A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
Related communities:
I'm so excited for "woke" to be so oversaturated that it becomes lame and people stop using it, like "Political Correctness" before it. One of the more infuriatingly vague terms in political culture.
I do feel like it's on the downswing after DeSantis.
a : aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)
I will never understand why this πis such a bad thing. Personally, I find it complimentary. But then again, I believe in facts and truth, and the betterment of society as a whole.
The meaning of a word doesn't matter to them. They're told it's a bad thing and that they're to oppose it, like the attack command for a dog that's been trained to be racist.
It's why everytime they have a new trigger word like "woke" or "CRT", there is always a stream of clips of supporters and pundits who can't articulate what the word means but are staunchly opposed to it anyway.
Within that, there's probably people who do know what it means, they just can't say things like "I oppose anyone being empathetic or fair to minorities" out loud, even though that's exactly their view.
Alt right playbook: find a word the left uses, then say it with disgust in frequent rants about the left. Followers associate negative feelings and connotations with the word without ever having to learn its meaning.
Just as a perfect example of this is being liberal
Being a liberal is literally being for liberty
Liberty is basically defined by The Bill of Rights. Basically what the US Constitution is based in.
So the right has to make it a bad word because if people actually realized that, well yeah who doesn't support that shit?! They won't get anyone to vote against their best interests. Instead they require people vote to benefit social hierarchy that creates in groups that the law defends and out groups that the law binds.
Worth noting that "liberal" also has other connotations. You appear to be referring to social liberalism, which is a great thing for the majority of humanity. Frequently, the term is used to refer to economic liberalism, which is a right-wing ideology. This is why you have leftists speaking negatively about (neo)liberalism. It's an ideology focused primarily on unfettered capitalism and devalues everything that is not directly related to profit. It is also the ideology followed by nearly all western governments' ruling parties (including the Dems in the US).
yet, a large percentage of "liberals" are against said liberty.
Articulate an example...
2A for starters. 1A when it doesn't suit them. As much as most don't like it, hate speech is expressly protected speech. It's morally repugnant, but still protected. Much like burning the flag. A ton seem to be ok with nixing the 4th in an attempt to nullify the 2nd.
Nearly everyone is guilty of what you're saying about 1A. And I'd argue the right is making a far more concerted effort and progress in banning books and speech they disagree with.
You have something on the 2A, but I'd argue again that some people on the right believe they have a right "or need" for rocket launchers and miniguns. Which, maybe per the 2A they do. But the problem is that the people who think those weapons are necessary to protect them from a tyrannical government accidentally allowed those things to get used on schools. And, all of those people and the NRA love to ignore the well regulated part. So there's extremists on both sides.
And I'd argue no one assaulted 4A like the patriot act which was definitely not liberals (but I'm sure some were involved).
Extremists on both sides are guilty and one of "our" tasks as rational citizens is to not generalize "those we disagree with more" as said extremists.
Thanks for answering tho.
p.s. if you want to see some fascinating history about hate speech and 1A watch the recent American Experience episode called Nazi Town USA. It will only be available to watch online for another week or so (at least at the source).
The language of 2A has always been a troublesome comprehension issue. "Well Regulated" does not mean what you are insinuating. It's two separate phrases. It's saying in order to have a free state, there needs to be a well organized, trained, militia. in order to have a militia the people need to be able to bear arms, therefore, the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. Pretty sure james madison even expressly stated in a letter that, yes, even cannons were covered by this. It's why we are allowed to have the same stuff the military does, albeit heavily taxed. We had a whole war about being taxed, but i digress... The term "well regulated" at the time was more of a "well organized" not what gun grabbers think it means today in Rules, regulations, and restrictions on owning certain things. The language is pretty clear. Shall not be infringed.
So why would our government be trying to introduce a bill to not let people train and be "well regulated"? Look into House Bill s3589.
I agree that the Patriot act is anything BUT patriotic, but your claim that liberals had nothing to do with it is misguided. While it's true it was sponsored and co-sponsored by republicans, Joe Biden was a staunch supporter of it and even claimed it was based on previous bills he wrote. Both sides suck in this one I'm afraid. The patriot act is one of the worst things to ever happen to our 'liberty' in this country.
I do appreciate your well tempered response though. rare to see intelligence on these forums and not just people spouting hate because you feel a different way about something. thank you.
