James Lindsay at European Parliament - Woke Conference

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc0684V2ej8

Where do you find these idiots ?

This guy made up his own strawman definition of equity and then used it to transport to the twilight zone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b5aW08ivHU

Ajax wrote on Apr 18^th, 2023 at 5:58pm:

James Lindsay at European Parliament - Woke Conference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc0684V2ej8

He rambles on a bit.    :-[


Get to the point.

The comparison is brilliant imo.

Many examples are given.

To get the point across.

Ajax wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 9:08am:

The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across.

I lost interest half way through.   :-[

Ajax wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 9:08am:

The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across.

Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards.

Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one.

Ajax wrote on Apr 18^th, 2023 at 5:58pm:

James Lindsay at European Parliament - Woke Conference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc0684V2ej8

Very good.

Marxism is, above all, a METHOD. It refers to itself as 'scientific', highlighting that methodology is at its heart.

That methodology of social, cultural, economic analysis and critique is adopted by the various self-styled progressive ideologies to their own pet 'proletariat' - women, gays, tinted, third world , indigenous, trans, [your oppressed demographic here].

Dnarever wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 9:15am:

Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one.

Translation - you didn't understand the first thing, no peas were forthcoming so your head stays firmly in sand/up yet Khyber.

... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print

SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons




.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 9:15am:

Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one.

What was that strawman at the beginning, duckwit? Are you able to say?

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:41am:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:15am: Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one. What was that strawman at the beginning, duckwit? Are you able to say?

Reply 1.

It is all based on a faulty definition of Equity. Without it the argument falls apart badly.


Quote:

Didn't see it

Looks confusing when I re read it. I did see the clip but didn't see what the previous post said was there.

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 2:32pm:

... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons .

:D :D :D

When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated or brain washed to the degree you are. To your doctrinaire "minds" (if that's the word I want) disagreement or a different view and value system is simply 'uneducated'.

Your proggy forebears in the Soviet would have said 'false consciousness' for the same thing. For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated.
Totally laughable.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:45am:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:41am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:15am: Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one. What was that strawman at the beginning, duckwit? Are you able to say? Reply 1. It is all based on a faulty definition of Equity. Without it the argument falls apart badly. Quote: Didn't see it Looks confusing when I re read it. I did see the clip but didn't see what the previous post said was there.

What is the correct definition of Equity?
Why is his definition faulty?

Quote:

WOKE - MARXISM INCOGNITO

How funny is this:

Who would have believed it possible that in any combination of words the word INCOGNITO would be the only one that the right may actually understand?

Well at least a 20% chance anyway.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:51am:

Quote: WOKE - MARXISM INCOGNITO How funny is this: Who would have believed it possible that in any combination of words the word INCOGNITO would be the only one that the right may actually understand? Well at least a 20% chance anyway.

What is the correct definition of Equity, duckers?
Why is his definition faulty?

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:50am:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:45am: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:41am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:15am: Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one. What was that strawman at the beginning, duckwit? Are you able to say? Reply 1. It is all based on a faulty definition of Equity. Without it the argument falls apart badly. Quote: Didn't see it Looks confusing when I re read it. I did see the clip but didn't see what the previous post said was there. What is the correct definition of Equity? Why is his definition faulty?

This is a definition for equity it can be put several ways with similar meaning.

Equity: the quality of being fair and impartial.
"equity of treatment"


This is what JL said:

Equity - A administered political economy  in which shares are adjusted so that bla bla bla equally.

What JL has done is to present a rather odd definition of a system for Social equity. Probably a misrepresentation.

Here is a more accurate definition for social equity:


Quote:

The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy.

He basically made up his own definition of equity and got it wrong or was not talking about equity at all (who knows). This was the building block that his argument was built on. You know what happens to the house when the foundations crumble.



Quote:

The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy.

JL is arguing that this is Marxism ?

Do you agree that being fair just and equitable = Marxism ? When you correct JL's errors this is what you are left with.

Being a Groucho Marxist I cannot say that I agree with him.

Quote:

WOKE - MARXISM INCOGNITO

I think I have a name for my supercoach team next year.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:50am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:45am: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:41am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:15am: Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one. What was that strawman at the beginning, duckwit? Are you able to say? Reply 1. It is all based on a faulty definition of Equity. Without it the argument falls apart badly. Quote: Didn't see it Looks confusing when I re read it. I did see the clip but didn't see what the previous post said was there. What is the correct definition of Equity? Why is his definition faulty? This is a definition for equity it can be put several ways with similar meaning. Equity: the quality of being fair and impartial. "equity of treatment" This is what JL said: Equity - A administered political economy  in which shares are adjusted so that bla bla bla equally. What JL has done is to present a rather odd definition of a system for Social equity. Probably a misrepresentation. Here is a more accurate definition for social equity: [quote]The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy.

He basically made up his own definition of equity and got it wrong or was not talking about equity at all (who knows). This was the building block that his argument was built on. You know what happens to the house when the foundations crumble.



Quote:

The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy.

JL is arguing that this is Marxism ?

Do you agree that being fair just and equitable = Marxism ? When you correct JL's errors this is what you are left with.

Being a Groucho Marxist I cannot say that I agree with him.[/quote]
So the definition of equity is to be equitable.

Good one.


You quoted JL as saying: "Equity - A administered political economy  in which shares are adjusted so that bla bla bla equally."

So you didn't understand him, don't remember what he said - but since he didnt use you "correct" definition of equity = being equitable, he was talking strawman and so you excused yourself from listening, understanding - but not from dismissing.

Very duckbrained, very you. Thick. Lamo.

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 2:42pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 12:08pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:50am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:45am: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:41am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:15am: Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one. What was that strawman at the beginning, duckwit? Are you able to say? Reply 1. It is all based on a faulty definition of Equity. Without it the argument falls apart badly. Quote: Didn't see it Looks confusing when I re read it. I did see the clip but didn't see what the previous post said was there. What is the correct definition of Equity? Why is his definition faulty? This is a definition for equity it can be put several ways with similar meaning. Equity: the quality of being fair and impartial. "equity of treatment" This is what JL said: Equity - A administered political economy  in which shares are adjusted so that bla bla bla equally. What JL has done is to present a rather odd definition of a system for Social equity. Probably a misrepresentation. Here is a more accurate definition for social equity: [quote]The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy. He basically made up his own definition of equity and got it wrong or was not talking about equity at all (who knows). This was the building block that his argument was built on. You know what happens to the house when the foundations crumble. [quote]The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy.

JL is arguing that this is Marxism ?

Do you agree that being fair just and equitable = Marxism ? When you correct JL's errors this is what you are left with.

Being a Groucho Marxist I cannot say that I agree with him.[/quote]
So the definition of equity is to be equitable.

Good one.


You quoted JL as saying: "Equity - A administered political economy  in which shares are adjusted so that bla bla bla equally."

So you didn't understand him, don't remember what he said - but since he didnt use you "correct" definition of equity = being equitable, he was talking strawman and so you excused yourself from listening, understanding - but not from dismissing.

Very duckbrained, very you. Thick. Lamo.


[/quote]


Quote:

You quoted JL as saying:

I quoted exactly what he said to the point where I stopped.


Quote:

So you didn't understand him,

If I didn't understand how did I explain what he thought he said and what his error was?


Quote:

he didnt use you "correct" definition of equity

It wasn't an incorrect definition it was a poor definition of a completely different and unrelated concept.

