liittovaltiokehityksen kautta, tukenut EU:n täysin päätöntä ja epärealistista ilmastopolitiikkaa, saarnannut fanaattisesti ohjatun ja pakotetun monikulttuurisuuden puolesta sekä tehnyt kaikkensa, että Suomeen tultaisiin ja jäätäisiin sosiaaliturvan varaan. Kokoomus äänestäjineen on ollut tämän hulluuden takuumies yli kaksikymmentä vuotta.

[sancai]

Taistolaisuus muistuttaa hyvin paljon nykyistä woke-liikehdintää. Sasi tuntuu kuitenkin vertaavan nykyistä ilmapiiriä suoraan taistolaisuuteen ja uskovan, että tämä menee itsekseen ohi taistolaisuuden tavoin (tosin taistolaisuus ei koskaan mennyt täysin ohi, ne vanhat taistolaiset rakenteet jatkoivat institutioiden mädättämistä koko ajan). En ole yhtä optimistinen, muutamia pointteja, joita olen pohtinut, miksi nykyinen ilmapiiri on vaarallisempi:


- Taistolaisuus oli vahvasti sidoksissa Neuvostoliittoon. Taistolaisuus saavutti asemansa puhtaasti Neuvostoliiton rahallisella avulla. Nykyinen woke-aate tuntuu tulevan länsimaiden sisältä, meidän omien pyhien instituutioitemme ytimistä.

- 60-70-lukujen yleislänsimaalainen radikaalivasemmistolainen liikehdintä tapahtui kylmän sodan vastakkainasettelun aikana. Länsimaisella oikeistolla oli konkreettinen vihollinen, Neuvostoliitto, jota vastaan ymmärrettiin käyvän kulttuurisotaa. Nykyään vihollinen puuttuu, minkä takia keskustaoikeisto ei tunnista äärivasemmiston uhkaa, eikä tee mitään.

- Taistolaisuus kaikessa radikaaliudessaan oli hyvin suomalainen ilmiö. 60-luvulla radikaalivasemmistolaiset tuulet pyyhkivät länsimaiden kulttuuria, mutta Suomi oli yksi niistä harvoista maista, joissa Neuvostoliiton fanitus jatkui 80-luvulle. Mikä tärkeintä, Yhdysvaltalaiset instituutiot eivät sortuneet ja amerikkalainen kulttuuri avoimesti torjui sosialismin näihin päiviin asti. Nyt se on muuttunut ja radikalismin ydin on USA.

- Taistolaisuus jäi yliopistoihin ja mediaan. Yritysmaailma säilyi vahingoitta, koska taistolaisuus oli avoimesti kommunistinen aate. Toista on woketus, joka tietoisesti leviää ja loisii suuryrityksissä, koska onnistuu piilottamaan marxilaiset tarkoitusperänsä keskustaoikeistolaisilta, jotka eivät tunnista uhkaa. Siinä missä taistolaisuus hyökkäsi kapitalismia vastaan, woke-aate on punkki, joka lihoo suuryrityksistä pumppaamallaan verellä.


Olen sitä mieltä, että Sasin ja aateveljiensä lapsellinen usko "liberaalidemokratiaan" koituu turmioksemme. Sasi uskoo, että meidän ei tarvitse taistella radikaalivasemmistolaisuutta vastaan, koska länsimainen "liberaalidemokratia" automaattisesti korjaa tilanteen jotenkin jossain vaiheessa.

Tämä "uusliberalismi" on perua ysäriltä, jolloin todellakin uskottiin, että Neuvostoliiton hajoaminen todisti, että länsimaalainen ihmisoikeuskäsitys ja vapaa markkinatalous leviävät nyt väistämättä koko maailmaan ja kaikki suuret poliittiset aatteet ovat kuolleita. Seuraa ikuinen liberalisoituminen, valtioiden rajat katoavat, uskonnot katoavat ja kaikki suvaitsevat toisiaan ja vaurastuvat yhteisymmärryksessä. Uskottiin, että vapaa markkintalous automaattisesti tuottaa lisää vapaata markkinataloutta ja lisää yksilönvapauksia, tätä oli ns. globalismi. Nämä kaikki ennusteet vaan menivät katastrofaalisesti pieleen:

- Syntyi ääri-islam. Vielä ysärillä ääri-islamia pidettiin salaliittoteoriana ja uskottiin, että muslimimaat liberalisoituvat automaattisesti. Turkin uskottiin olevan pian länsimaa.
- Maahanmuuttajat eivät integroituneet, ysärillä uskottiin, että maahanmuutto ei ole ongelma, koska he automaattisesti haluavat sulautua ylivertaiseen markkinaliberaaliin yhteiskuntaan.
- Monikultturismista ei syntynyt onnelaa, vaan länsimaat jakautuivat rotu- ja uskontoristiriitojen takia ennennäkemättömään vihaan ja katkeruuteen, nyt kaupungit palavat rotumellakoissa ja pommit räjähtelevät islamilaisissa terrori-iskuissa.
- Kiina avasi markkinat, mutta ei liberalisoitunut vaan muuttui kansallissosialistiseksi
- Venäjä epäonnistui
- Länsimaiden kansalaiset eivät halunneetkaan omaksua globaalia identiteettiä, vaan 2000-luvusta tuli kansallismielisten puolueiden nousun vuosikymmen

ja viimeisimpänä:

- Kommunismi ei kuollut länsimaista, vaikka Neuvostoliitto hajosi, vaan voimaantui ja kasvoi yliopistoissa. Talouskasvu ja yksilönvapaudet eivät automaattisesti johtaneetkaan markkinatalousmyönteisten aatteiden kannatukseen.

En usko "liberaalidemokratian" kaikkivoipaisuuteen. Useat länsimaat, Suomi etunenässä, ovat jo osoittaneet miten helposti sananvapaus ja vapaa tiedonvälitys katoavat jopa vapaassa länsimaassa. Mielestäni sananvapaus on tärkein liberaalia demokratiaa ylläpitävä voima ja siitä ei ole pian mitään jäljellä, sananvapauskriittisyys on jo täysin valtavirtainen aate. Sananvapauden puolustaminen painottamatta sen "rajoja" ja "vastuuta" on nyt "äärioikeistolainen" kanta. Siitä ei ole kuin kymmenisen vuotta, kun Yhdysvalloissa liberaalit marssivat uusnatsien mielenosoitusoikeuden vuoksi.

[zupi]

Toteanpa jälleen omana näkemyksenäni, että CSJ / woketus - sonta olisi edelleen kohtuullisen marginaalinen ilmiö, ellei valtamätä olisi katsonut, että tuo aate on varsin hyödyllinen heidän omien tavoitteidensa kannalta. Eikä se todellakaan ole mikään yllätys, että tämä kehitys alkoi edellisen, 2008-2009 talousromahduksen jälkeen. Siis sen jälkeen, kun Hussein Obama lapioi karmeita summia rahaa tavallisten kansalaisten taskuista kusipäisten pankkiirien taskuihin. Joista kukaan ei joutunut vastuuseen mistään, taskut vaan täyttyivät entisestään.

Suuri ongelmahan valtamädällä on nykyisin, että heillä ei enää ole tiedonvälityksen monopolia, internet periaatteessa on rikkonut sen. Niinpä valtamädän kannalta erittäin ikävät uutiset ja paljastukset "systeemin" mädäntyneisyydestä leviävät netissä varsin laajalle, vaikka valtamedia yrittää miten rummuttaa sitä narratiivia. Mutta mitenkä sitä nyt voisi valistuneessa, vapaassa, yksilön oikeuksia kunnioittavassa länsimaisessa demokraattisessa yhteiskunnassa lähteä sensuroimaan ihmisten mielipiteitä ja sulkemaan tiedonvälityskanavia, joissa näitä näkemyksiä esitetään? Eihän sellaista voi tehdä, yritykset tällaiseen toimintaan törmäisivät karmeaan vastustukseen. Me Jumalasta seuraavat emme nyt oikein pidä näistä mielipideistä, joten heitämme kaverin vankilaan ja suljemme alustan, missä mielipiteet on esitetty...

Ei tietenkään, tämähän vaatii sen, että ollaan suojelemassa jotain. Ja tässä sadistiset woksterit tulevatkin sitten kuvaan mukaan. Tuolle poppoolle ei millään ole paskankaan merkitystä, paitsi heidän pyhillä kulttiaatteillaan ja niiden edistämisellä. Tuon poppoon fanaattisuudessa ja vaarallisuudessa jäävät partaislamistitkin kevyesti kakkoseksi. Valtamädän ei tarvitse tehdä muuta kuin leimata kaikki itsensä kannalta epämiellyttävät asiat pyhien wokeaatteiden vihollisiksi, niin heti on vähintään kymmeniä miljoonia, ellei jopa satoja miljoonia aivopestyjä ääliöitä raivoamassa netissä sen puolesta, että nuo epämiellyttävät asiat pyyhkäistään pois maan päältä. Tässä vaiheessa ei vielä ihmisiä, mutta eipä taida tuokaan enää kovin kaukana olla. Eli kaikki vääriä mielipiteitä esittävät leimataan saman tien joksikin aivan saatanan pahaksi (vihapuhujat, äärioikeisto, ekstremistit, demokratian viholliset, terroristit....), jotka vaarantavat hyviä ihmisiä, ja etenkin jotain "sorrettua ihmisryhmää".

