Предыдущая публикация
share share share
WOKEISM IS A SCAM WHICH HELPS THE RULING CLASS WHILE HURTING THE POOR
Woke is the main philosophy of the western world. While the early forms of Woke were anti-Hitlerian, it has since been corrupted and has become quite Hitlerian in many ways. Why do those who call themselves liberals cater to bullies?
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS OF WOKEISM
(Funny but true!)
1. THOU SHALL HATE, FOR THE CULT OF WOKEISM IS NOT ONE OF LOVE NOR PRAISE, BUT ONE OF CONDEMNATION AND VENGEANCE; AND RECOGNIZES NO SAINTS, ONLY SINNERS.
2. THOU SHALL HONOR THE BULLY, AND GRANT THE GREATEST WOKE PRIVILEGE TO GROUPS WHO HAVE BULLIES SUPPORTING THEIR INTERESTS.
3. THOU SHALL CANCEL ANY FREE SPEECH PRIVILEGES OF THOSE WHO EXPRESS DISSENT.
4. THOU SHALL NOT MAKE JUDGEMENTS BASED ON RACE, PREJUDICE OR ANY KIND OF STEREOTYPE - HOWEVER, JUDGMENTS ABOUT A CERTAIN RACE ARE FINE.
5. THOU SHALL BLAME A CERTAIN RACE OF PEOPLE FOR THE UNDERACHIEVEMENTS AND SHORTCOMINGS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT OF THAT RACE.
6. THOU SHALL NOT ABUSE PEOPLE FOR THEIR SEXUAL ORIENTATION - UNLESS THEY ARE HETEROSEXUAL MALES.
7. THOU SHALL ACCUSE HETEROSEXUAL MALES, WHO SUBTLY EXPRESS ADMIRATION FOR FEMALES, OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT.
8. THOU SHALL BITTERLY OPPOSE PREJUDICE AND DISCRIMINATION TOWARDS PEOPLE WHO ARE THOUGHT TO BE POOR, MARGINALIZED, OR OTHERWISE DISADVANTAGED - EXCEPT FOR HOMELESS PEOPLE.
9. THOU SHALL BE IMPARTIAL TO THE FACT THAT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST HOMELESS PEOPLE IS LEGAL IN THESE WOKE TIMES; AND ALSO THE MEDIA INDUCED STEREOTYPES OF SUCH PEOPLE.
10. THOU SHALL HATE HITLER, EVEN THOUGH HE TOO IS GUILTY OF HATE, RACISM, DISCRIMINATION, CANCELLATION OF FREE SPEECH, BULLYING AND BLAMING A CERTAIN RACE OF PEOPLE FOR GERMANY'S UNDERACHIEVEMENTS AND SHORTCOMINGS.
There have been some allegations about Wokeism. Some say it is a scam which enables criminals to control police, journalists and politicians. Some say it is a form of 'divide and rule' as it causes violence, hence fear, which causes the population to be more supportive of laws and enforcement of laws - hence granting more power for the ruling class - who are protected from violence, in their gated communities.
There are many who exploit Wokeism to nefarious ends. Jussie Smollett being a well known example. Many a cop, who has caught a perp red-handed, has been called a racist. Cops are often called racists just for doing their jobs. It's a means of manipulation. One evening, when I was a teenager, a 40yo man got me drunk and then asked me for sex. When I refuse, he implied I was racist and homophobic. Then there is the claim that 'systemic racism' is the cause of underachievement, unproductivity and crime among certain minorities. However the levels of such things are consistent with the levels of such things in countries where those minorities are the majority. It is not just common criminals who exploit wokeism. Mainstream media will lead you to believe that the only threat to the environment is greenhouse gases. Not overhunting, overfishing deforestation and other habitat destruction and population growth. Can it be that this is because the latter five occur mainly in the third world, while the first can be blamed mainly on a certain race? Is the environmental debate being racialized? It appears that it is. In the 1990s, tree hugging and other attempts to save forests, were becoming popular. Some big businesses were not happy with this. Those who wish to vilify environmentalists accuse them of keeping the poor poor. Of stopping the development of the third world. However, the overwhelming majority (if not all) of the third world countries where deforestation, habitat destruction and development were allowed to proceed, are still third world countries. So the poor are still poor. So that Wokeist argument is a scam. And the Woke clearly play a role in damaging the biosphere which sustains us.