I don't think you can dig your way out of this one with word soup and insults.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 3:04pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 2:42pm: Dnarever wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 12:08pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:50am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:45am: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:41am: Dnarever wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:15am: Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one. What was that strawman at the beginning, duckwit? Are you able to say? Reply 1. It is all based on a faulty definition of Equity. Without it the argument falls apart badly. Quote: Didn't see it Looks confusing when I re read it. I did see the clip but didn't see what the previous post said was there. What is the correct definition of Equity? Why is his definition faulty? This is a definition for equity it can be put several ways with similar meaning. Equity: the quality of being fair and impartial. "equity of treatment" This is what JL said: Equity - A administered political economy  in which shares are adjusted so that bla bla bla equally. What JL has done is to present a rather odd definition of a system for Social equity. Probably a misrepresentation. Here is a more accurate definition for social equity: [quote]The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy. He basically made up his own definition of equity and got it wrong or was not talking about equity at all (who knows). This was the building block that his argument was built on. You know what happens to the house when the foundations crumble. [quote]The fair, just and equitable management of all institutions serving the public directly or by contract; and the fair and equitable distribution of public services, and implementation of public policy; and the commitment to promote fairness, justice and equity in the formation of public policy. JL is arguing that this is Marxism ? Do you agree that being fair just and equitable = Marxism ? When you correct JL's errors this is what you are left with. Being a Groucho Marxist I cannot say that I agree with him.

So the definition of equity is to be equitable.

Good one.


You quoted JL as saying: "Equity - A administered political economy  in which shares are adjusted so that bla bla bla equally."

So you didn't understand him, don't remember what he said - but since he didnt use you "correct" definition of equity = being equitable, he was talking strawman and so you excused yourself from listening, understanding - but not from dismissing.

Very duckbrained, very you. Thick. Lamo.


[/quote]


Quote:

You quoted JL as saying:

I quoted exactly what he said to the point where I stopped.


Quote:

So you didn't understand him,

If I didn't understand how did I explain what he thought he said and what his error was?


Quote:

he didnt use you "correct" definition of equity

It wasn't an incorrect definition it was a poor definition of a completely different and unrelated concept.

I don't think you can dig your way out of this one with word soup and insults.[/quote]


:D ;D ;D
You misquoted him ("bla bla bla") because you didn't understand him. He referenced H George Frederickson who was a pioneer in equity theories in public administration. 
You attributed to JL YOUR error of not understanding him or Frederickson because that is the lazy, lame ducky thing to do.

It was not a different and unrelated concept of equity for what JL was talking about. But since you dont understand what he is talking about, you now say that he should have talked about something ELSE, some other use of equity that you imagine you understand but of course you don't.


Lame duckbrain stands.

Here's Lindsay on the topic of Woke at the Oxford Union. Watch out, he opens with a reference to Habermas. That should throw most of the wokerati and duckeraty.

https://youtu.be/3Zut8akB4h8


Kisin followed him. Very good
https://youtu.be/zJdqJu-6ZPo


Others arguing against wokeism were Toby Young and Vedika Rastogi.

Arguing FOR woke were:

Alex Jackson
https://youtu.be/Vd_vT95qT9g
Tommy Nguyen
https://youtu.be/RBnHgRgUR2I
Benjamin Butterworth
https://youtu.be/aH1C6U9M82s
Yasmina Benojt
https://youtu.be/Q6263w4iJvA


All link on the one page:
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLGXYDmRq-VnHe9QzWLHZabadZSISIh-MR


By all accounts, wokery is the continuation of Soviet man by other (but similar) means.

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 3:34pm:

:D ;D ;D You misquoted him ("bla bla bla") because you didn't understand him. He referenced H George Frederickson who was a pioneer in equity theories in public administration.  You attributed to JL YOUR error of not understanding him or Frederickson because that is the lazy, lame ducky thing to do. It was not a different and unrelated concept of equity for what JL was talking about. But since you dont understand what he is talking about, you now say that he should have talked about something ELSE, some other use of equity that you imagine you understand but of course you don't. Lame duckbrain stands.

Quote:

unrelated concept of equity

You are doing the same thing, you keep saying equity but you are both talking about "social equity" - it isn't the same thing. It has a different definition.

Yes H George Frederickson had some idea on "social equity". He defined it poorly.


Quote:

That should throw most of the wokerati and duckeraty.

He said he was going to define equity - he didn't he was commenting on what Tom said about equity. We don't know what Tom said but assuming that Tom had referred to equity and not "social equity" it is almost certain that Tom was not talking about the same subject as James.

No matter how you look at it James defined the word equity and got it wrong. He went on to base his argument on this failure.


Quote:

You misquoted him ("bla bla bla")

The bla bla bla was just to shortcut to typing all the words. I assumed that you would know what they were. My bad there for assuming some intelligence at your end.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 3:34pm: :D ;D ;D You misquoted him ("bla bla bla") because you didn't understand him. He referenced H George Frederickson who was a pioneer in equity theories in public administration.  You attributed to JL YOUR error of not understanding him or Frederickson because that is the lazy, lame ducky thing to do. It was not a different and unrelated concept of equity for what JL was talking about. But since you dont understand what he is talking about, you now say that he should have talked about something ELSE, some other use of equity that you imagine you understand but of course you don't. Lame duckbrain stands. Quote: unrelated concept of equity You are doing the same thing, you keep saying equity but you are both talking about "social equity" - it isn't the same thing. It has a different definition. Yes H George Frederickson had some idea on "social equity". He defined it poorly. [quote]That should throw most of the wokerati and duckeraty.

He said he was going to define equity - he didn't he was commenting on what Tom said about equity. We don't know what Tom said but assuming that Tom had referred to equity and not "social equity" it is almost certain that Tom was not talking about the same subject as James.

No matter how you look at it James defined the word equity and got it wrong. He went on to base his argument on this failure.


Quote:

You misquoted him ("bla bla bla")

The bla bla bla was just to shortcut to typing all the words. I assumed that you would know what they were. My bad there for assuming some intelligence at your end.
[/quote]
We know what Tom said - I posted his segment.
"The bla bla bla was just to shortcut to typing all the words" - idiotic. You do not understand anything and try, moronically, to pass it off as "I assumed that you would know what they were. My bad there for assuming some intelligence at your end. "

You are thick, ignorant, lost AND dishonest.  Not unusual for duckwit.i

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:49am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated or brain washed to the degree you are. To your doctrinaire "minds" (if that's the word I want) disagreement or a different view and value system is simply 'uneducated'. Your proggy forebears in the Soviet would have said 'false consciousness' for the same thing. For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated. Totally laughable.

When you've located YOUR copy of Mr Dictionary,
you might want to look up "PROGRESS",
as practiced by us "PROGRESSIVES"

Or perhaps you're content to remain a "REGRESSIVE" ?




..

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 21^st, 2023 at 2:40pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated or brain washed to the degree you are. To your doctrinaire "minds" (if that's the word I want) disagreement or a different view and value system is simply 'uneducated'. Your proggy forebears in the Soviet would have said 'false consciousness' for the same thing. For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated. Totally laughable. When you've located YOUR copy of Mr Dictionary, you might want to look up "PROGRESS", as practiced by us "PROGRESSIVES" Or perhaps you're content to remain a "REGRESSIVE" ? ..

Where are you progressing TO?  How will you know you have arrived?

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:49am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated.