Tuo woksterien ja valtamädän liitto on kyllä totaalisen sairas. Tuon seurauksena esim. se tietyssä mielessä järkevä vasemmisto (sellainenkin on ja sellainen tarvitaan) on tallottu jonnekin pari kilometriä maan alle. Kaipa siinä kummankin tahon (valtamätä, hullu-woksterit) johto ajattelee, että käytetään nyt noita idiootteja hyväksi, ja sitten myöhemmin "putsataan pöytä". Eipä ole ensimmäinen kerta historiassa, kun valtamätä liittoutuu hullujen kanssa tuhotakseen heitä vastustavat tahot. Kun en ole historioitsija, niin en tiedä, onko tuosta koskaan seurannut mitään hyvää. Ei olisi ainakaan ensimmäinen kerta, kun homma on mennyt ihan totaalisen reisille.

Mutta siis tuo asia, että tällä kertaa länsimaiden valtamätä tukee estotta noita woke-hulluja, ja päinvastoin, tekee tilanteesta erityisen vaarallisen, ja aiemmasta poikkeavan. Se, että saisi ihmiset huomaamaan vaaran, on todella hankalaa, koska niin valtamätä, valtamedia kuin "instituutiot", laitokset ja virastot ajavat tuota samaa totalitarismi-aatetta. Tavoitehan tuossa valtamädän osalta nähdäkseni on, että länsimaista muodostetaan vähän nyky-Kiinan kaltainen yhteiskunta, missä sinänsä taloudellisesti voi mennä ihan kohtuullisen hyvin, mutta tavalliset ihmiset ovat lähempänä orjaa kuin vapaata ja itsenäistä kansalaista. Eliitti kikkailee mitä kikkailee, ja tuloksesta riippumatta on aina oikeassa. Orjat pitäköön päänsä kiinni ja palatkoon sorvin ääreen.

Ja kokkareista vielä sen verran, että tuo sontasakki on kyllä omastakin mielestä yksi suurimpia syitä nykykehitykseen. Ihan saatanan oksettavaa sakkia. Sieltä aina valitut ihmiset höpöttelee ja kirjoittelee ihan järkeviä mielipiteitä, ja lammaskansa sitten jotenkin yhdistää nuo mielipiteet puolueeseen. Vaikka oikeasti kyseinen puolue ajaa karmealla voimalla juuri päinvastaisia tavoitteita. Ja noista "järkeviä mielipiteitä" esittävistä kokkareista olen kyllä itse sitä mieltä, että ovat pelkkiä itsekkäitä valehtelijoita. Jos olisivat oikeasti mielipiteidensä takana, niin olisivat lähteet lätkimään sontatunkiosta nimeltä kokkarit jo kauan sitten.

Edit. Lisätään vielä sen verran, että se, mitä tapahtui 2008-2010, on niin kaukana kapitalismista kuin vain voi olla.

[kekkeruusi]

Toteanpa jälleen omana näkemyksenäni, että CSJ / woketus - sonta olisi edelleen kohtuullisen marginaalinen ilmiö, ellei valtamätä olisi katsonut, että tuo aate on varsin hyödyllinen heidän omien tavoitteidensa kannalta. Eikä se todellakaan ole mikään yllätys, että tämä kehitys alkoi edellisen, 2008-2009 talousromahduksen jälkeen.

Ei, se alkoi jo joskus 1970-luvulla neukkulan toimesta, niin kuin Juri Bezmenov on asiasta kertonut. Kommunistista länsimaisten yhteiskuntien romahtamiseen tähtäävää toimintaa. Neukkula kaatui, mutta "syöpä" oli jo saanut alkunsa.

[zupi]

Sekaisin koko rahalla...

Seerut:

No trigger warnings. No safe spaces.

Build resilience & be your own damn 'safe space'.
8:46 PM · Aug 6, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

I've never met anyone truly virtuous who's felt the need to advertise it.
8:49 PM · Aug 6, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Wokeness prioritises the appearance of 'goodness', over goodness itself.
5:46 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Wokeness fights for the rights of black, brown, disabled, gay, lesbian, women & trans people.

Unless they're the wrong kind of black, brown, disabled, gay, lesbian or trans person- then they try to destroy your life.

Almost as if it's not about their rights at all...
9:36 PM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

There's a streak of narcissism in taking it upon yourself to speak for an entire 'community'.

If the community didn't vote & elect you speak for them, you're speaking for yourself.
9:58 PM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

No one with good intentions makes it socially unacceptable to ask good faith questions.
1:41 AM · Aug 8, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

https://twitter.com/seerutkchawla

Tämä vähän OT, mutta pitipä heittää kuitenkin.

[tweet]1423480015342252032[/tweet]

(recoil = hätkähtää tms.)

[tweet]1423483069131116544[/tweet]

James:

You're driving. You stop to let someone cross on a crosswalk, and they do, without looking. A car coming the other direction does not stop and hits the person. Who is at fault?

If we think systemically, everyone but the pedestrian. Everyone. Everyone who drives, sells cars, etc.
7:17 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android


We have a system that leads people to drive cars, to *need* to drive cars, to be *unable* to solve their problems without driving cars. In which people profit from selling cars, making cars, putting fuel in cars, extracting and refining the fuel, metal, rubber, etc, to make cars.
7:19 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android

All of those people, everyone who supports an economy of cars, is complicit in this and every traffic death, injury, or inconvenience, not to mention the different impacts on people because not everyone has cars or equally good cars. These are systemic harms based on cars.
7:20 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android

his whole system and all its beneficiaries are therefore complicit in car culture, which kills tens of thousands per year. They have car complicity, which they rationalize as normal and justified because it benefits them. Their car-driving life is comfortable for them.
7:22 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android

Not only people who drive cars, but people who depend on and benefit from an economic system enabled and supplies by cars (and trucks), people who lay roads, people who develop components put into cars or an economy reliant on them are are complicit and willfully ignorant of it.
7:24 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android

This is how systemic thinking works. This is a Marxian Theory of cars. This is Critical Car Theory.

It's ridiculous bullshit.
7:25 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android

(...)

Conclusion? Need for self-driving cars, a car-free primitive society that's somehow not primitive, government programs to make owning and operating a car very expensive, abolish cars, etc. Whatever Leftist-Marxian political football can be tied to any of it.
8:04 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android

If you disagree, you just want people to die in traffic accidents (so, you're complicit in mass vehicular homicide and manslaughter) and refuse to admit your complicity in the system because you want to maintain your own benefit and comfort. You lack moral humility and stamina.
8:06 AM · Aug 7, 2021·Twitter for Android

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames

Ja jotain muuta.

[tweet]1423796796854206464[/tweet]

Täälläkin on vähän Rufoa arvosteltu, mutta pitäisi ehkä huomioida se, millä vimmalla valtamätä / -media käy hänen(kin) kimppuunsa. Ei voi antaa mitään mustamaalaamisen aihetta.

[tweet]1423858077036519427[/tweet]

Niinpä:

[tweet]1270737800544112641[/tweet]

Ja juurikin näin:

[tweet]1423687903402598401[/tweet]

[ikuturso]

Tämä se vasta oli hienoa tämä Raytheonin kriittisen rotuteorian huomioiminen työyhteisössä. Etenkin tämä kohta:

SCOOP: Raytheon, the nation's second-largest defense contractor, has launched a critical race theory program that encourages white employees to confront their "privilege," reject the principle of "equality," and "defund the police."

Let's review the internal documents.

Raytheon then asks white employees to deconstruct their identities and "identify [their] privilege." The company argues that white, straight, Christian men are at the top of the oppression hierarchy—and must work on "recognizing [their] privilege" and "step aside" for minorities.

Muistan eräällä työpaikalla monikulttuurisessa suuressa konsernissa keittäneeni usein kahvia. Kun kahvia teki mieli, kävin lataamassa moccamasterin ja näin sain tuoretta kahvia silloin kun sitä teki mieli. Olin siis etuoikeutettu. En toki tajunnut sitä silloin, vaan keitin pannullisen monena päivänä viikossa.

Olisinpa sllloin tiennyt wokeismista ja kriittisestä rotuteoriasta, niin olisin astunut sivuun ja joku kiinalainen transgenderkääpiö olisi voinut keittää kahvit jatkossa.

Ymmärsinköhän nyt ihan oikein tuon Raytheonin ohjeen?

-i-

[zupi]

Pari ekaa vanhoja, viimeinen uusi. Vähän eri asia tietenkin, kun tuossa viimeisessä itse "hyvät ihmiset" esittää mielipiteitään.

[tweet]1414654970725498881[/tweet]

[tweet]1411880626337325066[/tweet]

[tweet]1424920929356877826[/tweet]

[zupi]

[tweet]1425272751057608711[/tweet]

Netissä saalistavia radikaalivasureita voi kyllä hyvin verrata pedofiileihin. Ja sitten vielä suvakkivanhemmat...  No, tuolla vanhempien mielipiteellä ei välttämättä ole pian enää mitään merkitystä. Muistutuksena, että tuota Abigailin kirjaa on pyritty kaikin keinoin sensuroimaan, monessa tapauksessa siinä onnistuen.

[tweet]1424917511686922247[/tweet]

[Pöhisijä]

[tweet]1425349889102254089[/tweet]
Jotain positiivisia uutisia sentään välillä. Vastauksissa melko sakeaa tavaraa, esim:
[tweet]1425534192260198400[/tweet]

[zupi]

Lisää samaan sarjaan. Woksteri-liike houkuttelee mukaansa kaikki ihmiskunnan pahimmat pervopaskat, ja sitten vielä ylistää heitä.

[tweet]1425526638809436168[/tweet]

Photo of young child with men in bondage gear wins award from Dutch Pride organizers

A photo from a Pride event in Holland won an award for being "iconic" and the "most aesthetic." It shows a a small child smiling while surrounded by men in bondage gear. The men, in harnesses and shiny black hot pants, are gathered outdoors on a porch where a little girl plays with a swing set.