Then there is there particularly hateful form of feminism winch labels men, who do very subtle things like trying to make eye contact or trying to start a conversation, as sex pests. Not surprisingly this is caused a rise in incels, frustrated, single, young men, who are more likely to commit violent crime.
Wokeism also causes distrust. Wokeists will claim that they never make judgments based on race, then say that one race is good while another is bad. Wokeism does not tolerate dissenting views. How can we all get along if we can't speak openly about issues which divide us? Let's look at how Wokism evolved In America, which is where it started.
Some say Wokeism is merely an awareness of black suffering which creates sympathy and hence improvement. And yes, there have been improvements since the 60s, when Wokeism became popular. There has been affirmative action, sympathetic media coverage, more public spending, less policing in the ghettos and other improvements. There are now more black politicians and other elected officials and there are now more popular black actors. One sees a lot of blacks in television advertisements too. But what is the overall effect for the common black man? There have been some negative side effects, especially with regards to the sympathetic media coverage. Like the story of the blind men and the elephant, the sympathetic media coverage often gives a one-sided, misleading picture. Some have referred to it as 'race hate propaganda'. Since the passing of the Civil Rights Act, the average wage gap between blacks and whites has been about the same and unemployment among blacks hasn't changed and is still about double that of whites. So the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not improve this. Furthermore there has been a significant change in the black incarceration rate, which is about double what it was in 1960. Furthermore, as Wokism encourages crime, many black neighborhoods have become considerably more dangerous than they were in 1960. Nowadays the leading cause of death, among young black men, is homicide by other young black men. There was a major rise in violent crime from the mid 1960s until the mid 1990s, many new laws were passed, and there was heavier law enforcement and this was followed, not surprisingly, by an increase in the incarceration rate. So by the late 1990s America, the land of the free, had the world's highest incarceration rate. So is Wokism really benefiting blacks? Why is it that anyone, with a platform, is unable to be open and straightforward about it?
'60s pop star Jim Morrison said "We must reinvent the gods". Well maybe we should reinvent Wokism or replace it with something more practical and realistic. Human societies, throughout history, have been influenced by preachers, moral leaders or other gurus. In the old days, in the West, the gurus were the priests and other holy men. Nowadays, the gurus are the journalists and anchor men. Many of these modern gurus do not appear to be concerned with spreading useful and practical philosophies. They seem to be more concerned by selling sensational stories which make money, even when it's quite obvious that the hype which they spread can the harmful to those who are not protected by bullies or 'militants' (to use the Wokeist term).
There have been stories, in the media, of segregation, and confrontation by police, but no plausible explanations for either. Should there be a media blackout of crimes, especially violent crimes, committed by ethnic minorities? A design flaw was discovered which caused the Ford Pinto to be called the car with the exploding gas tank. Should the public have been informed? Warnings about this could be labeled 'hate speech' towards Ford's employees. So should they have taken the Woke approach; allowed people to burn to death and cancelled those who spoke out against it? Or should they have taken the realistic approach and resolved the problem?
Another example of hateful reportage is the claim that homeless people, in general, simply choose their plight because they are too lazy to work. When in fact many homeless people have salary jobs and/or work very hard, for what little they get, in other ways such as selling 'The Big Issue', busking, collecting and selling waste materials and walking long distances for water, or other resources. News media also stereotype the homeless as being "drug addicted mental patients", when there are many homeless who are neither/nor. Journalists make these stereotypes because they sell. There are many people who would like to believe that the homeless are self-made, so deserve their plight. They seem to find hatred easier to cope with than compassion. However this incitement of hatred leads to abuse of the homeless which makes them more likely to develop mental health problems and turn to substance abuse. Furthermore creating a negative stereotype makes it hard for the homeless to get jobs. Add to this the fact that even in these Woke times, it is still perfectly legal to discriminate against the homeless, the poorest most marginalized people.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not putting the blame, for all the above mentioned, squarely on the journalists - but they are certainly likely to play a major role.