For starters, I went straight into the workforce, on completing Year 12 of my formal education.
I had no tertiary or university education.
But I never considered or allowed my leaving school to be the end of my broader education experience.
Life - from cradle to grave - is an education

I've learned never to appropriate words from the English language - and give them a new definition to suit my political agenda.



woke

well-informed, up-to-date, alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice.


progressive

in favour of new ideas, modern methods and change


Opposite of retrogressive

​(of an action) making a situation worse or returning to how something was in the past.


liberal

willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave


Oxford English Dictionary



So if anyone wants to compliment me - as a woke, liberal, progressive - I'd be more than flattered



.

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 21^st, 2023 at 10:02pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated. For starters, I went straight into the workforce, on completing Year 12 of my formal education. I had no tertiary or university education. But I never considered or allowed my leaving school to be the end of my broader education experience. Life - from cradle to grave - is an education I've learned never to appropriate words from the English language - and give them a new definition to suit my political agenda. woke well-informed, up-to-date, alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice. progressive in favour of new ideas, modern methods and change Opposite of retrogressive ​(of an action) making a situation worse or returning to how something was in the past. liberal willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave Oxford English Dictionary So if anyone wants to compliment me - as a woke, liberal, progressive - I'd be more than flattered

So gay.

Frank wrote on Apr 21^st, 2023 at 10:24pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 21st, 2023 at 10:02pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated. For starters, I went straight into the workforce, on completing Year 12 of my formal education. I had no tertiary or university education. But I never considered or allowed my leaving school to be the end of my broader education experience. Life - from cradle to grave - is an education I've learned never to appropriate words from the English language - and give them a new definition to suit my political agenda. woke well-informed, up-to-date, alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice. progressive in favour of new ideas, modern methods and change Opposite of retrogressive ​(of an action) making a situation worse or returning to how something was in the past. liberal willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave Oxford English Dictionary So if anyone wants to compliment me - as a woke, liberal, progressive - I'd be more than flattered So gay.

Gay or not, he's right.

But trust you to attempt to conduct an 'argument' from the gutter.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 9:15am:

Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one.

You seem to have missed the point trying to dot the i's and cross the t's.

The world you live in must be perfect or you are an ignorant fool.

They do say that ignorance is bliss..... :)

Kat wrote on Apr 22^nd, 2023 at 4:30pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 21st, 2023 at 10:24pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 21st, 2023 at 10:02pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated. For starters, I went straight into the workforce, on completing Year 12 of my formal education. I had no tertiary or university education. But I never considered or allowed my leaving school to be the end of my broader education experience. Life - from cradle to grave - is an education I've learned never to appropriate words from the English language - and give them a new definition to suit my political agenda. woke well-informed, up-to-date, alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice. progressive in favour of new ideas, modern methods and change Opposite of retrogressive ​(of an action) making a situation worse or returning to how something was in the past. liberal willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave Oxford English Dictionary So if anyone wants to compliment me - as a woke, liberal, progressive - I'd be more than flattered So gay. Gay or not, he's right. But trust you to attempt to conduct an 'argument' from the gutter.

WOKE is even strangling the gays LOL.



"Trans Ideology is the New Homophobia" - Arielle Scarcella

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrH-W9XfOj8

Ajax wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 11:27am:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:15am: Ajax wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 9:08am: The comparison is brilliant imo. Many examples are given. To get the point across. Didn't see it and very boring not going to watch it again. To me the whole narrative relied on the strawman at the front. without the base it falls over like a house of cards. Doubt that he or most viewers would recognise a marxist if they tripped over one. You seem to have missed the point trying to dot the i's and cross the t's. The world you live in must be perfect or you are an ignorant fool. They do say that ignorance is bliss..... :)

Quote:

ignorance is bliss

Happy to defer to your experience here.

Woke = An excuse for having no policies, direction or idea.

WOKE  =  homosexuals taking control of the narrative.

Dnarever wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 3:43pm:

Woke = An excuse for having no policies, direction or idea.

This guy believes he’s a 6 year old girl.

This is progress. No wait - regress.
No, wait, its liberal

willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave

Oh, yes.

If transwomen are women then old blokes are 6 year old girls. Coz all there is to being a 6 year old girl is to DECLARE, with a bow in your hair, that you are one and play with a doll's house. It is woke, it is polite and sensitive to treat old bloke as a 6 year old girl. Anything else is hate.


https://twitter.com/ClownWorld_/status/1650143426086858753

Frank wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 4:39pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 24th, 2023 at 3:43pm: Woke = An excuse for having no policies, direction or idea. This guy believes he’s a 6 year old girl. This is progress. No wait - regress. No, wait, its liberal willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave Oh, yes. If transwomen are women then old blokes are 6 year old girls. Coz all there is to being a 6 year old girl is to DECLARE, with a bow in your hair, that you are one and play with a doll's house. It is woke, it is polite and sensitive to treat old bloke as a 6 year old girl. Anything else is hate. https://twitter.com/ClownWorld_/status/1650143426086858753

That guy is sick in the head.    :(

Bobby. wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 4:50pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 24th, 2023 at 4:39pm: Dnarever wrote on Apr 24th, 2023 at 3:43pm: Woke = An excuse for having no policies, direction or idea. This guy believes he’s a 6 year old girl. This is progress. No wait - regress. No, wait, its liberal willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave Oh, yes. If transwomen are women then old blokes are 6 year old girls. Coz all there is to being a 6 year old girl is to DECLARE, with a bow in your hair, that you are one and play with a doll's house. It is woke, it is polite and sensitive to treat old bloke as a 6 year old girl. Anything else is hate. https://twitter.com/ClownWorld_/status/1650143426086858753 That guy is sick in the head.    :(

No, no, no, that's  not the EDUCATED, woke, pwogwessive and liberal answer.
https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1681804724/25#25

Frank wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 5:10pm:

No, no, no, that's  not the EDUCATED, woke, pwogwessive and liberal answer. https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1681804724/25#25

There is a list of Cultural Marxists on Ozpolitic.



https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1660808671/255

Updated list of Ozpolitic Cultural Marxists:

LTYC,
FTLW,
Monk - possible leader
Smith,
Greggy,
Mothra,
Athos,
AiA,
Jim,
Random,
Marla,
Dnarever.
Brian?

Carlson makes an important point.
Woke is religious, not political. Certainly not rational.

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1650299174066216961

Full keynote

https://www.youtube.com/live/ebG2POkoHgU?feature=share

Frank wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 5:20pm:

Carlson makes an important point. Woke is religious, not political. Certainly not rational. https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1650299174066216961 Full keynote https://www.youtube.com/live/ebG2POkoHgU?feature=share

Quote:

Carlson makes an important point.

A first ? No doubt it.

Q How do you know when Carlson means what he said ?

A It was secretly recorded.

In 2020 Carlson was Biden's biggest supporter.

Frank wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 4:39pm:

Dnarever wrote on Apr 24th, 2023 at 3:43pm: Woke = An excuse for having no policies, direction or idea. This guy believes he’s a 6 year old girl. This is progress. No wait - regress. No, wait, its liberal willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave Oh, yes. If transwomen are women then old blokes are 6 year old girls. Coz all there is to being a 6 year old girl is to DECLARE, with a bow in your hair, that you are one and play with a doll's house. It is woke, it is polite and sensitive to treat old bloke as a 6 year old girl. Anything else is hate. https://twitter.com/ClownWorld_/status/1650143426086858753

Frank you normally have something that isn't just insults. not much but something.