(...) The photo is called "Celebrating Diversity," and was snapped by Jan van Breda. (...)

In selecting van Breda's photo, the jury stated that "This photo, in its composition - child in the foreground, men preparing for Canal Parade in the background, everyone busy with their own activities and fascinations - sublimely depicts what will hopefully remain self-evident: that we, unhampered by prejudices , and almost unsuspectingly, all may and can exist side by side."

(...)

"Eletään rinta rinnan"...  Sanoo jengi, jonka toiminta perustuu täyteen valehteluun ja lasten aivopesemiseen, ja kenellä on pöksyt märkänä sen suhteen, että kunhan jo pääsis uunittaan kaikki eri mieltä olevat.

[ohkurin_narsi]

[tweet]1423796796854206464[/tweet]

Tässä on sinällään vinha perä - mutta minä väitän että semmoista ei ole olemassa kuin vasemmistoliberaali.

Vasemmistolaisuus on AINA totalitaristinen aate, joka pyrkii puolue-eliitin valtaan ja kontrolliin.

Liberalismi sen sijaan alkuperäisessä muodossaan pyrkii yksilön valtaan omista asioistaan. Tätä ei aja tällä hetkellä yksikään merkittävä puolue.

[zupi]

[tweet]1428083882490875906[/tweet]

[tweet]1425485418187816961[/tweet]

[tweet]1427860997914513409[/tweet]

[tweet]1427670044826378246[/tweet]

[tweet]1428033173376540676[/tweet]

[ohkurin_narsi]

Juuri niin. Woke on setti mikä sanoo itseään liberaaliksi mutta on totalitaristinen hirviöaate.

Tulee mieleen se juttu missä ne vaatii vapaaehtoisia valkkareita ihmiskilviksi.

Wokea vastaan pitää taistella, sen kaikissa olomuodoissa. Se on vissiin Homma itsessään.

[Jorma Teräsrautela]

Sen verran tuohon mun kirjasuositteluun lisään, että kirja on näemmä nyt Pirkanmaallekin hankinnassa, löytyy tunnuksilla kun hakee PIKI-puolelta (ei näemmä ilman tunnuksia) ja sitä voi jo varata. Suosittelen lämpimästi lukemaan kyseisen teoksen, sisältää hyvin paljon lainauksia ja lähdeviitteitä. Lainauksia lukiessa voi vain pyöritellä silmiään, että miten kummallisia (ja jopa vaarallisia) ajatusmalleja tuolla kuplassa on.
- - -
Suosittelen ehdottomasti hankkimaan kyseisen opuksen luettavakseen. Helmet alueella tosiaan on kirjastossa ja näemmä tulossa nyt myös Pirkanmaalle. Jos noilla alueilla ei asu ja kirjastosta ei opusta löydä voi aina toki laittaa menemään hankintaehdotusta, joka sitten johtaa johonkin tai ei johda mihinkään. Turussa ainakin taitaa moinen opus lentää suoraan uuniin poltettavaksi, ainakin muistelen että siellä taisi olla tämä epämiellyttävien kirjojen tuhoamisella kehuskellut kirjastotäti.

Suositus koskee siis kirjaa Pluckrose & Lindsay: Cynical Theories. Siitä on myös pitkä referaatti Wikipediassa.

[Lalli IsoTalo]

[tweet]1423796796854206464

Tässä on sinällään vinha perä - mutta minä väitän että semmoista ei ole olemassa kuin vasemmistoliberaali.

Vasemmistolaisuus on AINA totalitaristinen aate, joka pyrkii puolue-eliitin valtaan ja kontrolliin.

Liberalismi sen sijaan alkuperäisessä muodossaan pyrkii yksilön valtaan omista asioistaan. Tätä ei aja tällä hetkellä yksikään merkittävä puolue.

Melko paljon samaa mieltä.

^^^

Alkuperäisessä twitter ketjussa esitetään, että myös oikea on liukunut oikealla. Kuvat liitteenä.

[zupi]

Kirjoitus siitä, miten wokeismi tiputtaa USAn tieteellisen kehityksen kärkipaikalta, Kiinan noustessa tilalle. Millään muulla kun ei ole mitään väliä, kuin lopputulosten tasa-arvolla. Hassu juttu, kun ottaa huomioon sen rahamäärän, minkä Kiina tunkee amerikkalaisiin yliopistoihin (ja pystyy sitä kautta vaikuttamaan niiden toimintaan).

https://quillette.com/2021/08/19/as-us-schools-prioritize-diversity-over-merit-china-is-becoming-the-worlds-stem-leader/

As US Schools Prioritize Diversity Over Merit, China Is Becoming the World's STEM Leader
19 Aug 2021

All three of us are mathematicians who came to the United States as young immigrants, having been attracted by the unmatched quality and openness of American universities. We came, as many others before and after, with nothing more than a good education and a strong desire to succeed. As David Hilbert famously said, "Mathematics knows no races or geographic boundaries; for mathematics, the cultural world is one country." Having built our careers in US academia, we are proud to call ourselves American mathematicians.

The United States has been dominant in the mathematical sciences since the mass exodus of European scientists in the 1930s. Because mathematics is the basis of science—as well as virtually all major technological advances, including scientific computing, climate modelling, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and robotics—US leadership in math has supplied our country with an enormous strategic advantage. But for various reasons, three of which we set out below, the United States is now at risk of losing that dominant position.

First, and most obvious, is the deplorable state of our K-12 math education system. Far too few American public-school children are prepared for careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). This leaves us increasingly dependent on a constant inflow of foreign talent (...)

The second reason for concern is that the nationwide effort to reduce racial disparities, however well-intentioned, has had the unfortunate effect of weakening the connection between merit and scholastic admission. It also has served (sometimes indirectly) to discriminate against certain groups—mainly Asian Americans. (...)

Third, other countries are now competing aggressively with the United States to recruit top talent, using the same policies that worked well for us in the past. Most notably, China, America's main economic and strategic competitor, is in the midst of an extraordinary, mostly successful, effort to improve its universities and research institutions. As a result, it is now able to retain some of the best Chinese scientists and engineers, as well as attract elite recruits from the United States, Europe, and beyond.

(...)

There are numerous underlying factors that help explain these failures—including some that, as mathematicians, we feel competent to address. One obvious problem lies in the way teachers are trained. The vast majority of K-12 math teachers in the United States are graduates of programs that teach little in the way of substantive mathematics beyond so-called math methods courses (which focus on such topics as "understanding the complexities of diverse, multiple-ability classrooms"). This has been true for some time. But the trend has become more noticeable in recent years, as curricula increasingly shift from actual mathematics knowledge to courses about social justice and identity politics.

(...)

An even bigger problem, in our view, is that the educational establishment has an almost complete lock on the content taught in our schools, with little input from the university math community. This unusual feature of American policymaking has led to a constant stream of ill-advised and dumbed-down "reforms," which have served to degrade the teaching of mathematics to such an extent that it has become difficult to distinguish a student who is capable from one who is not.

Those who find that last assertion difficult to accept should peruse the revised Mathematics Framework proposed by California's Department of Education. If implemented, the California framework would do away with any tracking or differentiation of students up to the 11th grade. In order to achieve what the authors call "equity" in math education, the framework would effectively close the main pathway to calculus in high school to all students except those who take extra math outside school—which, in practice, means students from families that can afford enrichment programs (or those going to charter and private schools). California is just one state, of course. But as has been widely noted, when it comes to policymaking, what happens in California today often will come to other states tomorrow.

(...)

The authors write that "a fundamental aim of this framework is to respond to issues of inequity in mathematics learning"; that "we reject ideas of natural gifts and talents [and the] cult of the genius"; and that "active efforts in mathematics teaching are required in order to counter the cultural forces that have led to and continue to perpetuate current inequities." And yet the research they cite to justify these claims has been demonstrated to be shallow, misleadingly applied, vigorously disputed, or just plainly wrong. Even the specific model lessons offered in the proposed framework fail to withstand basic mathematical scrutiny, as they muddle basic logic, present problems that can't be solved by techniques described as being available to students, or list solutions without discussing the need for a proof (thus developing a false understanding of what it means to "solve" a problem—a misconception that university educators such as ourselves must struggle to undo).

(...)

But what started as a well-meaning and sometimes beneficial effort has, over time, transformed into a bureaucratic machine whose goal has gone well beyond fighting discrimination. The new goal is to eliminate disparities in representation by any means possible. This is why education officials in some school boards and cities—and even entire states, such as California and Virginia—are moving to scrap academic tracking and various K-12 gifted programs, which they deem "inequitable." Operating on the same motivations, many universities are abandoning the use of standardized tests such as the SAT and GRE in admissions.

This trend, which reaches across many fields, is especially self-defeating in mathematics, because declining standards in K-12 math education are now feeding into a vicious cycle that threatens to affect all STEM disciplines. As already noted, low-quality K-12 public-school education produces students who exhibit sub-par math skills, with underprivileged minorities suffering the most. This in turn leads to large disparities in admissions at universities, graduate programs, faculty, and STEM industry positions. Those disparities are then, in turn, condemned as manifestations of systemic racism—which results in administrative measures aimed at lowering evaluation criteria. This lowering of standards leads to even worse outcomes and larger disparities, thus pushing the vicious cycle through another loop.

(...)

