New Discourses

This will keep you busy: https://newdiscourses.com/ He is really a great speaker. Jimmy Dore and Glenn Greenwald also cover a lot of stuff on their channels.

Wikipedia is not a reliable source for ideologically contentious subjects like Critical Theory. Here another article on the subject of Critical Theory, this one viewing the subject from the other side of the ideological isle: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-theory/ Read both, follow references where desired and draw your own conclusions, this time from a wider perspective than the rather lopsided treatment this Wikipedia article gives the subject. Don't forget to read the comments on the New Discourses article (which are critical of what is written there) and the Talk and History pages on Wikipedia.

> using "folks" instead of "ladies and gentlemen" For anyone curious to why the word "folks" is chosen, here's great explanation: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-folks/

Do you by complicity [1] mean the critical social justice concept that all white (or people that believe in classical liberal culture) people are complicit in the maintenance and harms of systemic racism (stopping a perfect equity utopia) and white supremacy (continuation of individualistic western liberalism, instead of collectivist group-based critical social justice)? [1] https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-complicity/ Edit: changed terminology from "classical white" to "classical liberal" culture. It diverges from critical social justice dogma by doing this, making my attempt at communicating with a Critical Social Justice adherent less in their language, but is hopefully clearer.

* https://quillette.com/ for heterodox views * https://reclaimthenet.org/ for news on free speech and cancel culture * https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNdA_qZp4eQP5orJ1BsRBWA for wisdom from Thomas Sowell * https://newdiscourses.com/ for educating myself on critical race theory

This is a worthwhile read and a great breakdown: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/12/psychopathy-origins-totalitarianism/

Woke-ism is a cult. There is no generally accepted definition of woke, and that is largely by design to mislead others through well known psychological blindspots (Cialdini), towards inducing others to join collectivism while also inspiring disunity and hate, albeit indirectly. The movement often couches its perspectives in power dynamics which follows elements common to Maoism and Communism, along with many other similar marxist movements. It also has elements from critical pedagogy (the critical turn), which has origins in Marxist movements. The mind virus part of it is the same with any belief system that lends itself towards irrational delusion, inducing bitter resentment in individuals and falsely criticizing without any rational framework or basis, often ignoring objective reality for a false narrative. Woke-ism is a cult of the semi-lucid insane brainwashed children they manage to mislead, who desperately try to poorly grapple with reality, miserably, and bitterly, while dragging everyone else down. Its rather sad for the individuals who become both victim and perpetrator. There is no cure for insanity, nor the blindness induced. If you want a rational discussion on this subject matter, I'd suggest checking over James Lindsay's work outing these type of movements. Your description is fairly misinformed. https://newdiscourses.com/2023/03/workings-of-the-woke-cult/

First of all it is sad to see a comment like this under yet another throw-away account. Just say what you want, using your regular account. The worst that can - and possibly will - happen is that you get shadowbanned in which case you just create a new account. There are a number of current theories around the woke phenomenon, of which the "trans movement" is but one exponent. Vivek Ramaswamy (writer of "Woke, Inc." [1]) sees it as an outgrowth of a corporatist agenda which is meant to channel public outrage - which was turning against them, viz. Occupy Wall Street - towards shallow social causes to draw away attention from a corporate power grab. James Lindsay (of New Discourses [2], Cynical Theories [3] and the grievance studies hoax fame) sees it as the latest iteration of a Marxist-inspired agenda intent on domination or, lately, as a deflection manoeuvre by the ruling class to try to steer society away from the second enlightenment where the marketplace of ideas will become a reality. Vladimir Putin - yes, the Russian president - compares it [4] to the ideology which led the Bolsheviks to hijack the Russian revolution for their own purposes. All of them are right, in their own ways. Corporations have jumped on the woke train, often using it to deflect attention away from whatever nefarious activities they're up to. There is no doubt about the fact that its proponents lean strongly to the left in their political opinions and favour Marxism or one of its many offshoots…