Why not get back to something serious like crying about the green M&M or burning some books.

The cost of the woke stolen election lie - $787.5 Million. So far.

That's enough duckyfruckery nonsense.

Frank wrote on Apr 24^th, 2023 at 9:55pm:

That's enough duckyfruckery nonsense.

Quote:

The cost of the woke stolen election lie - $787.5 Million. So far.

The next one in line will get a lot more.

At the height of the student protests in Melbourne, sixteen-year-old schoolgirl Ivy Bertram appeared on The Project to discuss her decision to help organise the pro-Palestinian rally. As Miss Bertram, an expert on Gaza and geo-politics, delivered pearl after pearl of wisdom, Mr Ali and his fellow hosts nodded in deference at the insight being proffered by this modern-day oracle of Delphi. Unfortunately, this new breed of political commentator currently gracing our screens typifies everything that is wrong with the education system in this country.

There is no doubt that Miss Bertram is simply repeating what she has been told by her teachers at school. But who is teaching the teachers, and what are they being taught at university? The Institute of Public Affair’s latest report, Who Teaches the Teachers? An Audit of Teaching Degrees at Australian Universities, answers these questions and confirms what we have long suspected: our education faculties have been completely beguiled by the forces of wokery, woke activism is deeply and irrevocably embedded into teacher training and universities are churning out legions of woke activist teachers.

Instead of being taught how to master core academic curricula such as reading, writing, mathematics, history and science, the report reveals that teachers are being trained by their university lecturers to be experts in critical social justice, identity politics, critical race theory, radical gender theory, social and emotional learning, and sustainability. Of the 3,713 subjects taught across 37 universities that offer teaching degrees, 1,169 are classified as woke, or as critical social justice. In contrast, a meagre 371 are devoted to teaching phonics, mathematics and grammar. It’s a wonder that children are able to spell ‘Climate Justice’ on their protest banners.’

Critical social justice and the accompanying theories now entrenched in Australian universities were pioneered by Brazilian Marxist educator Paulo Freire (1921-1977) as a theory of teaching known as ‘critical pedagogy’. Built on Marxist foundations, this sought to turn children into politically conscious participants in a perpetual revolution. Tellingly, Freire’s other heroes were Friedrich Hegel, Vladimir Lenin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro and Che Guevara.

By the early 1990s, Freire’s ideas were added to by the social theorists in North American universities who introduced critical race theory and post-colonial theory into the mix. The influence of Freire and his disciples on the teaching landscape in Australia has been far-reaching and profound. He even came to this country in 1974, giving lectures on ‘authority and authoritarianism, conscientisation (critical awareness), violence, class struggle and illusions of neutrality’. Freire’s audience clearly tuned out while he was talking about illusions of neutrality.

As recently as 2021, the Brazilian Marxist was being lauded as ‘one of the most important thinkers of the twentieth century’ by Australian academics at a conference held at the University of South Australia.

Critical social justice requires teachers to be agents of change, a message which is drummed into them throughout their four-year degrees. At Monash University, a student taking ‘Theorising Social Justice’ is told that the unit ‘aims to develop in you a strong grasp of the concept of “cognitive justice”, and the associated notions of “epistemic” and “epistemological” justice which will support you to engage with and give value to, the diversity of thought and different “ways of knowing” that can be applied to the pursuit of social justice in local, national, and international contexts, in educational settings and beyond’.

It also teaches them to approach Aboriginal education through the lens of critical race theory and post-colonial theory. At the University of Melbourne, Masters students ‘will engage in critical discussions and activities that enable them to reflect on the impacts of settler colonialism, racism and unexamined bias on First Nations educational sovereignties as well as build their understanding and awareness of Indigenous knowledges and strategies for working towards decolonisation’.

In extreme cases, such as ‘Rethinking Indigenous Education’ offered by Macquarie University, students are not only taught that all Western knowledge must be decolonised, but that they must also be proficient in ‘abolitionist, futurist and Indigenist thinking’. Those taking ‘Leadership in Indigenous Education’ at the University of Canberra are being taught to monitor the ‘attitudes, beliefs and behaviours of other educators around them’. There must be no wrong think in the classroom!

Sustainability is of course, inextricably linked to critical social justice, and maintains that a sustainable world cannot be achieved without a socially just world. Sustainability education is not confined to secondary education but commences at an early age. For example, students studying a Bachelor of Education Early Childhood and Primary at the University of New England are taught how to introduce children aged between two and five to sustainability in the sciences. At the University of Notre Dame, lecturers ensure that ‘a key aim is to empower pre-service teachers to integrate effective advocacy for sustainability in their professional teaching role’ while ‘strategies will be explored to enable young children to participate as active citizens and agentic leaders in protecting the environment for a sustainable future’. Meanwhile, Federation University is concerned with equipping students with ‘tools to embed environment and sustainability practices into primary and/or junior secondary education using interdisciplinary teaching and learning strategies’.

With teaching like this, it is no wonder that anxious young Australians are out in the streets protesting about the government’s supposed inaction on climate change. Almost since birth, they have been indoctrinated by their woke teachers with the narrative that the world is on the verge of a climate apocalypse. And it is of course hardly a coincidence that one in three Australian students can barely read or write, with an average of 33 per cent performing below expectations, while almost one in ten students is not achieving the expected learning outcomes for literacy and numeracy at their year level.

Under the federal government’s ‘back to basics’ plan, there will be a new accreditation regime for teaching degrees, and it will be mandatory for universities to instruct trainee teachers in evidence-based reading, writing, arithmetic, and classroom management practices. While this might be a step in the right direction, it will not address the fact that teachers are being schooled in ideologies which are not only incompatible with the notion of traditional education but also seek to tear it down. As long as woke courses dominate teaching degrees, I fear we will have to endure being lectured to by activist schoolchildren.


Dr Bella d’Abrera is a Director at the Institute of Public Affairs’ Foundations of Western Civilisation Program

see also
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEH714rGrtg

Clymat Justus ....  Climbit Justis (why did Sir Edmund Hilary climb Everest.... because it was there = climb it - just is) .... buggar ... gotta get this ryght - four the sines at the demo ....gonna need for or is it siks?

Clydmate Justas..... hey Clyde.... watcha reccin?

Australian education is ****ed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opXwm_7WVvY

Karl Marx to Resign, Ditch Legacy Due to Sexual Misconduct
Doctrine of class conflict and communist internationalism now in dire jeopardy.
December 11, 2017 by Oleg Atbashian

The father of scientific socialism and an inspirational figure to many leading Democrats, Karl Marx has announced that he is resigning as a seminal thinker and is asking all his followers, especially women, to forgive him and forget his doctrine of class conflict and communist internationalism due to allegations of sexual abuse of his female aide and a criminal conspiracy to cover it up.

In his remarks, the author of the Communist Manifesto stated, “This decision is not about me. It’s about the workers of the world. It’s become clear that I can’t both continue to deal with my history of sexual misconduct (some of which I remember differently) and at the same time remain an effective messianic leader of the oppressed in their struggle against capitalist exploitation.”

Marx continued, “As a white cisgendered heterosexual male, I have cheated on my wife, sexually assaulted my subordinate, and otherwise abused my power and privilege to hurt and victimize women. I therefore feel that I no longer have the right, nor the moral authority to defend my philosophy of class victimization, to incite class hatred, provoke violent anti-bourgeois revolutions, and establish proletarian dictatorships.”