Unfortunately, the trend is pointing in the opposite direction. In fact, at many of our leading academic and research institutions, including the National Academies of Sciences, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health, scientific excellence is being supplanted by diversity as the determining factor for eligibility in regard to prizes and other distinctions. And some universities, following the example of the University of California, are now implementing measures to evaluate candidates for faculty positions and promotions based not only on the quality of their research, teaching, and service, but also on their specifically articulated commitment to diversity metrics. Various institutions have even introduced pathways to tenure based on diversity activities alone. The potential damage such measures can bring to academic standards in STEM is immense. And the history of science is full of examples that show how performative adherence to a politically favored ideology, easily faked by opportunistic and mediocre scientists, can lead to the devaluation of entire academic fields.

Needless to say, China pursues none of the equity programs that are sweeping the United States. Quite the contrary: It is building on the kind of accelerated, explicitly merit-based programs, centered on gifted students, that are being repudiated by American educators. Having learned its lesson from the Cultural Revolution, when science and merit-based education were all but obliterated in favor of ideological indoctrination, China is pursuing a far-sighted, long-term strategy to create a world-leading corps of elite STEM experts. In some strategically important fields, such as quantum computing, the country is arguably already ahead of the United States.

As part of this effort, China is identifying and nurturing talented math students as early as middle school. At the university entrance level, China relies on a hierarchical, layered system based on a highly competitive, fairly administered, national exam. STEM disciplines are encouraged: According to the World Economic Forum, China has the highest number of STEM grads in the world—at least 4.7 million in 2016. (By comparison, the United States came in third at 569,000. And as noted previously, a large portion of these graduates are foreign nationals.) China also has vastly increased the quality of its top universities, with six now ranked among the best 100 in the world. Tsinghua and Peking (ranked 17th and 18th respectively) now narrowly outrank Columbia, Princeton, and Cornell. As visitors to these Chinese universities (including ourselves) can attest, the average math undergraduate is now performing at a much higher level than his or her counterpart at comparable US institutions.

(...)

Percy Deift, Svetlana Jitomirskaya, and Sergiu Klainerman are professors of mathematics at, respectively, New York University, Georgia Institute of Technology and University of California Irvine, and Princeton University.

Edit. Ei ehkä tarvi hirveästi ihmetellä Suomenkaan laskevia PISA-pisteitä...

[zupi]

Vivek Ramaswamy kirjoittelee vielä pahemmista tuhoista, mitä wokeismistä seuraa. En laittanut Afganistan ketjuun, kun tässä on aika paljon ketjuun kuulumatontakin.

https://nypost.com/2021/08/17/afghanistan-was-a-ghastly-display-of-how-wokeness-weakens-america/

Afghanistan was a ghastly display of how wokeness weakens America
By Vivek Ramaswamy   
August 17, 2021 7:00pm Updated

Twenty years ago, the military-industrial complex rushed the United States into a pair of wars that cost billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives — only to end in the abject humiliation of American power in Kabul over the past few days. Meanwhile, defense contractors, who had no financial incentive to properly train an Afghan military to operate independently of them, made out handsomely along the way.

Today, a new alliance of big government and big business seeks to profiteer from the domestic culture war. I call it the woke-industrial complex. The consequences could be even more devastating this time around, for democracy at home and for the moral standing of the United States on the global stage.

As I detail in my new book, "Woke, Inc.," the woke-industrial complex concentrates into the hands of a small group of investors and CEOs the power to determine our social and moral values on a vast range of issues, from climate change to race. (ja maahanmuutto...)

Companies like Blackrock, Goldman Sachs and Twitter leverage their market power to wield undue influence in the marketplace of ideas (...)

Fragility at home begets fragility abroad. The geopolitical consequences of woke-ism were painfully on display during our ignominious departure from Afghanistan. Pundits who criticized President Biden's flawed execution missed the more important point: The only way to have ensured an orderly exit from Afghanistan was to impress the fear of total decimation upon the Taliban in response to malign behavior.

Yet Biden made no such threat, and even if he had, the Taliban would have known that he wouldn't have followed through on it. When the commander-in-chief of the United States obsessively criticizes our country — including by claiming, as Biden did, that "systemic racism" stains our national "soul" — Washington loses its moral standing to project strength abroad precisely at the moments we need it most.

The Taliban exploited this grim reality to the fullest extent.

(...) If America's president doesn't believe in American exceptionalism, no one else will, either.

Another factor compounded our compromised geopolitical position: America's top companies have turned their backs on America.

(...)

These corporate actions further contribute to a growing morally relativistic perception of America on the global stage: If the same companies that criticize the United States for injustice say nothing bad about the Taliban or the Beijing regime, that implicitly bolsters the moral standing of the latter at the expense of the former.

So when China invades Taiwan in the years ahead, we can reasonably expect that these same companies will remain silent or even praise Beijing, just as Twitter implicitly aided the Taliban this week at the expense of US interests. China expects it, too. That's what modern progressives miss: Once corporations become vectors to advance progressive agendas, they become vehicles to advance any agenda.

We are only beginning to understand the dangers of the woke agenda and its marriage to American capitalism. The consequences could be existential for American democracy at home and American exceptionalism abroad. The first step in addressing the problem is to expose it and speak out against it.

Tuosta Woke, Inc. kirjasta lyhyt lainaus Amazonin sivulta:

There's a new invisible force at work in our economic and cultural lives. It affects every advertisement we see and every product we buy, from our morning coffee to a new pair of shoes.  "Stakeholder capitalism" makes rosy promises of a better, more diverse, environmentally-friendly world, but in reality this ideology championed by America's business and political leaders robs us of our money, our voice, and our identity.

Vivek Ramaswamy is a traitor to his class. He's founded multibillion-dollar enterprises, led a biotech company as CEO, he became a hedge fund partner in his 20s, trained as a scientist at Harvard and a lawyer at Yale, and grew up the child of immigrants in a small town in Ohio. Now he takes us behind the scenes into corporate boardrooms and five-star conferences, into Ivy League classrooms and secretive nonprofits, to reveal the defining scam of our century.

The modern woke-industrial complex divides us as a people. By mixing morality with consumerism, America's elites prey on our innermost insecurities about who we really are. They sell us cheap social causes and skin-deep identities to satisfy our hunger for a cause and our search for meaning, at a moment when we as Americans lack both.

"Vivek Ramaswamy provides the single most informative and insightful analysis yet of woke ideology...Woke, Inc. is indispensable for understanding how America's newest and most consequential cultural dogma is fundamentally transforming virtually every sector of our lives."―Glenn Greenwald, journalist, constitutional lawyer, and author of four New York Times bestselling books

https://www.amazon.com/Woke-Inc-Corporate-Americas-Justice/dp/1546090789/

Heitetään vielä tämä mukaan:

[tweet]1431644830518714371[/tweet]

Miten muuten woksterit voi vaatia, että länsimaiden pitäisi jollain tavalla aseellisesti estää talipallojen toimia? Tottahan toki jokainen suloinen, vuosikausia sorrettu talipallokin on sata kertaa korkeammalla intersektionaalisessa uhrihierarkiassa kuin esim. rasisti-sovinisti-islamofobisti-sortaja-suomiVHM. Ei meillä ole mitään oikeutta puuttua heidän tekemisiinsä, korkeintaan mennä sinne polvistumaan heidän eteensä, nyrkki pystyssä. Ehkä Afganistaniin pitäisikin lähettää neekereitä Afrikasta, jos jotain toimia tarvitaan? Heillä on varmasti tarvittava määrä uhripisteitä, jotta voivat sekaantua asiaan.

[Siili]

Amerikkalainen (ainakin ennen) arvostettu yleistajuinen tiedelehti Scientific American julkaisi artikkelin, jossa arvostellaan matematiikan valkoisuutta ja patriarkaalisuutta:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/modern-mathematics-confronts-its-white-patriarchal-past/

Modern Mathematics Confronts Its White, Patriarchal Past

Mathematicians want to think their field is a meritocracy, but bias, harassment and exclusion persist

Juttu vaikuttaa sen verran tendenssimäiseltä, etten jaksa ruveta sitä analysoimaan kohta kohdalta, joten tuon vain linkin tänne tiedoksi mahdollisesti kiinnostuneille.

Wokeiluun yleisesti skeptisesti suhtautuvalla Jerry Coynella on oma näkemyksensä artikkelista:

https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/08/29/scientific-american-and-math-go-full-woke/

Hän viittaa kommentissaan myös toiseen mielenkiintoiseen ilmiöön:  amerikkalainen matemaatikkojen yhdistys American Mathematical Society (AMS) kouluttaa vapaaehtoisia kokouksiinsa, joiden tehtävä on minimoida mielen pahoittamiset:

The AMS is proud to participate in MathSafe, a program by and for the mathematical community to support a safe and welcoming environment at meetings. MathSafe volunteers are trained to help anyone at meetings who experiences harassment, discrimination, or other inappropriate behavior.

How the AMS uses MathSafe

The AMS requires all staff members working at our meetings and conferences to receive MathSafe training. We also welcome trained MathSafe volunteers from the community at any of our meetings and will provide them with identifying badges and AMS contacts when they're on site.

MathSafe volunteers:

- serve as point persons to connect people with help if they experience harassment or other improper behavior during a meeting

- serve as calm interveners if witnessing escalated behavior of attendees

- wear buttons to identify themselves throughout meetings - their collective presence will help remind us all to be welcoming and civil

http://www.ams.org/mathsafe/ams-mathsafe

Ehkäpä tulevaisuudessa tietellisten kokousten järjestäjät velvoitetaan nimeämään tietty määrä tällaisia mentaalisia turvahenkilöitä, aivan kuten nykyään yleisötilaisuuksissa pitää olla tietty määrä järjestysmiehiähenkilöitä.