Yeah, I accept that explanation for 2A. And, arguably by definition the well regulated would not be regulated by the government, otherwise the spirit of the whole amendment is meaningless. I'm definitely not ignorant enough to say guns should be banned, if at least for the simple fact we'll be able to 3D print our own in a very short amount of time. Not to excuse the "liberals" (going back to your original comment and my question), being primarily Democrats and as politicians trying to do something about mass shootings for sure they go to gun regulation. And it absolutely doesn't help that Republicans seemingly don't have any solutions to the problem, including making access to healthcare overly complicated. If we go back to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness then people with mental struggles who turn to gun violence as an answer, they deserve the opportunity to get the easiest and free access to mental healthcare. So if we're not going to regulate guns (which I'm not even condoning per my 3D printer point) then the alternative course must be healthcare, and the "opposite of liberals" don't seem to even discuss this beyond "no." So I'd say both sides suck on this one too haha
I did acquiesce that some liberals were involved in the patriot act... :)
And yeah, thanks for answering the question. I try to have a meaningful conversation here, otherwise I may as well just look at cat pics.
Same with "SJW" -- "Social Justice Warrior." Sounds great to me!
I don't know, but I always thought grok was a fairly progressive idea. Outside of the genocidal implications, of course. To seek understanding so deep that you become a part of what you're trying to understand and it becomes a part of you, sounds pretty good to me.
I will never understand why this πis such a bad thing
because it's been coined by the Black comminity.
That's not the definition conservatives are using, obviously. And they don't have a consistent definition between them either. Making a movie with a black person? Woke. Passing legislation to save the environment? Woke. Being gay? Woke. Disliking racists? Woke.
That's why I hate it. If it was something solid, even with a negative connotation, we could use it for political discussion.
Is PC lame? I interpreted it as just it being more formal, whereas woke is a more meme way to say it
What do these guys do when they want to watch a movie or a tv show? Do they have a big list to check if it's woke or not? Because 90% of Hollywood films must be woke by their definition.
For some reason I watched one of these dudes review Star Trek: Strange New Worlds. It was woke because there were more women than men in the bridge crew.
The amount of conservatives who don't realize that Star Trek is the OG "woke" show is crazy. Like yes THAT'S THE POINT OF THE SHOW!
To be fair William ShatMyPants doesn't remember that either.
I had someone who actually watched the movie tell me that Dial of Destiny was too liberal. Unless they're literally a Nazi or object to the reality of Vietnam War protestors existing in 1969, I have no idea what they meant.
Is this referring to Stranger in a Strange Land grok or explicitly caveman grok?
My guess would be Twitterβs AI chatbot, Grok, which was supposed to be anti-woke.
anti-woke chat bot
Didn't Microsoft release one of those years ago? I believe it was called Tay
Not sure if you're joking but Tay was not supposed to have any kind of political bent, they just made it far too easy for Tay to "learn" from the people it talked to, so people were racist to it on purpose so it would become racist.
This is amazing
Isn't grok also a slang word from A Clockwork Orange, meaning to understand, like the way grasp is used?
It comes from a book called A Stranger in a Strange Land written by Robert Heinlein.
The way Heinlin used it, grok is a deeper understanding, past comprehension, to the point of something being part of your very soul. To "grok" something is to truly know it with all of your being.
It's an arrogant name for an AI, which is no surprise based on its owner.
This is the general meaning of the word "to grok", as originated in Heinlein's book "Stranger in a Strange Land".
What the fuck kind of name is "Grok" for an AI chatbot?
It comes from a book called Stranger in a Strange Land written by Robert Heinlein. In the book, if someone groks something, the person understands and loves that thing in a fundamental and complete way.
A really bad one.
The Martian Race had encountered the people of the fifth planet, grokked them completely, and had taken action; asteroid ruins were all that remained, save that the Martians continued to praise and cherish the people they had destroyed.
This quote doesn't define the word, though. As per the article, Grok means "to understand completely" not "to obliterate".
After the Martians grokked them, they realized there was no option but to obliterate them. This is possibly a valid response, depending how terrible the occupants of said planet were.
It's still a bad name for a chat bot, as they clearly do not understand anything completely, or at all.
According to the book, grok is the Martian word for "to drink". Since water is rare on Mars (and it is needed for life), it is a holy substance. Martians (and people studying the Martian language) share a drink of water to become "water brothers", bathing is a profound ritual and to understand something or somebody completely is referred to as "drinking" them or it.
I mean, part of groking Mike involved some light cannibalism, and the martians planned on wiping out humanity once they groked them, regardless of any kind of end result.
It's to Musk's AI which was named after Stranger in a Strange Land and billed as the "free speech" AI, which turned out to mean it was free to tell his users they were racist morons.
Very hilarious.
Yeah, the term Grok has been used by nerds for a long time, kind of a signal to other nerds. At some point, Elon Musk started using it too. So now, it's basically been co-opted by the right wing. But Pim's xeet kind of suggests they're turning away from it?
Now how would a caveman know a long word like "unfortunately"?
Probably Youtube or something
Itβs in translation