The pressure on the leader of the exploited masses to step down has been mounting for days, ever since the New York Times broke the story about how Mr. Marx, a husband and a father of three, sexually exploited his longtime family maid, Helen Demuth. Fearing to lose her job in a volatile capitalist economy, Ms. Demuth yielded to her employer’s sexual harassment. What started as inappropriate touching and groping, soon escalated into what legally amounts to sexual assault in the workplace, which continued daily for years in Mr. Marx’s home, where Mrs. Marx and their daughters also resided.

According to The New York Times, the repeated sexual abuse of Ms. Demuth by her employer, compounded by the unavailability of women’s health services, resulted in the birth of a male child. Fearing that this would destroy his reputation of a rebel against bourgeois morals, Karl Marx organized a conspiracy to cover up both the affair and the baby. His co-conspirators were his close friend and collaborator Friedrich Engels and Ms. Demuth – a powerless victim who was intimidated into silence by the men in positions of power.

The conspiracy involved abandoning the child, Freddy Demuth, who ended up being one of the many fatherless inner-city clients of foster care. Upon discovering the truth, Karl Marx’s wife, Jenny Marx, committed suicide. Their daughter, Laura, killed herself several years later.

The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ are the enemies of freedom.


The sort of freedom I am talking about is what Os Guiness calls ‘soul freedom’ (in his book The Global Public Square, IVP Books, 2013). By ‘soul freedom’ he means, ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and freedom of belief’. Do you think the angry protestors at the pro-Palestinian rallies want the rest of us to have those freedoms? Do the trans-activists want us to have those freedoms? Do those people who push  ‘cancel culture’ to drive people out of the public square really want everyone to have those freedoms? Of course not! The ‘woke’ are people who believe they should have ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief’ – but that you should not. Because they are right, and you are wrong. More importantly, they think you are morally wrong. You are morally inferior to them. Which means that you have no right to freedom of thought, or freedom of conscience, or freedom of belief. Instead, your freedoms should be taken away, and you should be guided by them. That is why this now tired word ‘woke’ still matters.
Kel Richards

Frank wrote on Jul 8^th, 2024 at 7:32pm:

The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ are the enemies of freedom. The sort of freedom I am talking about is what Os Guiness calls ‘soul freedom’ (in his book The Global Public Square, IVP Books, 2013). By ‘soul freedom’ he means, ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and freedom of belief’. Do you think the angry protestors at the pro-Palestinian rallies want the rest of us to have those freedoms? Do the trans-activists want us to have those freedoms? Do those people who push  ‘cancel culture’ to drive people out of the public square really want everyone to have those freedoms? Of course not! The ‘woke’ are people who believe they should have ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief’ – but that you should not. Because they are right, and you are wrong. More importantly, they think you are morally wrong. You are morally inferior to them. Which means that you have no right to freedom of thought, or freedom of conscience, or freedom of belief. Instead, your freedoms should be taken away, and you should be guided by them. That is why this now tired word ‘woke’ still matters. Kel Richards

Quote:

The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’

Woke as described by the right is a non existent political tool of the right. Nobody thinks themself as woke by the rights definition.

To the right woke means almost anything they don't like.

"Nobody thinks themself as woke"

Of course not - they think themselves woke by a totally false set of standards and beliefs...... you only need to look here for some such - as regards what Frank was saying - who reach for the high moral ground every time in the absolute belief that they are morally superior and you are their moral inferior, and thus you have no right to speak.

mothra is a classic - always posting empty phrases of moral superiority without addressing issues in any meaningful way... the grab for moral superiority far out-weighs the need for rational discussion and examination of ideas and positions taken.....

Unteachables to the core...

Herr Colonel Dokteur Professor Grappler:-  "Hmm - looks like that doctor speaking without the patient or a blood test and such is speaking from her accumulated records in front of him - clearly about mental health issues and substance abuse and memory problems.  That must make Deuce feel great - guilty of dismal taste..."

mothra (lettuce leaf in hand):- "Oooo, you brute!  You think all women who complain of rape are of the one type, like that one (is that an admission that this patient IS of 'that type'!"

Grappler:-  "Let us look at the facts of THIS patient... clearly long term treated for mental health issues and substance abuse to the extent that her records are filled with indications of memory losses and lapses..... hmmm - where does that put Deuce in a complaint made 48 days later and based solely on a half-remembered awakening in mid-stroke .... hmmmm ... just  hmmmmm.... yes - his piggy eyes will make him guilty!  Guilty of the worst possible taste - well - he looks autistic...."

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 9^th, 2024 at 1:28am:

"Nobody thinks themself as woke" Of course not - they think themselves woke by a totally false set of standards and beliefs...... you only need to look here for some such - as regards what Frank was saying - who reach for the high moral ground every time in the absolute belief that they are morally superior and you are their moral inferior, and thus you have no right to speak. mothra is a classic - always posting empty phrases of moral superiority without addressing issues in any meaningful way... the grab for moral superiority far out-weighs the need for rational discussion and examination of ideas and positions taken..... Unteachables to the core... Herr Colonel Dokteur Professor Grappler:-  "Hmm - looks like that doctor speaking without the patient or a blood test and such is speaking from her accumulated records in front of him - clearly about mental health issues and substance abuse and memory problems.  That must make Deuce feel great - guilty of dismal taste..." mothra (lettuce leaf in hand):- "Oooo, you brute!  You think all women who complain of rape are of the one type, like that one (is that an admission that this patient IS of 'that type'!" Grappler:-  "Let us look at the facts of THIS patient... clearly long term treated for mental health issues and substance abuse to the extent that her records are filled with indications of memory losses and lapses..... hmmm - where does that put Deuce in a complaint made 48 days later and based solely on a half-remembered awakening in mid-stroke .... hmmmm ... just  hmmmmm.... yes - his piggy eyes will make him guilty!  Guilty of the worst possible taste - well - he looks autistic...."

Quote:

as regards what Frank was saying

Do you have a valid comparison.

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 2:32pm:

... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons .

What type of moron are you again?

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 21^st, 2023 at 10:02pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . For you, having done the three year Bachelor of Indictrination course at uni, you add a little vanity and preening, implying that you, in contrast, are educated. For starters, I went straight into the workforce, on completing Year 12 of my formal education. I had no tertiary or university education. But I never considered or allowed my leaving school to be the end of my broader education experience. Life - from cradle to grave - is an education I've learned never to appropriate words from the English language - and give them a new definition to suit my political agenda. woke well-informed, up-to-date, alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice. progressive in favour of new ideas, modern methods and change Opposite of retrogressive ​(of an action) making a situation worse or returning to how something was in the past. liberal willing to understand and respect other people’s behaviour, opinions, etc., especially when they are different from your own; believing people should be able to choose how they behave Oxford English Dictionary So if anyone wants to compliment me - as a woke, liberal, progressive - I'd be more than flattered

It has long since lost that meaning. And in the main it's change has been bought about by those claiming to be described as such ....

being the exact opposite.

Frank wrote on Dec 21^st, 2023 at 9:04pm:

Australian education is ****ed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opXwm_7WVvY

She is the type of person who in shining a light on the stupidity of these post-modernist academics teaching in our centres of higher education i.e. Universities gets cancelled by the woke brigade.