[zupi]

Amerikkalainen (ainakin ennen) arvostettu yleistajuinen tiedelehti Scientific American julkaisi artikkelin, jossa arvostellaan matematiikan valkoisuutta ja patriarkaalisuutta:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/modern-mathematics-confronts-its-white-patriarchal-past/

Modern Mathematics Confronts Its White, Patriarchal Past

Mathematicians want to think their field is a meritocracy, but bias, harassment and exclusion persist

(...)

Racism, sexism and other forms of systematic oppression are not unique to mathematics, and they certainly are not new, yet many in the field still deny their existence. "One of the biggest challenges is how hard it can be to start a conversation" about the problem, Sawyer says, "because mathematicians are so convinced that math is the purest of all of the sciences." Yet statistics on the mathematics profession are difficult to ignore. In 2019 a New York Times profile of Edray Herber Goins, a Black mathematics professor at Pomona College, reported that "fewer than 1 percent of doctorates in math are awarded to African-Americans." A 2020 NSF survey revealed that out of a total of 2,012 doctorates awarded in mathematics and statistics in the U.S. in 2019, only 585 (29.1 percent) were awarded to women. That percentage is slightly lower than in 2010, when 29.4 percent of doctorates in those areas (467 out of 1,590) were awarded to women. (Because these numbers are grouped based on sex rather than gender, that survey did not report how many of those individuals identify as a gender other than male or female.)

Siinähän se taas tuli, täydellisen varmat todisteet rasismista ja sovinismista... Jostain kumman syystä unohtivat mainita aasialaisten osuuden.

"Because these numbers are grouped based on sex rather than gender, that survey did not report how many of those individuals identify as a gender other than male or female."

Priceless...

Heitetään tällainen mukaan:

[tweet]1432146555402735617[/tweet]

[zupi]

(...)

She said: 'It is always acceptable in our woke culture of 2021 to mercilessly attack black conservatives.

'They have 'betrayed' their leftist masters by daring to think for themselves, when they should be grateful.

'THAT is institutionalised/cultural racism. And it is everywhere.'
(...)

[tweet]1428755809580638209[/tweet]

Jutun kirjoittaja on tosin itsekin musta, mutta lieneekö tuolla hirveästi merkitystä. Kuinkakohan moni suomalainen muuten tuntee Larry Elderin nimen? Siis henkilön, josta voi tulla ensimmäinen musta Kalifornian kuvernööri (Kalifornia on kuitenkin aika iso peluri jopa globaalisti). Ja kuinkakohan moni suomalainen tuntisi tuon nimen, jos Elder olisi demokraatti, joka on mahdollisesti suistamassa valkoisen elitistisen republikaanin pois kuvernöörin pallilta... Isä merijalkaväen kersantti toisessa maailmansodassa, talonmies, myöhemmin kahvilanpitäjä.

Edit. Elder on itse asiassa tullut vastaan aiemminkin.

https://www.creators.com/read/larry-elder/08/17/the-shameful-blackout-of-thomas-sowell-and-williams
https://hommaforum.org/index.php/topic,130391.msg3209787.html#msg3209787

Viime vuoden haastattelu:

Larry Elder & Thomas Sowell FULL Interview on School Choice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ij7JAp6qnA4

[zupi]

^ Asiaan liittyen erään mustan konservatiivin kirjoitus.

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/squires-heres-a-reminder-that-the-left-not-larry-elder-is-doing-the-bidding-of-white-supremacists

Squires: Here's a reminder that the left, not Larry Elder, is doing the bidding of white supremacists
Delano Squires
August 24, 2021

The L.A. Times article claiming Larry Elder is the "black face of white supremacy" is just the latest example of how the left tries to weaponize race to keep black conservatives in line.  (...)

The party that promotes itself as champions of inclusion, diversity, and tolerance has no problem spewing racial invective as long as black conservatives are the target. There have been multiple instances over the last year alone when the left's racism has been on public display. Women's March co-founder Tamika Mallory compared Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron to "sellout negroes" who sold their own people into slavery. She said this because Cameron declined to bring charges against the officers who shot and killed Breonna Taylor. Megachurch preacher Jamal Bryant invoked the legacy of Harriet Tubman when he called black Trump supporters at the Republican National Convention "slaves" who could be freed if they realized they were in bondage. One self-described radical feminist college professor claimed black men voted for Trump to replicate the patriarchy and status white men enjoy. And a failed Florida congressional candidate said "20% of black men voted for Trump because they hate black women."

It's not just black liberals who engage in this behavior. One white congressional candidate in California responded to a Candace Owens tweet about crime data with a picture of a Klan hood under the words "you may've dropped this." One white liberal journalist in the late 1980s likened Clarence Thomas, the left's most reviled black conservative, to "those chicken-eating preachers who gladly parroted the segregationists' line in exchange for a few crumbs from the white man's table."

All these examples prove one thing: Those on the left have no problem with racist verbal attacks. They just want to be the ones making them. The irony is that Larry Elder released a documentary last year entitled "Uncle Tom" that questioned the treatment of black conservatives by the liberal political establishment. The film noted that ad hominem racial attacks are a deterrent to other blacks who may be tempted to share nonconforming views publicly and demonstrated how accusing black conservatives of being self-hating sellouts keeps Democrats from having to defend their actual positions.

It's a lot easier to call a black conservative names than explain why Democrats oppose school choice — whether charter schools or voucher programs — even though they are extremely popular among black voters.

Accusing Larry Elder of being a tool of racist white Republicans for opposing efforts to defund the police is an easy way to dodge the fact that homicide is the leading cause of death for black males ages 15-24, something Black Lives Matter ignores unless the perpetrator is wearing a badge.

Claiming that black conservatives want to bring back Jim Crow also allows the left to stay silent on how its welfare policies and cultural norms have weakened the black family since the 1960s. (...)

Toinen kirjoitus samalta äijältä.

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/squires-white-guilt-more-destructive-than-white-rage-robin-diangelos-new-book-unwittingly-makes-a-persuasive-case

Squires: White guilt more destructive than white rage? Robin DiAngelo's new book unwittingly makes a persuasive case
Delano Squires
August 31, 2021

I recently found myself doing something I never thought possible: agreeing with something Robin DiAngelo has to say about race. Don't get me wrong: I reject the way she radicalizes common human behavior and think her brand of racial group guilt is toxic. Thankfully, her broken-clock moment — right twice a day — is right there on the cover of her new book, "Nice Racism." Its subtitle reads, "How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm."

On this one point, DiAngelo is absolutely correct, but for very different reasons from those she argues. Her definition of "harm" includes white people who smile too much at black people or claim to have black friends. I believe the feelings of guilt white liberals like DiAngelo carry because of America's complicated racial history motivates them to craft policy (e.g. 1960s welfare reform) and advance cultural norms (e.g. dismissing the importance of the nuclear family to social outcomes) that are far more destructive to the country in 2021 than the left's shape-shifting white supremacy boogeyman.

(...)

"White rage" is a currency in decline. White guilt is where every major institution in this country has had its cultural capital invested since the 1960s. That means it can do a lot more damage before it hits a wall of resistance. No sector of American life demonstrates this more clearly than K-12 schools. Traditional public, charter, and private schools are being bombarded on every side, from administration to instruction, with demands to capitulate to Ibram Kendi-syle anti-racism and his hazy notions of equity.

That has resulted in the governor of Oregon eliminating reading and math proficiency graduation standards in order to aid Oregon's "Black, Latino, Latinx, Indigenous, Asian, Pacific Islander, Tribal, and students of color." She is not the only one. Schools and districts across the country have changed admission criteria into elite schools solely for the purpose of achieving a particular racial makeup. Funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was used to create a curriculum that claimed making students show their work in math class is a function of white supremacy.

If white guilt in the classroom threatens American minds, its counterpart on the streets threatens American lives. Dozens of mayors, governors, and district attorneys ignored riots, looting, statues being torn down, and crime spikes in cities across the country in the name of racial justice last year. They think that the primary role black people play in the criminal justice system is as victims of systemic racism, so they undermine their local law enforcement leaders and police officers.

When the police inevitably change their behavior to adjust to social and political pressure, crime goes up. The cruel irony is that it always goes up in the very neighborhoods guilty white liberals claim they want to help, not the wealthy ones where decision-makers actually live. The truth is people like Mayor Bill de Blasio would never respond to nightly shootings and robberies in Robert De Niro's neighborhood the way he does in low-income communities in Brooklyn.

One of the worst aspects of white guilt is the effect it has on many black people, some of whom speak about their life in America today as if melanated skin is a congenital defect. Sometimes I wonder how the benefactors of the emancipation, Reconstruction, and civil rights generations came to gain so much with respect to rights and resources yet lose so much of our self-respect. How did a generation of black leaders come to see "dismantling white supremacy" as a more urgent need than rebuilding the black family? How did black civil rights lawyers go from fighting against school segregation in 1951 to celebrating the elimination of "master bedroom" from real estate listings in 2021? What would make the NAACP think that getting white Hollywood celebrities to take responsibility for racism is a more pressing cultural concern than getting black hip-hop artists to take responsibility for lyrics that promote death and destruction?

The answer is simple. The past 60 years have seen the guilt of white liberals transform both public policy and American cultural norms. One by-product of these changes is the symbiotic relationship that has developed between white liberals seeking forgiveness and absolution for offenses they didn't personally commit and black liberals seeking empathy and affirmation for injustices they didn't personally suffer.

Our entire country's ruling class is caught between a black rock and a white hard place. On one hand we have Ibram Kendi claiming that racist policy is the sole cause of disparities in outcomes between different ethnic groups. On the other is Robin DiAngelo claiming that America would be a much better place if white people stopped denying their racist ideas and beliefs. Both create work that can tear down and divide but never build up and unify.