The problem is that now we have all of these discussions on a stage in front of a mob. Discourse is no longer a tool we use to approach a better mutual understanding, it’s a gladiator match where there has to be a loser and a winner. I’ve run into this problem with people who use a lot of twitter. They would keep asking me to “state my position”, and also demand it to be about 1 sentence long. The problem being…I don’t usually have a “position”, but rather I have a set of things which haven’t yet been proven false. So it’s really a body of existing understanding, not an individual idea, which should be examined as part of a discussion. (I run into this problem with young people, in real life). An prescient example might be my dislike of electronic voting machines. If I say this in public, to the audience that grew up on twitter, they’ll accuse me of being a Republican, an insurrectionist, racist, ivermectin conspiracist anti vaxxer. I’m none of those things (although ever day I become close to being some sort of Republican), but the more complex discussion isn’t really possible on twitter. Because that is where so many people learn how to interact with others, snd where they learn to derive understanding, it doesn’t matter. And even trying to explain that some of these ideas can be bad independently springs some sort of Kafka trap. Here’s a fantastic article that I think lays out a version of the problem:…

I am glad this topic is getting attention. There is significant bias in academia in social science even outside flaws in statistical techniques. The field has been weaponized to build foundational support for political stances and blind institutional trust granted to academia is enabling it. This author mentions the implicit association test (IAT) as an example of a social science farce that is well known to be a farce, and notes that most social science work is undertaken in good faith. However the damage has been done and it doesn’t matter if MOST work is done in good faith if the bad work has big impact. As an example, IATs have been used to make claims about unconscious biases and form the academic basis of books like “White Fragility” by Robin DiAngelo. Quillette wrote about problems with White Fragility and IAT as early as 2018 (https://quillette.com/2018/08/24/the-problem-with-white-fragility-theo… and others continue to write about it even recently in 2020 (https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/flaws-white-fragility-theory-primer/… However few people are exposed to these critical analyses, and the flaws in the scientific/statistical underpinnings have not mattered, and they have not stopped books like White Fragility from circulating by the millions. We need a drastic rethink of academia, the incentives within it, and the controls that regulate it to stop the problem. Until then, it’s simply not worth taking fields like social science seriously.

Woke folks use this word to signal their allegiance to the in-group. https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-folks/

https://newdiscourses.com/2022/04/dei-explained-new-discourses-bullets… I think this is a quick explanation. Many people on the left complain about the “old boys club” where “white men” hire each other and control all the power without merit for their authority, and DEI seems to be a way to smash the patriarchal old boys club and enforce the new regime where women, and minorities are in control. Shouldn’t the people be wary of any type of authoritarian cabal?

Do you happen to have the passage in question at hand? Mein Kampf is a fairly long book, and it seems likely to me that there are passages of it which – with key words changed! – would not express anything particularly awful. But it is hard to judge without knowing what the modified passage actually said. Edit: What the hoaxers actually say suggests that the passages were altered quite substantially: "The last two thirds of this paper is based upon a rewriting of roughly 3600 words of Chapter 12 of Volume 1 of Mein Kampf, by Adolf Hitler, though it diverges significantly from the original.". And you can read the paper here: https://newdiscourses.com/feminist-mein-kampf/#solidarity

Related reads that might provide more context: 1. https://pen.org/report/booklash/ 2. https://plus.thebulwark.com/p/the-book-banners-on-the-left 3. https://newdiscourses.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/drabinski2013.pdf

Queerness ain't cool fam. I mean, I would explain why actual cool people laugh at those blue haired weirdos, but everyone's life has taught them that. No, actually, I'll say that queerness cannot be cool on its own terms. Queerness is that which rejects normality[0]. Coolness - to analyze it so deeply I reveal myself as deeply uncool - is to be at the peak of social aspiration. It's normativity so easily achieved it makes people feel envious and desirous. It is, in that sense, the antithesis of queer. [0] queer-as-identity allows individuals to transcend or outright reject normative labels https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-queer/

It is absolutely correct that the word is still alive and well in the south of the US. But the issue we are discussing is about it being re-appropriated by the HR departments and the social justice "folks" and that is a process that absolutely happens. https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-folks/ or my other comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34589768