She made this address in 2023.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 8^th, 2024 at 11:33pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 7:32pm: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ are the enemies of freedom. The sort of freedom I am talking about is what Os Guiness calls ‘soul freedom’ (in his book The Global Public Square, IVP Books, 2013). By ‘soul freedom’ he means, ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and freedom of belief’. Do you think the angry protestors at the pro-Palestinian rallies want the rest of us to have those freedoms? Do the trans-activists want us to have those freedoms? Do those people who push  ‘cancel culture’ to drive people out of the public square really want everyone to have those freedoms? Of course not! The ‘woke’ are people who believe they should have ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief’ – but that you should not. Because they are right, and you are wrong. More importantly, they think you are morally wrong. You are morally inferior to them. Which means that you have no right to freedom of thought, or freedom of conscience, or freedom of belief. Instead, your freedoms should be taken away, and you should be guided by them. That is why this now tired word ‘woke’ still matters. Kel Richards Quote: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ Woke as described by the right is a non existent political tool of the right. Nobody thinks themself as woke by the rights definition. To the right woke means almost anything they don't like.

No ... woke means what it has become because of the actions of those who deem themselves to be woke as described in the dictionary : "aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)"....

they have become the opposite & help none of those groups they purport to be concerned about.

Dnarever wrote on Jul 8^th, 2024 at 11:33pm:

Frank wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 7:32pm: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ are the enemies of freedom. The sort of freedom I am talking about is what Os Guiness calls ‘soul freedom’ (in his book The Global Public Square, IVP Books, 2013). By ‘soul freedom’ he means, ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and freedom of belief’. Do you think the angry protestors at the pro-Palestinian rallies want the rest of us to have those freedoms? Do the trans-activists want us to have those freedoms? Do those people who push  ‘cancel culture’ to drive people out of the public square really want everyone to have those freedoms? Of course not! The ‘woke’ are people who believe they should have ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief’ – but that you should not. Because they are right, and you are wrong. More importantly, they think you are morally wrong. You are morally inferior to them. Which means that you have no right to freedom of thought, or freedom of conscience, or freedom of belief. Instead, your freedoms should be taken away, and you should be guided by them. That is why this now tired word ‘woke’ still matters. Kel Richards Quote: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ Woke as described by the right is a non existent political tool of the right. Nobody thinks themself as woke by the rights definition. To the right woke means almost anything they don't like.

Ducky nonsense.



https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1678962098/71#71

Gnads wrote on Jul 9^th, 2024 at 2:38pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 11:33pm: Frank wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 7:32pm: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ are the enemies of freedom. The sort of freedom I am talking about is what Os Guiness calls ‘soul freedom’ (in his book The Global Public Square, IVP Books, 2013). By ‘soul freedom’ he means, ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and freedom of belief’. Do you think the angry protestors at the pro-Palestinian rallies want the rest of us to have those freedoms? Do the trans-activists want us to have those freedoms? Do those people who push  ‘cancel culture’ to drive people out of the public square really want everyone to have those freedoms? Of course not! The ‘woke’ are people who believe they should have ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief’ – but that you should not. Because they are right, and you are wrong. More importantly, they think you are morally wrong. You are morally inferior to them. Which means that you have no right to freedom of thought, or freedom of conscience, or freedom of belief. Instead, your freedoms should be taken away, and you should be guided by them. That is why this now tired word ‘woke’ still matters. Kel Richards Quote: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ Woke as described by the right is a non existent political tool of the right. Nobody thinks themself as woke by the rights definition. To the right woke means almost anything they don't like. No ... woke means what it has become because of the actions of those who deem themselves to be woke as described in the dictionary : "aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)".... they have become the opposite & help none of those groups they purport to be concerned about.

Using this definition how does Bud Light, Dr Seuss or the green M&M fit in ? This is what woke means to the right ?

Dnarever wrote on Jul 9^th, 2024 at 8:11pm:

Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2024 at 2:38pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 11:33pm: Frank wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 7:32pm: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ are the enemies of freedom. The sort of freedom I am talking about is what Os Guiness calls ‘soul freedom’ (in his book The Global Public Square, IVP Books, 2013). By ‘soul freedom’ he means, ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and freedom of belief’. Do you think the angry protestors at the pro-Palestinian rallies want the rest of us to have those freedoms? Do the trans-activists want us to have those freedoms? Do those people who push  ‘cancel culture’ to drive people out of the public square really want everyone to have those freedoms? Of course not! The ‘woke’ are people who believe they should have ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief’ – but that you should not. Because they are right, and you are wrong. More importantly, they think you are morally wrong. You are morally inferior to them. Which means that you have no right to freedom of thought, or freedom of conscience, or freedom of belief. Instead, your freedoms should be taken away, and you should be guided by them. That is why this now tired word ‘woke’ still matters. Kel Richards Quote: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ Woke as described by the right is a non existent political tool of the right. Nobody thinks themself as woke by the rights definition. To the right woke means almost anything they don't like. No ... woke means what it has become because of the actions of those who deem themselves to be woke as described in the dictionary : "aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)".... they have become the opposite & help none of those groups they purport to be concerned about. Using this definition how does Bud Light, Dr Seuss or the green M&M fit in ? This is what woke means to the right ?

Ducky - YOU are woke! Woke up, ducky!

You are a dreadful woke. 

Frank wrote on Jul 9^th, 2024 at 8:13pm:

Dnarever wrote on Jul 9th, 2024 at 8:11pm: Gnads wrote on Jul 9th, 2024 at 2:38pm: Dnarever wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 11:33pm: Frank wrote on Jul 8th, 2024 at 7:32pm: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ are the enemies of freedom. The sort of freedom I am talking about is what Os Guiness calls ‘soul freedom’ (in his book The Global Public Square, IVP Books, 2013). By ‘soul freedom’ he means, ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, and freedom of belief’. Do you think the angry protestors at the pro-Palestinian rallies want the rest of us to have those freedoms? Do the trans-activists want us to have those freedoms? Do those people who push  ‘cancel culture’ to drive people out of the public square really want everyone to have those freedoms? Of course not! The ‘woke’ are people who believe they should have ‘freedom of thought, freedom of conscience, freedom of belief’ – but that you should not. Because they are right, and you are wrong. More importantly, they think you are morally wrong. You are morally inferior to them. Which means that you have no right to freedom of thought, or freedom of conscience, or freedom of belief. Instead, your freedoms should be taken away, and you should be guided by them. That is why this now tired word ‘woke’ still matters. Kel Richards Quote: The people who think of themselves as ‘woke’ Woke as described by the right is a non existent political tool of the right. Nobody thinks themself as woke by the rights definition. To the right woke means almost anything they don't like. No ... woke means what it has become because of the actions of those who deem themselves to be woke as described in the dictionary : "aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)".... they have become the opposite & help none of those groups they purport to be concerned about. Using this definition how does Bud Light, Dr Seuss or the green M&M fit in ? This is what woke means to the right ? Ducky - YOU are woke! Woke up, ducky! You are a dreadful woke.

Thank You now go back to slept.

Nation's Progressives Issue Friendly Reminder That If You Don't Agree With Them On Everything They Will Destroy You


https://media.babylonbee.com/articles/article-3992-1.jpg

U.S. - Progressive spokespeople issued a statement this morning offering a friendly reminder that if you don't agree with them on every last issue they will absolutely destroy you.

