Replies

This author is excessively wordy. My graduate school editing professor would have a field day with this piece.

The bottom line: there’s no regressive endpoint to which these idiots can point where society was “better.” They dive back to 1619, but there’s no real substantial global reason for it. Why not 1492 when Columbus set sail to the Americas? Or the beginning of the Hundred Years War in 1337? Or the conquests of the Mongols in the 1200s marked by the fall of many historic dynasties? They glom on to what they perceive as historical hot spots with no intention of explaining why those eras were better for any body.

Challenge a Work adherent with explaining their ideal social worldview or historical pivot point, and they can’t. They can’t tell you why they’re oppressed, just that they are. They can’t tell you what is their end goal, just that “something” needs to change. There’s no reason or logic to their claims or their goals. It’s change for the sake of change. I call this the “do something” cabal. But then all of this thought I’ve committed is obviously racist because I’m privileged by my whiteness and my cisnormative upbringing means I can’t understand any of their plights, but don’t ask them about their plight. It just is.

To this I will add that accommodation doesn’t placate, it emboldens.

Same as with militant Muslims, as a matter of fact.

They easily offended, especially the easily offended by proxy (by what they imagine should offend others of certain descriptions), only become easier to offend if people give in.

Given that power and influence among the Woke gravitates to the most obnoxious and the loudest, who live the farthest out on the ragged edge of their enflamed sensibilities (always emotionally derived from the crowd or themselves rather than received from any more stable source) it’s small wonder that the woke are like hyper-puritans without purity.