▪️This is nonsense. Woke doesn’t refer to one being “awaken to the needs of others,” it was specifically in reference to being “woke” to racial injustices and activism of the black community. Its roots are in radical black activism, dating back to Marcus Garvey in the 1920s.
▪️Woke broke into mainstream culture during the 2014 Ferguson riots, when it became enmeshed with BLM and the #staywoke social media campaign. It was a call to stay focused on black activism, particularly to stay vigilant on police misconduct.
▪️It then morphed into being focused on the plight of all marginalized communities. Woke was no longer limited to BLM. It was now in the 2017 Women’s March. It included BIPOC, LGBTQ+ & eventually the broader goals of progressive activism. This is when phrases like “white privilege” took off.
▪️Woke ideology viewed history as a struggle between oppressed and oppressors, and attributed all current inequities to structural racism/sexism, etc. To combat this, it sought to group everyone into hierarchies based on their oppressor status (generally based on race and sex).
▪️With this movement came the many whiny, annoying young activists (mostly white) who knew little about anything, but after reading a Teen Vogue article or a Robin DiAngelo book were lecturing everyone about racial inequities and checking your privilege.
▪️Even corporations embraced it, executives would give their pronouns and identify which native tribe the land was stolen from at their conferences. Door Dash had a “black-owned businesses” section, United Airlines announced half their pilots would be women/POC.
▪️It was this quasi-religious wokeness that caused a huge backlash. The right fought back by using the term in a derogatory and mocking way, to great effect. Woke was painted as political correctness reaching absurd new heights, an obsession over identity politics.
▪️The left has recently tried to combat this stigmatization of woke. At first, they claimed woke was a made up bogeyman of the right, a term that no one can even define (nevermind they have no coherent definition of words like racist, late-stage capitalism or woman).
▪️Now they seem to be embracing woke and attempting to redefine it as some generic term meaning nice and sympathetic, wanting what’s best for everyone. This is nonsense and never what it meant.
As with the leftist freak out over “banned books” this is not banning books, it’s still easy to get Harry Potter and bookstores should be able to limit whatever books they want for whatever reason. But not only does it show a double standard, the rationale is far less justifiable than removing certain content from school libraries. At least there the justification was the content of certain books are inappropriate for children, clearly not every book should be available in a school library. Here, there’s no argument about the content they just don’t like the author’s politics!
Because news came out about his letter to the FBI, revealing he was a nutcase. The letter was rambling and incoherent, claiming he was trained by the US military off the books, and that Walz had instructed him to kill Amy Klobuchar so he could run for Senate. None of it made any sense (Walz is not running for Senate) and none of the assassinations made any sense, even in a diabolical way.
Nearly all of his hit list was Democrats (including Walz) and abortion clinics, but he was supposedly working for Walz?! Plus, one of the guys he killed wasn’t even on his list, and others were no longer in office or deceased. None of it makes sense from any coherent angle.
Basically, it appears the guy was mentally ill and neither the left or right can use the incident to push their agendas anymore, so the story was dropped.
This is so dumb. First, this means LA began as Spanish land founded to support Spanish missions (i.e. colonialism). Which contradicts their entire premise. But the reality is that Los Angeles is a quintessential American city.
▪️When the US acquired California in the 1840s, LA was a small town of less than 2,000 people. It was basically nothing. It became large only after the gold rush and the railroads completed in the 1870-80s, which brought thousands of new settlers and a booming commercial center.
▪️But LA had a major issue limiting its growth, no water. It wasn’t until Mulholland found a water source and built an aqueduct down from Northern California that LA had the infrastructure to grow into a major city.
▪️Then, a combination of oil, real estate and the film industry caused it to boom in the early 1900s. Post WWII, industries like aerospace continued its spectacular growth. Calling this “Mexican land” is a brain dead take. Neither the Mexicans, Spanish nor ...