"It doesn't matter if you're with us on 90% of issues. If you disagree on one thing, we will make it our goal to ruin your career, your livelihood, and your reputation," one woman, speaking on behalf of the nation's progressives, said. "It doesn't even matter if you said one tiny thing years ago that seems to go against our progressive agenda. We. Will. Destroy. You."

The progressive movement also issued a handy list of issues that you must agree with them on:

Abortion
Healthcare
Captain Marvel
Taxing the rich and eating their still-beating hearts
Universal basic income
Democratic communism
Donald Trump literally being Hitler reincarnated
The Last Jedi
Open borders
Gun control
Seizing the means of production
Eliminating the electoral college
Free college
Free everything
Everything else
"If you don't march in lockstep with us, we will call you a Nazi, reply to your every tweet, haunt your every waking moment, and mob you until you die."

https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img641/9394/yawnr.gif

.

---

Time the Silenced Majority spoke up... just vote quietly .... slip the knife in without sound...

Frank wrote on Jul 10^th, 2024 at 9:34am:

Nation's Progressives Issue Friendly Reminder That If You Don't Agree With Them On Everything They Will Destroy You https://media.babylonbee.com/articles/article-3992-1.jpg U.S. - Progressive spokespeople issued a statement this morning offering a friendly reminder that if you don't agree with them on every last issue they will absolutely destroy you. "It doesn't matter if you're with us on 90% of issues. If you disagree on one thing, we will make it our goal to ruin your career, your livelihood, and your reputation," one woman, speaking on behalf of the nation's progressives, said. "It doesn't even matter if you said one tiny thing years ago that seems to go against our progressive agenda. We. Will. Destroy. You." The progressive movement also issued a handy list of issues that you must agree with them on: Abortion Healthcare Captain Marvel Taxing the rich and eating their still-beating hearts Universal basic income Democratic communism Donald Trump literally being Hitler reincarnated The Last Jedi Open borders Gun control Seizing the means of production Eliminating the electoral college Free college Free everything Everything else "If you don't march in lockstep with us, we will call you a Nazi, reply to your every tweet, haunt your every waking moment, and mob you until you die."

You go Marxism, woke now progressive. They are different things.

You produce a long list of made up garbage that clearly shows that you look at Woke as anything you don't like and label it as progressive - can you make up your mind ?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10^th, 2024 at 1:32pm:

Time the Silenced Majority spoke up... just vote quietly .... slip the knife in without sound...

Many people who say this identify with MAGA the loudest minority.

Why woke is destructive - explained.

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1826165038669087062

Dnarever wrote on Jul 10^th, 2024 at 7:24pm:

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Jul 10th, 2024 at 1:32pm: Time the Silenced Majority spoke up... just vote quietly .... slip the knife in without sound... Many people who say this identify with MAGA the loudest minority.

Maybe so - but they are still Silenced.... just biding their time....

Ajax wrote on Apr 18^th, 2023 at 5:58pm:

James Lindsay at European Parliament - Woke Conference https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc0684V2ej8

WOKE ?

woke,
adjective:
Originally: well-informed, up-to-date.
Now chiefly: alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice; frequently in stay woke.



A right-wing writer’s epic and humiliating meltdown during an appearance on the online news show "The Hill Rising" on Tuesday proves that Republicans have no idea what their new buzzword, “woke,” means.

During a discussion about her new book Stolen Youth, conservative author Bethany Mandel struggled to define “woke,” after being asked to do so by host Briana Joy Gray. However, her new book repeatedly accuses liberals of targeting children with “woke indoctrination.”

“So, I mean, woke is, sort of, the idea that, um,” Mandel began after the host asked her to define the word. Then, after a very long pause during which Mandel visibly began to panic because she recognized the predicament she was in, she said, “This is going to be one of those moments that goes viral.”

She tried again.

“Woke is something that’s very hard to define, and we’ve spent an entire chapter defining it. It is sort of the understanding that we need to totally reimagine and redo society in order to create hierarchies of oppression,” she responded with discombobulation.

“Sorry, I, it’s hard to explain in a 15-second sound bite,” she finally said, hoping for a lifeline from one of the on-screen journalists.

“Please take your time,” Gray said, unwilling to let Mandel off the hook.

“It’s easier to come up with examples, like, you know, punishing people for using the wrong pronouns or identifying structures of that kind" he added.”

Republicans have made the term toxic, using it as a pejorative toward liberals and those whose worldview embraces people from many backgrounds. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis proudly claims that Florida is “where woke goes to die” and often touts his “Stop Woke Act,” which forbids Florida state government from embracing inclusivity and tolerance across the board.

Most Americans are not buying what the GOP is selling regarding being woke.

According to a recent USA Todaypoll, the majority — 56 percent — of Americans believe that being woke is a positive thing.

On Wednesday, apparently after trying to recover from the humiliation of her previous performance, Mandel tweeted through her embarrassment. She tried to blame the host for saying something before the show began that caught Mandel off guard, and she also submitted a definition of the term she was unable to define previously. Her tweets seemed just to make the secondhand embarrassment for her worse.

Cont ...

https://www.advocate.com/media/conservative-author-cant-woke

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:49am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated or brain washed to the degree you are.

I mean so uneducated they're incapable of looking up the definition of a word, before it falls out of their mouths



Woke
Well we've already covered that one



Progressive
An advocate for progress
(that's a pretty simple one)



Liberal and Liberalism
adjective
1.
willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own, open to new ideas.
2.
relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.


So I'm naturally quite happy to be called a woke, liberal progressive

Why WOULDN'T I be ?
It's quite a COMPLIMENT !



When Robert Menzies formed the Liberal Party of Australia on 16 October 1944, it was built on truly liberal values and a progressive path for Australia.
To look at the party he formed - and to see what it became, today under the divisive Dutton, Morrison and Howard - would have him crying in his coffin


.

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19^th, 2023 at 2:32pm:

... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons .

'twas a funny night on my TV, last night, with the repeat of Monday's Q&A

Some predictable right-wing nong throwing the"W" word around, in a question

Host, Patricia Karvelas, interjected asking
"Could someone from the panel - - or the audience
- let me know what "woke" actually MEANS ?"

Out of an audience of several hundred - plus members of the panel ---

Not ONE had a trace of a CLUE !



https://mediaproxy.salon.com/width/1200/https://media2.salon.com/2020/12/donald-trump-dunce-1216201.jpg

WOKE, mah man - is bein' ALIVE to the harsh realities an' the rip-offs of Dah Man, whose guv'mint is filled wit' dem Wharte Cracka mofockers to beat down on da poor and da disadvantaged an specially on da BLACK MAN, brudda!  But we's lettin' The Man know we's onto him an' his slavery an' time is comin' fo' Dat Revolution, mah man... Black folks is goin' rise up an' take their rightful place, brudda.... now gimme five!!  Ah said FIVE, Mofocka.. not SIX!  You inbred or somethin'?  OH - you from ALABAMA - well dat explain it raght dere... all dat cotton an' pesticide an' stuff da Wharte Man use ta kill off da Black Man and da Indians  .... so gimme six raght here, brudda!

I can only surmise 'The Grappler' and myself are sourcing different dictionaries. (not to mention different versions of Spellcheck)

But SERIOUSLY, NO ONE out there can give me a definition of "woke" ?

Interestingly, this bit of "newspeak" has become the  call-sign of THE SKY TV Batshit Crazy Hours - Punani, Credlin, Bolt, etc,

If you ARE a regular viewer, do you think you could fill us all in - as to what they all THINK they are saying ?