(...)

[tweet]1430554559550787585[/tweet]

[tweet]1425840315831922695[/tweet]

[zupi]

Aika samoilla linjoilla mennään, mitä Sowell on paukuttanut parikymmentä vuotta, mutta ihan hyvä kirjoitus kuitenkin.

[tweet]1432060062764261379[/tweet]

Historical Racism Is Not the Singular Cause of Racial Disparity
Samuel Kronen
17 Jul 2021

Even before the crescendo of Black Lives Matter last summer, the operative view among progressives was that historical racism is the overriding cause of racial disparities between black and white Americans today. The progressive ethos on race is neatly conveyed by the novelist William Faulkner's remark: "The past is never dead. It's not even past." If the wide socio-economic gaps between whites and blacks in terms of income, wealth, health, incarceration, and education outcomes speak to the enduring legacy of slavery and segregation, large-scale efforts to improve the conditions of the country without regard for race seem insufficient to many. First, Americans must come to terms with the moral and political implications of living in a country that oppressed an entire class of citizens for hundreds of years on the arbitrary basis of ancestry, while flaunting democratic ideals of freedom and equality it was failing to uphold. Those who respond by pointing to the decline of anti-black racism since the civil rights movement or the subsequent success of other minority groups in the country are open to the charge of historical denialism or worse, and then swiftly consigned to the wrong side of history.

(...)

But, while this account is not inaccurate or without import, it has been profoundly influenced by the deep impulse in American culture to make moral meaning out of historical racism—determining which facts merit selection and which ones don't. The effect is to render a moral analysis of history as though it were a causal analysis of the present. But morality is not causation. Though often equated in prevailing race discourse, the moral gravity of historical racism and the cause of present racial disparities are not the same thing. More crucially, the belief that historical racism is the sole cause of current outcomes compels a backward-looking stance more concerned with reversing past injustices than with addressing the problems of the present. Meanwhile, crucial facts are left out of the narrative that would otherwise throw its underlying vision into doubt.

(...)

But other data point in a different direction. In their magnum opus, America in Black and White: One Nation, Indivisible, Abigail and Stephan Thermstrom show that, between 1940 and 1960, the percentage of black families with income below the poverty level was almost cut in half, from 87 percent to 47 percent. In key skilled trades, the income of blacks relative to whites more than doubled between 1936 and 1959,1 while black income rose absolutely and relative to white income across the board from 1939 to 1960.2 The rise of blacks into professional and other high-level occupations was greater during the years preceding the civil rights movement than in the years afterwards,3 and blacks began closing the gap between themselves and whites in years of schooling over the same period.4

While some of this can be attributed to broader structural forces in the economy, it's significant that blacks were moving ahead along vital socio-economic metrics over a period that supposedly set them back. Coates, meanwhile, writes that discriminatory laws "reached their apex in the mid-20th century when the federal government—through housing policies—engineered the wealth gap." But this doesn't gel with the black economic and social progress during the post-war years. Significantly, the fact that black Americans were making progress over a period of rampant overt racism contradicts the assumption that racial disparity reflects the scale of bias in society.

(...)

But doesn't the fact that blacks were economically disadvantaged when the maps were drawn speak to the broader scope of racism in our history? Yes and no. Again, drawing causal conclusions from a moral interpretation of history invariably drowns out other relevant facts. Beginning in 1916, when 90 percent of black Americans lived in the south, six million southern blacks migrated to northern cities. They brought a very different way of life suited to an agricultural environment and unacquainted with big city norms. Before then, racial barriers in northern cities were beginning to dissipate, with the descendants of free blacks in the north often living side by side with whites and attending integrated schools. For instance, as early as 1860, no neighborhood in Detroit was even 50 percent black. In Michigan, blacks were being elected to public office as early as the 1890s by a predominantly white electorate.6 In 1899, W.E.B. Du Bois commented on the "growing liberal spirit toward the Negro in Philedelphia" in which "the community was disposed ... to soften the harshness of race prejudice."

This growing liberal spirit began to wane, however, when millions of black southerners arrived, leading white majorities in those cities to erect racial barriers against blacks in general. This development reflected a common historical pattern, in which ethnically similar groups with different cultures are punished for the mass influx of the less developed group, such as the retrogression in American attitudes toward Jews when millions of eastern European Jews immigrated to the US after German Jews had already been living there for generations. In fact, the term "kike" was invented by German Jews as an epithet against their Eastern European counterparts, and major efforts were made to acculturate the incomers in order to prevent the arousal of anti-Jewish sentiment.7 Du Bois expressed a similar sentiment regarding blacks:

    Yet it has everywhere been manifest in the long run that while a part of the negroes were native-born and trained in the culture of the city, the others were immigrants largely ignorant and unused to city life. ... Thus the history of the negro in Northern cities is the history of the rise of a small group by accretion from without, but at the same time periodically overwhelmed by them and compelled to start over again when once the material has been assimilated.

It would be a huge coincidence if the deterioration in race relations in the 20th century and the hardening of racial restrictions occurred at the exact moment that millions of southern blacks came north. What's more, many of these developments correlated with different periods of migration, such as the later migrations and retrogressions in San Francisco, Berkeley, and Oakland.

None of which is to excuse the racist attitudes of northern whites, nor to erase the hopes and struggles of those fleeing the south. But it wasn't blacks alone who were discriminated against. The first racially targeted zoning laws go back to the 19th century against the Chinese, and restrictive deed covenants of the 20th century often excluded Irish, Japanese, and other recent immigrants—only specifically excluding those outside the "Caucausian race." In his essay "Black Rednecks and White Liberals," Thomas Sowell notes that a 1951 survey conducted in Detroit found that white southerners living in the city were considered "undesirable" by 21 percent of those surveyed, compared to 13 percent who ranked blacks the same way. (https://hommaforum.org/index.php/topic,130391.msg3209787.html#msg3209787) When poor whites from the south moved north for work, "occasionally a white southerner would find that a flat or a furnished room had 'just been rented' when the landlord heard his southern accent." In short, blacks weren't the only group subjected to residential segregation, but their visible racial identity made them an easier target. The history of blacks in the north provides a vital lesson for race relations today: Racial differences can be more or less meaningful under different cultural conditions.

*     *     *

More illustrative of the prevailing view of racial history and its blindspots than what it highlights, however, is what it omits. For instance, one would never guess, upon hearing this account, that the legislative victories of the civil rights movement were followed by a massive wave of reparational, race-conscious policies introduced as part of President Johnson's War on Poverty and Great Society initiatives. ("I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years") These spent an estimated 20 trillion dollars on programs geared to ameliorate "poverty and racial injustice." A few examples include the Food Stamp Act of 1964, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, the Social Security Amendments of 1965, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, the Social Security Amendments of 1962, and the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964.

The War on Poverty was based on the notion that black poverty was unique because of historical racism, just as activists claim today. But the desired results were not forthcoming. Violence, single households, joblessness, welfare dependency, teen pregnancy, drug addiction, and all of the ills we associate with the urban ghettos today were accelerated in the late 60s, whether or not those policies were a cause of the decline or just an ineffective remedy. So, much of what is called for by modern anti-racist activists has already been tried and failed. And yet it is critics of such policies that are accused of not knowing their history.

The failure to grapple with countervailing facts has implications in our own time. Urban renewal policies were among the most damaging to black communities—leveling working class neighborhoods and concentrating the poorest section of the black population into dystopian high rises with incentives that dissuaded upward mobility on penalty of eviction. But even these policies were informed by public housing schemes designed by a progressive activist named Catherine Bauer (referred to affectionately by a friend as "Communist Catherine") under anti-poverty, anti-racist principles that sought to abolish private ownership and establish a workers' paradise. These were rolled out under the civil rights-friendly President Truman. The aftermath was disturbingly documented in this multi-part 1982 PBS documentary on Chicago's Robert Taylor Homes project (the first video is mislabeled "Cabrini Green Public Housing Projects" for some reason, another project closer to the heart of the city). Some of the most destructive racial policies were framed in progressive terms, and can't be attributed to racism.

Why don't we hear about this? Much of what doesn't make sense about how we discuss race in America is a holdover from the 1960s, when the country finally accepted responsibility for its brutal history. It's understandable that America's acknowledgment of its own participation in evil would leave a moral stain on the national culture, but the stigma of collective racial guilt has taken on a life of its own. For reasons that are perfectly understandable in the context of history, much of our racial discourse is animated by the deep desire among many whites to avoid being seen as racist against blacks and the deep desire of many blacks to avoid being seen as less than whites. Using racism as an all-purpose explanation for disparity satisfies both sensibilities.

But it comes at a cost. The implicit assumption behind the idea that racism lies behind every disparity is that, if it turns out white racism weren't the culprit, then blacks themselves must be at fault. In this false dichotomy, either white people or black people are to blame for racial disparities, as though relative statistical disparities between groups demand moral explanation. But this is backwards. Disparities exist everywhere that different groups exist, regardless of institutional bias. To take one example among thousands, Americans of Indian descent have an income of over five times that of Americans of Iraqi descent, despite belonging to the same race. But, above all, disparity discourse gives the false impression that the success of one group is contingent on the failure of another. The complex tangle of historical, demographic, socio-economic, geographic, and cultural forces behind white-black disparities can't be captured by a moral melodrama of collective guilt and victimization.