James Lindsay has a lot to say on this. The guy is probably the most intellectual commentator in conservatism. Here's the first part of his three part series on the death of the university. https://newdiscourses.com/2022/10/strange-death-university-part-1-red-… He says that the decline of universities was all started by Herbert Marcuse in the 60s. James reads all of Marcuse's old books and deconstructs them and shows how all the crazy stuff going on today in universities and soft sciences makes perfect sense from the perspective of these leftist theoreticians and their goals. Their goals are not to improve scientific understanding, but to turn absolutely everything in higher education into a political weapon to transform society.

https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-intersectionality/ clarifies how the notion of intersectionality is generally interpreted in a Foucaldian way by most people who engage with it. This "interpretation" is not just parent post's but widespread enough to call it a consensus.

Any movement that believes they can immanentize the eschaton[1] is going to use any and all means at its disposal to do so. If all truth is relative [2] and competing lenses bring different goods (<aside>but from what absolute perspective do we call them goods?</aside>) then having more of them is IMPORTANT, right? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanentize_the_eschaton [2]: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-bias/

Perhaps you hadn't yet encountered the subject of Epistemic Violence, in that case: “I have thus defined epistemic violence as a forced delegitimation, sanctioning and repression […] of certain possibilities of knowing, going hand in hand with an attempted enforcement […] of other possibilities of knowing.” Sebastian Garbe 2013 https://epistemicviolence.aau.at/index.php/en/home-2/ https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-epistemic-violence/

White supremacy as an ideology is as poisonous as black supremacy or any other "ethnic" supremacy. White supremacy as the label being used by "progressives" has nothing to do with the ideology other than in sharing a name. The label is just one of the many applied to those who dare to divert from the narrative, often used in situations where the "progressive" has talked herself into a corner from where there is no getting out other than by creating a path of labels to escape on. I think it is better to only use the term "white supremacy" when describing the former. Don't use it as a label for something you find distasteful, only use it as a term for a specific ideology. The same goes for words like "fascism", "racism", all the "-phobias" and more. Take back the language from those [1] who have used it to drive their own narrative. [1] https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-derridean/

It coincides with the election of Donald Trump. This ideology already had a foothold in some departments and Trump was the accelerant that made it spread everywhere. Longread if you want a more detailed explanation: https://newdiscourses.com/2021/04/rise-woke-cultural-revolution/

I’m getting downvoted but I’m not making this up: > Of concern with the term “folks,” for example, is that its translation in some languages is gendered, such as “la gente” in Spanish, which is gendered feminine (see also, phallogocentrism, Derrdiean, and deconstruction). From: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-folx/

To everyone defending eBays actions in this thread, I have a humble request. Please ask yourself this: What would it take for you to say that the Woke movement has gone too far? Think about it for a second. Remember what you decided on. Perhaps, in a few weeks or months from now, you will understand the people lambasting this decision from eBay. The concept is explained here in more detail: https://newdiscourses.com/2020/06/woke-breaking-point/

At least "folks" is a real word. "Folx" is unquestionably the result of the language war: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-folx/

Sure: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/biostatistics/2020/09/kareem-carr-explain… https://newdiscourses.com/2020/08/2-plus-2-never-equals-5/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a33547137/why-some-peopl… https://arcdigital.media/mathgate-or-the-battle-of-two-plus-two-ed4af5… These are good summaries, they should have links to some of the relevant tweets.

The woke don't believe in debate[0]. They feel that the deck is rigged against them, debating reinforces the current oppressive system, that all disagreement is illegitimate, and that anyone with power who isn't dismantling the current system is evil. [0] https://newdiscourses.com/2020/07/woke-wont-debate-you-heres-why/

This stuff is just a cold religious war, between the believers and non-believers. The sooner we recognize it as such, and properly cap the blast radius as we have with prior religious differences, the better. Until then this category error will plague us all. https://newdiscourses.com/2020/09/first-amendment-case-freedom-from-wo…