Because none of THEM can.


.

Woke Democrats = Gay French (Suicide)

...just like German Nazism was the Confederate Redneck (War)

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 6^th, 2024 at 11:46am:

I can only surmise 'The Grappler' and myself are sourcing different dictionaries. (not to mention different versions of Spellcheck) But SERIOUSLY, NO ONE out there can give me a definition of "woke" ? Interestingly, this bit of "newspeak" has become the  call-sign of THE SKY TV Batshit Crazy Hours - Punani, Credlin, Bolt, etc, If you ARE a regular viewer, do you think you could fill us all in - as to what they all THINK they are saying ? Because none of THEM can. .

No TAKERS ?

You MAY "phone a FRIEND"





.

WOKE is gettin' down on da dudes wit' you brothas... takin' a stand..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwVCMWLFKDk

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEB5368B522B81594

Yo know when dey trample an' set fire to dat fiel' o' golden grain what Sting sang about - dat called Mob Barley!!  Ain' no thang - Ah mek you woke yet, Bro!

Frank wrote on Apr 20^th, 2023 at 11:49am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated

'progs' - and I'm assuming you mean 'progresives' - is another bit of 'newspeak' used by 'the right' - thinking it's an insult.

"Progressive" - actually means an 'advocate of PROGRESS'
(as opposed to REGRESSIVE)

"LIBERAL is another, meaning "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own, and open to new ideas"

So I THANK-YOU, proud to be called a "woke, liberal progressive" - anytime you feel the urge.

Though at no stage will I be happy being called "covfefe"



.

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 1:14pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated 'progs' - and I'm assuming you mean 'progresives' - is another bit of 'newspeak' used by 'the right' - thinking it's an insult. "Progressive" - actually means an 'advocate of PROGRESS' (as opposed to REGRESSIVE) "LIBERAL is another, meaning "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own, and open to new ideas" So I THANK-YOU, proud to be called a "woke, liberal progressive" - anytime you feel the urge. Though at no stage will I be happy being called "covfefe" .

If only you could say
1. What you are progressing to
2. How you will know when you have arrived


The massive intellectual and emotional advantage conservatives have over pwogwessives is that they know and can explain WHAT they want to conserve and WHY.

Pwogwessives, like teenagers with mummy and daddy issues, can only seethe and emote    and revolt. They can only destroy and oppose. Marxism has given them the perennial method for it.



There is also a degenerate strand of pwogwessivism. https://x.com/RadioGenoa/status/1832534021521256511

Frank wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 2:22pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8th, 2024 at 1:14pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated 'progs' - and I'm assuming you mean 'progresives' - is another bit of 'newspeak' used by 'the right' - thinking it's an insult. "Progressive" - actually means an 'advocate of PROGRESS' (as opposed to REGRESSIVE) "LIBERAL is another, meaning "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own, and open to new ideas" So I THANK-YOU, proud to be called a "woke, liberal progressive" - anytime you feel the urge. Though at no stage will I be happy being called "covfefe" . If only you could say 1. What you are progressing to 2. How you will know when you have arrived

Both "progressive" and "liberal" share an "openness to change" in all and everything

The "conservative" and "regressive" - at the other end of the scale - fear change, at every turn and cross-road.

It's an odd thing, that Australia's second largest political party refer to themselves as "Liberals" and "conservatives" in the one breath

An "openness to change" doesn't have limited timeline or finishing date


So what is going on in Frank's mind, when he says "liberal" and "progressive" - or "woke" for that matter ?

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 4:24pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 8th, 2024 at 2:22pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8th, 2024 at 1:14pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated 'progs' - and I'm assuming you mean 'progresives' - is another bit of 'newspeak' used by 'the right' - thinking it's an insult. "Progressive" - actually means an 'advocate of PROGRESS' (as opposed to REGRESSIVE) "LIBERAL is another, meaning "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own, and open to new ideas" So I THANK-YOU, proud to be called a "woke, liberal progressive" - anytime you feel the urge. Though at no stage will I be happy being called "covfefe" . If only you could say 1. What you are progressing to 2. How you will know when you have arrived Both "progressive" and "liberal" share an "openness to change" in all and everything The "conservative" and "regressive" - at the other end of the scale - fear change, at every turn and cross-road. It's an odd thing, that Australia's second largest political party refer to themselves as "Liberals" and "conservatives" in the one breath An "openness to change" doesn't have limited timeline or finishing date So what is going on in Frank's mind, when he says "liberal" and "progressive" - or "woke" for that matter ?

Quote:

what is going on in Frank's mind

This seems to be where the problem is: this infers some invalid assumptions.

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 4:24pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 8th, 2024 at 2:22pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8th, 2024 at 1:14pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated 'progs' - and I'm assuming you mean 'progresives' - is another bit of 'newspeak' used by 'the right' - thinking it's an insult. "Progressive" - actually means an 'advocate of PROGRESS' (as opposed to REGRESSIVE) "LIBERAL is another, meaning "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own, and open to new ideas" So I THANK-YOU, proud to be called a "woke, liberal progressive" - anytime you feel the urge. Though at no stage will I be happy being called "covfefe" . If only you could say 1. What you are progressing to 2. How you will know when you have arrived Both "progressive" and "liberal" share an "openness to change" in all and everything The "conservative" and "regressive" - at the other end of the scale - fear change, at every turn and cross-road. It's an odd thing, that Australia's second largest political party refer to themselves as "Liberals" and "conservatives" in the one breath An "openness to change" doesn't have limited timeline or finishing date So what is going on in Frank's mind, when he says "liberal" and "progressive" - or "woke" for that matter ?

Change worship is mindless. But unthinking, right-on pwogs like you just worship change - destruction.

Not all change is for the better. 

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8^th, 2024 at 4:24pm:

Frank wrote on Sep 8th, 2024 at 2:22pm: buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 8th, 2024 at 1:14pm: Frank wrote on Apr 20th, 2023 at 11:49am: buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 19th, 2023 at 2:32pm: ... and ANOTHER one to add too the LONG list of uneducated right-wing morons who've never thought to consult Mr Oxford on the correct definition of the word "woke" before putting it to print SkyTV being the original, uneducated, right-wing morons . :D :D :D When progs like you, mothra etc say 'uneducated' you mean un-indoctrinated 'progs' - and I'm assuming you mean 'progresives' - is another bit of 'newspeak' used by 'the right' - thinking it's an insult. "Progressive" - actually means an 'advocate of PROGRESS' (as opposed to REGRESSIVE) "LIBERAL is another, meaning "willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own, and open to new ideas" So I THANK-YOU, proud to be called a "woke, liberal progressive" - anytime you feel the urge. Though at no stage will I be happy being called "covfefe" . If only you could say 1. What you are progressing to 2. How you will know when you have arrived Both "progressive" and "liberal" share an "openness to change" in all and everything The "conservative" and "regressive" - at the other end of the scale - fear change, at every turn and cross-road. It's an odd thing, that Australia's second largest political party refer to themselves as "Liberals" and "conservatives" in the one breath An "openness to change" doesn't have limited timeline or finishing date So what is going on in Frank's mind, when he says "liberal" and "progressive" - or "woke" for that matter ?

Change worship is mindless. But unthinking, right-on pwogs like you just worship change - destruction.

Not all change is for the better.  If you want change it has to be for the better.

But pwogs like you can neither articulate WHAT that 'better' is or how you would know if you have achieved it.