*     *     *

Even if disparities between white and black Americans were a consequence of historical racism, contrary to everything I've written so far, it still wouldn't mean that race-conscious anti-racism is the appropriate response. Consider the racial wealth gap. According to an analysis by the Brookings Institute, the net worth of a typical white American family ($171,000) is nearly 10 times greater than that of the typical black American family ($17,150), as of 2016. "Perhaps no statistic better illustrates the enduring legacy of our country's shameful history of treating black people as sub-citizens, sub-Americans, and sub-humans," Coates laments, "than the wealth gap."

That the racial wealth gap elicits opprobrium is unsurprising. While income is accrued from year to year, wealth—assets and investments minus debt—is accrued from generation to generation, compounds across time, and correlates with virtually every metric of human flourishing: longevity, safety, health, happiness, freedom. It is the essential modern bulwark against unexpected catastrophe—job loss, illness, death of a breadwinner. Worse, the relative wealth gap between whites and blacks has actually increased since the 1960s. "The difference between the lived experience of black Americans and white Americans when it comes to wealth," writes Nikole Hannah-Jones in a long essay for New York Times Magazine, "can be described as nothing other than a chasm."

But the wealth gap perfectly illustrates the problem with using statistical disparities to diagnose and address social issues. An analysis by the left-leaning People's Policy Project reflects just one of the problems with what Coleman Hughes had called the disparity fallacy by uncovering an element of the racial wealth gap that's gone unremarked upon in most mainstream discourse—almost all of it is coming from the top. The gap between the wealthiest 10 percent of the white population and the wealthiest 10 percent of the black population accounts for 77.5 percent of the total wealth gap. And although the racial wealth gap exists to some degree across class lines, if we were to eliminate the disparity between the bottom 50 percent of blacks and whites in terms of wealth, a full 97 percent of the total gap would remain. Only three percent of the racial wealth gap is explained by the disparity between the poorer half of each population, while the vast majority of the gap is explained by the disparity between the top 10 percent of the wealthiest white and black Americans in the population.

Perhaps some of this gap can be attributed to historical or present discrimination, but most Americans are not particularly wealthy. As Adolph Reed Jr. (Toure's father, as it happens) notes in his essay with Walter Benn Michaels entitled "The Trouble with Disparity," if the racial wealth gap were to disappear tomorrow, it would hardly affect the overall wealth gap between the rich and the poor.

(...)

Ultimately, debates about the nature of racial inequality arise from a conflict of visions over the nature of human society and life itself. In a paper for the Manhattan Institute, Brown economist Glenn Loury articulates two different causal narratives around the persistence of racial disparity—a bias narrative and a development narrative. The bias narrative is concerned with discrimination against historically disadvantaged groups within the structures of society, and the development narrative is concerned with the underlying set of skills, habits, interests, and values conducive to success that develop in childhood within the family and community before discrimination has a chance to inhibit opportunity. (...)

There is a rich history of American ethnic groups overcoming discrimination, poverty, and ghettoization to rise to or above the level of the majority, from Italian Americans to Jewish Americans and, increasingly, Asian and Hispanic Americans. Unless we are willing to accept the racist idea that, to paraphrase John McWhorter, black Americans are the only group in human history who can't succeed under anything less than ideal conditions, there is no reason to believe the ultimate story of black Americans will be any different from other successful ethnic groups. Indeed, proponents of the development narrative have a much less fixed vision of race—they assume that blacks can and will join the majority and their unique cultural heritage will increasingly become the cultural legacy of the United States itself, as we've seen with other groups. This is why the development narrative weighs progress in terms of how little meaning we give to race in everyday American life—whether quantified by rates of intermarriage, the temperature of race discourse, or the political diversity within minority groups—rather than in exclusive terms of socio-economic outcomes.

It seems that we've arrived at a crossroads in American race relations. The popular vision of race in America seems to be incapable of breaking the gridlock that places the fate of black Americans in the hands of white society and then condemns that society to the wasteland of history. An alternative vision, while there are some encouraging signs, has yet to materialize. But history is not destiny. Formerly marginal groups are fast joining the ranks of mainstream American culture, regardless of color. While progressives lament the "white adjacency" of Asian and Hispanic Americans, those very groups are rapidly melting into a new majority, while black Americans are urged to retreat into ethnic enclaves and treat the United States as a hostile territory. My fear is that black Americans are going to be once again left behind, not because of racism, but because of the use of race for moral and political power and the attendant cultural need to revive a history that is steadily fading from our world.

https://quillette.com/2021/07/17/historical-racism-is-not-the-singular-cause-of-racial-disparity/

"if the racial wealth gap were to disappear tomorrow, it would hardly affect the overall wealth gap between the rich and the poor"

Jälleen kerran:

[tweet]1351548499091992584[/tweet]

[Siili]

Kanadalainen alkuperäiskansojen asiaa ajava aktivisti tri ManyGuns (tai manyguns) aikoo jatkossa välttää isojen kirjaimien käyttöä.  En täysin ymmärtänyt miksi, mutta ilmeisesti sillä on jotain tekemistä niiden hierarkiaa ylläpitävästä luonteesta.

the goal of equity, diversity and inclusion of all people is synonymous with the interests of Indigenous people. we support and expand the goal of equality and inclusion to all forms of life and all people. we join leaders like e. e. cummings, bell hooks, and peter kulchyski, who reject the symbols of hierarchy wherever they are found and do not use capital letters except to acknowledge the Indigenous struggle for recognition.

Taustaksi yliopiston uutinen hänen virkanimityksestään:

ManyGuns brings to this role extensive knowledge, experience and education. A Blackfoot woman, she was born on the Tsuut'ina Nation and registered at Siksika. She is an elder for the Buffalo Women's Society and part of the Beaver Bundle Society. Traditional knowledge informs her respect for all life and all thoughts.

ManyGuns has a Bachelor of Arts from St. Thomas University, a Master's from Carleton University, a law degree from University of Ottawa and a doctorate from Trent University. Her academic papers and projects are always on Indigenous subjects and informed by traditional knowledge.

https://www.mtroyal.ca/AboutMountRoyal/MediaRoom/News/2021/04/mru-names-linda-manyguns-associate-vice-president-indigenization-decolonization.htm

[zupi]

Mielestäni tämä on aika hyvä esimerkki siitä, millaisiksi pseudotodellisuudessa eläviksi psykopaateiksi wokeismi muuttaa ihmiset. Greenwald oli aiemmin, kun Chelsea ex. Bradley Manning oli oikeasti pulassa, hänen suurin ja lähes ainoa tukijansa. Keräsi rahaa hänelle, lahjoitti itse kypätonnin, vieraili vankilassa, puhui kymmeniä, ellei satoja tunteja hänen kanssaan puhelimessa, kun Manning hautoi vankilassa eristyksessä itsemurha-ajatuksia. Siis silloin kun kaikki muut olivat hylänneet Manningin.  Ja alla on se, miten woke-Manning kiittää kaikesta (sen jälkeen kun ei ole kolmeen vuoteen pitänyt käytännössä mitään yhteyttä Greenwaldiin). Koska Greenwald ei vain suostu lopettamaan "ongelmallista" käyttäytymistään... Siis sitä samaa käyttäytymistä, mitä Greenwald on luultavasti harjoittanut koko aikuisikänsä. Mutta kun ei näille wokstereille merkkaa mikään mitään paitsi se että noudatetaan "aatetta".

Kun ihan oikeasti loppuu sanat kesken, kun yrittää kuvailla näitä tyyppejä, mutta kuten Lindsay on kirjoittanut: Nämä eivät ole normaaleja ihmisiä. Enkä tässä tarkoita Manningin transuilua.  Mutta hei, 35t tykkäystä, moraalisäteilypisteitä ropisee muilta sekopäiltä. Taas vähän aikaa pärjää.

[tweet]1433480072288247809[/tweet]
(ketju)

Chelsea E. Manning@xychelsea

glenn greenwald, i don't have $10,000 right now but if i get it i want to send it back to you from a donation you once did. i can't deal with this anymore. im terrified of you and everything you do. you're greedy, unprincipled, and im embarrassed for ever considering you a friend

Chelsea E. Manning@xychelsea

last night during the floods i decided that im no longer going to be afraid of saying what's on my mind anymore or taking a stand from the people that i once considered allies but who have chosen to bash, harass, humiliate, intimidate, and lie to get ahead

Chelsea E. Manning@xychelsea

to those he has hurt im sorry i didn't say anything I was scared and that's my fault

Unfuckingbelievable.

[tweet]1433495577245929472[/tweet]

[tweet]1433500452545499138[/tweet]

Ja takuuvarma olen muuten siitä, Manning ei ikinä maksa takaisin tuota kypätonnia.

[zupi]

[tweet]1434176360243625988[/tweet]

https://bulletin.nu/social-justice-studies-in-the-university-why-did-they-emerge-despite-being-anti-scientific

Social Justice studies in the university: Why did they emerge despite being anti-scientific?

Critical Race Theory, Fat Studies, and Queer Theory are examples of Social Justice studies that have gained influence in the academical world. Yet, most of it is non-scientific or in some cases anti-scientific, according to scholars Nicolai J Foss and Torsten Skov who in this essay offers a number of hypotheses about this, as they say, puzzling development.
11 jul 2021 16:19

What is often called Social Justice Studies ("SJS") are influential in a number of research fields in social science and the humanities, as well as making their influence felt in STEM fields. However, much of SJS is plainly non-scientific, and in some cases even anti-scientific. So, why have they emerged and become influential?

(...)

However, it is well known that the process doesn't work perfectly and that errors can persist for a long time. Sometimes theories may be rejected that later turn out to be true (e.g., Pasteurization or the notion that stomach ulcers are caused by bacteria), and accepted theories turn out to be false (too many to list!). The last two decades have witnessed one "replication crisis" after the other, as discipline after discipline, including psychology, medicine, and economics failed to replicate a very large percentage of often central and seemingly well-established findings. This is problematic as replication is seen as a cornerstone of science.

