There two kinds of woke -- those who are ideologically possessed, and those who want power for its own sake. James Lindsay says the former are the true danger, because they are fundamentally disconnected from reality -- they truly believe they can bring about Heaven On Earth by destroying the current system. I think both are terribly dangerous, because the latter are the ones who *enjoy* stamping human faces with boots. They are the fascists, quite often former capitalists who don't want the inherent chaos of capitalism to topple their empires.
I strongly suggest reading Guy Debord. Yes, he's a 60s Marxist, but he was right about how the powerful can incorporate their critics into their systems. The fascists are enabling the communists to create the totalitarian state that the fascists can subsequently take over. Hence, "communo-fascism."
James Lindsay and I have different definitions of woke. He looks at the academic literature and philosophy, which is important. But I only look at implementation in the real world. He is focused on a specific segment of woke. I am not.
Ah, that makes sense. Looking at implementation, the two factions I describe appear identical, and it's impossible to determine who is who because it's very easy for the calculating fascist to look like a possessed communist. After all, lying is an endemic problem of language.
Maybe I just want to believe that the possessed can be successfully deprogrammed, given how many were initially converted by hijacking their compassion. Maybe I shouldn't be so naive as to underestimate how corrupting the acquisition of power is.
Hmmm. Limit the power of the power structures, to limit the damage of the power-hungry regardless of their underlying ideologies, eh?
That said, listen to what James says about ESG. Huge multinationals like BlackRock and Vanguard leveraging trillions of other people's money to exercise power. That's the fascist leveraging of wokeness. That's the endgame.
There two kinds of woke -- those who are ideologically possessed, and those who want power for its own sake. James Lindsay says the former are the true danger, because they are fundamentally disconnected from reality -- they truly believe they can bring about Heaven On Earth by destroying the current system. I think both are terribly dangerous, because the latter are the ones who *enjoy* stamping human faces with boots. They are the fascists, quite often former capitalists who don't want the inherent chaos of capitalism to topple their empires.
I strongly suggest reading Guy Debord. Yes, he's a 60s Marxist, but he was right about how the powerful can incorporate their critics into their systems. The fascists are enabling the communists to create the totalitarian state that the fascists can subsequently take over. Hence, "communo-fascism."
James Lindsay and I have different definitions of woke. He looks at the academic literature and philosophy, which is important. But I only look at implementation in the real world. He is focused on a specific segment of woke. I am not.
Ah, that makes sense. Looking at implementation, the two factions I describe appear identical, and it's impossible to determine who is who because it's very easy for the calculating fascist to look like a possessed communist. After all, lying is an endemic problem of language.
Maybe I just want to believe that the possessed can be successfully deprogrammed, given how many were initially converted by hijacking their compassion. Maybe I shouldn't be so naive as to underestimate how corrupting the acquisition of power is.
Hmmm. Limit the power of the power structures, to limit the damage of the power-hungry regardless of their underlying ideologies, eh?
That said, listen to what James says about ESG. Huge multinationals like BlackRock and Vanguard leveraging trillions of other people's money to exercise power. That's the fascist leveraging of wokeness. That's the endgame.
I'm not interested, I'm sorry. I can't focus on all things and do them well. That is not what I'm focused on right now.