Wokeism has many similarities to 'divide and rule' policies. If you make one, or more, tribes angry those tribes will intimidate the other tribes. If a large number of people feel intimidated, they will want, and vote for, protection in the form of more law enforcement. Hence more power for the ruling class. It is currently trendy, in the USA, to de-fund the police. Will this eventually lead to more draconian law enforcement, including the microchipping of people? That would be a good way to prevent mugging, rape and other assaults on people. Could it be that this incitement of hatred is a deliberate attempt to empower the ruling classes?
With 'open door' immigration policies, Woke politicians might appear to be kindly and compassionate - even when they do not appear to want mass migration into their own communities. However, the people who make it from the third world to the first world are usually the wealthier, more intelligent ones. So the Woke politicians are draining wealth and talent from the third world. This is good for a big businesses who can then go to the third world and get cheaper prices for labour and commodities. Furthermore increasing the population raises real estate prices and competition for jobs, it also lowers wages. While this is bad for the poor, it is certainly a bonus to the rich. Furthermore as most of the migrants are young men, this creates a gender imbalance and an increase in incels. Add to this the fact that many migrants, especially those from the Middle East, the Caribbean and Africa will be made hateful via the one-sided Woke propaganda.
Clearly Wokeism is a benefit to the ruling class and to big businesses but not a benefit to common people - and especially not to poor people. The question I would like to ask is should we reinvent a cleaner form of Wokism, or should we replace it with a philosophy which is useful, practical, non-hateful and less easy to exploit to nefarious ends? What do you think?
Please don't confuse the Woke for true liberals. A true liberal listens to constructive criticism and new ideas, including dissent, with an open mind. In doing so, he gains new knowledge, which improves and enhances his arguments.
Why would anybody, with a practical and useful philosophy, object - in any way - to constructive criticism?
Unlike the many of the Woke; I myself am not afraid of constructive criticism. I welcome it. Feel free to criticize me.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS: Thank you for the feedback on my post. But hey guys when you criticize me please be fair. I did get some feedback from some guys who mentioned injustices which happened long before I was even born. I'm not stupid I've already heard these arguments at least 10 times. What's the point in regurgitating propaganda that I've been indoctrinated with since an early age? It's also totally unfair. I have absolutely no control over the actions of people who were dead before I was born. And, in case you guys didn't know, slavery existed on every continent in the world (except Antarctica) before there was large-scale industrialization and slavery still exists in Africa and slavery existed in Africa long before the whites got into it there. So if you guys are going to criticize me about that please get your facts straight. And also it was only about 2% of Americans who owned slaves when it was legal in America. And there were many Americans who lost their lives, or lost their limbs, in a war which ended slavery. Why do you guys have to dwell so much on negativity? Why do you only see the bad things done by whites when whites have given so much money to Africa and given so much money to the ghettos and given so much affirmative action and sympathetic propaganda which you seem to think helps you? Try to show a little gratitude.
I was a bit of a Wokeist myself, before I traveled around and saw things as they really are. One of the main reasons I stopped being Woke is the lack of gratitude.
Hey I made up a new rap:
The fact you got to dig into history,
shows you got nothing to pin on me.
And you have the audacity
to cancel rationality.
We all know, it's plain to see
this is outright hypocrisy.
So, get a better grip on reality
and try to be a man of piety
by dumping this twisted philosophy.
It's good that you try to criticize me.
It improves me, intellectually.
It would help if you did so effectively.
Not repeating things incessantly.
TOP THAT!
Следующая публикация
Нет комментариев