(...)

Specifically, we refer to fields such as Gender Studies, Postcolonial Studies, Critical Race Theory, Fat Studies, and Queer Theory. We do not rule out that some activities within these fields could qualify as scientific, but we do claim that these areas are in large part un-scientific or even anti-scientific.

(...)

Much public attention has more recently been dedicated to the "Sokal Squared" affair that was initiated when Peter Boghossian, James A. Lindsay, and Helen Pluckrose in 2017 and 2018 managed to get a number of bogus papers published. These included "Human Reaction to Rape Culture and Queer Performativity at Urban Dog Parks in Portland, Oregon," ostensibly a study of canine rape culture in a Portland dog park!

These incidents are important and have had impact because they show that research that is entirely unfounded is publishable in certain fields.

That the authors-hoaxers managed to do this repeatedly and across different learned journals suggests that we are not talking about the occasional, isolated error. Rather, we are dealing with communities and journals that systematically allow non-science to be published. The question is how this state of affairs is possible. Existing accounts of the intellectual origins of SJS (e.g., Pluckrose and Lindsay' Cynical Theories) fail to explain this.

(...)

The second half of the 20th century witnessed a steady decline of overtly expressed racism and sexism in American society, partly driven by civil rights movements and women's liberation movements. Egalitarian, tolerant and "liberal" beliefs and attitudes were increasingly expressed in value surveys. And yet, statistics about income, health, education etc. for people of color did not show grand improvements, and gender statistics still showed wide disparities.

The fight for social justice looked like it had been won. But, the reality was different if you scratched the surface. In fact, this is exactly how a number of activist scholars themselves see it (e.g., Dasgupta, Dovidio and Gaertner, Swim et al.). Declaring victory in the midst of what seemed to be a failure was not an option. Thus, an explanation for the disconnect between egalitarian attitudes and material inequality had to be found.

(...)

The theory of unconscious biases filled a gap. And perhaps not only a gap in the understanding of equality but also a gap left after the declining belief in the unconscious as understood by psychoanalysis, as well as a religious gap left by the declining influence of the protestant churches in the USA. The unconscious had been vacated by psychoanalysis and the religious had been vacated by the church; thus, both were available for exploitation by an invalid "scientific" theory. A perfect storm.

In parallel with the advent of unconscious explanations for social inequalities, the idea of equality itself also made a transition. The focus on equality of opportunities for all, was gradually replaced by focus on equality of outcome – a logical development in view of formal equality being largely obtained but material equality lacking.

At first, the argument was made that in practical terms inequality of outcome could be taken as a sign of lacking equality of opportunity. For example, Anne Phillips argued that "equality of outcome .... has to be taken as a key measure of equality of opportunity" in her paper in defense of equality of outcome).

(...)

The basic point we want to make with the above remarks is that scientific rationality and integrity was in deficit in the theories about unconscious bias and discrimination pertaining to race and gender that became dominant after year 2000. This paved the way for other SJS that lacked these same properties, in the fields of postcolonial studies, fat studies, queer theory, as well as a wealth of intersectional studies that combine these with feminist theory and antiracism.

(...)

At the same time the increasing politicization of universities in the form of stepping up the engagement with the surrounding society is a factor working towards shielding SJS. Increasingly, universities have adopted Third Missions, that is, "the economic and social mission of the university and its contribution to communities and territories." Many universities have built layers of middle managers who deal with external parties (accreditors, donors, funding bodies), need to be kept busy, often sympathize with SJS ideas, and may have some discretion over decisions.

(...)

These are the departments that are most likely to be homes to scholars who work from a SJS perspective. The result is that such scholars may get access to funding resources, become important to carrying out third mission activities, and may become institutionally entrenched.

(...)

This entails keeping frictions and conflict at a reasonably low level. Accepting low-quality research may, in the eyes of university management, sometimes be an acceptable cost of maintaining the internal truce. This may take the form of accepting that evaluation is carried out in a less effective manner.

(...)

The fact that research contributions such as those in the Sokal Hoax and the Sokal Squared Affair that we mentioned above get published shows that errors happen. Moreover these were not flukes; the scholars who organized the Sokal Squared Hoax were able to repeatedly place non-scientific papers in ostensibly learned journals. This suggests that something is systematically wrong on the evaluation side.

(...)

But because evaluation processes and their organizational and institutional embodiments can lead separate lives, they may also develop differently and have very different standards. We see SJS scholars as clearly forming communities with their own evaluation hierarchies—but, also and very importantly, their own evaluation criteria.

These criteria are different from those of scientific criteria. In particular, the identities, or "positions," of scholars may matter and become an independent criterion for acceptance. Scholars from universities that are associated with, for example, a colonial past or just some "power" position may be disregarded because of their affiliation.

This is extremely problematic because it means that the self-regulatory mechanisms of science—the inbuilt error correction of critique—is basically sabotaged. Non-science may proliferate, seep into the surrounding society, and begin to exert a problematic influence.

The Tyranny of the Intolerant Minority and the Costs of Opposition

Why aren't these developments resisted from within academia?

First, they are an insult to scholars who work hard to produce what they see as valid claims to knowledge.

Second, they fly in the face of the ethos of most practicing scientists who don't endorse an "anything goes"-attitude.

Third, they potentially harm the reputations of universities and scientific fields.

Fourth, taxpayers may well feel that their hard-earned tax money is wasted.

Fifth, the spread of non-scientific ideas in society may cause harm. In other words, many people are negatively affected by the proliferation of SJS. Why don't they band up and put an end to it?

The problem here is one of the cost of collective action and of highly skewed incentives. SJS scholars may be seen as small, well-organized special interest groups. They directly appropriate the benefits of their activities (publications, tenure, influence in the university). So, their costs and benefits are directly linked. This is different in the case of their opponents.

(...)

The costs to individuals of engaging with SJS may be high. This is not just a matter of spending time getting acquainted with SJS. It is also a matter of criticism potentially resulting in deplatforming, organized attacks on social media, complaints to university administrators, and other intimidation tactics.

In turn, the perceived costs to "woke" scholar-activists of engaging in such activities may be low because they feel they are acting in the interest of a noble cause and because their unity of purpose makes organizing to fight critics a low-cost activity. By the same token, because of the diversity of the groups that are harmed by grievance studies it is costly to organize collective action.

All these factors imply that opposition to SJS is likely to be weak and disorganized.

The Way Forward

The endeavor to weed out non-science from the university can easily be framed by its opponents as a political crusade against legitimate political positions. It is important to avoid this framing by emphasizing that this is about scientific integrity, not about political positions.

We submit that most (if not all) of what goes on in SJS is non-scientific if not anti-scientific. A university that would start looking at such activities would have to evaluate each activity and researcher on their specific merits, lest well-conducted research be deemed invalid.

Serious researchers who engage in real science should feel secure no matter their field of research and their political stance. Luckily, evaluation of individual researchers is a routine at universities already. Some evaluation criteria will have to be added to identify activities that deserve no merit. Here are some suggestions:

    Many publications profess to be looking at some phenomenon in the world "through the lens of" queer theory, or whiteness studies, or similar. This is a sure sign of the authors subsuming the observation of reality totally under a theory that is already assumed to be true. Since the theory is not falsifiable and an interpretation of reality can always be established according to theory, the result is often a political statement about social injustice and how it should be remedied.

    Scholars who do nothing but produce such political statements pump up their CVs with non-scientific publications, jamming the scientific signaling process, fill positions at universities (which are then not available for more qualified researchers), and, what is worse, set a precedent for producing non-science or even anti-science there. This must be resisted. We are aware that taking institutional action here will potentially amount to closing research areas with obvious employment consequences for those who are active in such areas. This will cause resistance and cries of attacks on academic freedom. However, "academic freedom" may not include engaging in non- or anti-scientific activities as the main way of fulfilling one's research duties. Besides, concern for status of universities and science must weigh heavily here.

    Seeing the world through the above lenses may produce the types of output parodied by the paper about dog rape culture. Like the parody paper, they are basically products of sheer phantasy and imagination. They are at least partially intelligible and make sense provided that one accepts the lens through which everything is seen. However, since the underlying theory is neither modified nor falsified by observation and observation is distorted, the activity contributes nothing to science.

    In the same realm are publications which are beginning to appear in allegedly scholarly journals of literary texts in the form of prose and poetry. Such literature may be a valuable source of insights into human life, but they should be published in literary journals and magazine. Scholars whose only activity is to produce such texts of phantasy and imagination are not well placed in the universities.

    Fanciful theories that build ever more complex extensions on the core theories of the SJS, are not likely to be more valid than the core theories and can be weeded out.

(...)

    Finally, it is necessary to institutionalize critical perspectives on SJS. Thus, university managers need to ensure that evaluation, promotion committees, etc. are not just staffed by representatives of SJS. This can be implemented as a general university-wide rule that all panels and committees should be multidisciplinary.

Nicolai J Foss has a M.Sc. in economics (1989) and a Phd in management research (1993). He is a Professor of Strategy at the Copenhagen Business School. Foss has published widely on management, economics, and theory of science issues. He is a Clarivate Highly Cited Scholar.

Torsten Skov is MD (1981) and has a bachelor degree in philosophy. He earned his PhD in cancer epidemiology in 1993, and did research in occupation medicine for some years, including survey methods and questionnaire validation. Then he switched to the life science industry where he spent the last 25 years in clinical development positions.