humor and being ''WOKE''

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Just in case anyone is still clueless enough to not believe that this is a movement that is rooted in extreme misogyny have a look at this from the Johns Hopkins website. Lesbians are apparently 'non-men', while gay men are still 'men'.

Johns Hopkins.jpg

[vegetariantaxidermy]

The insanity is endless. Take a boy child with a transhausen mother. Boy is fed the idea that he's a girl in the 'wrong body'. Boy is given puberty blockers and is later castrated and given a 'neo-vagina' (hole that goes nowhere). Boy would have grown up to be a straight man. Now the 'boy' is allegedly a 'woman'. A 'woman' who is attracted to women. The thing is that straight women aren't sexually attracted to women (even when they are actually men), so this 'woman' has no choice but to be a 'lesbian woman' but unfortunately for him actual lesbian women are apparently not interested in men, even when they don't have a penis. How very 'transphobic' of them
Another scenario. Fully intact man has always had a fetish for pretending to be a woman (autogynephilia), with a particular obsession with lesbians. According to the law this man is a woman because he says he is, therefore he must be accepted as a lesbian--a lesbian who just happens to have a penis. Lesbians who don't accept this and are revolted by 'her' penis are just 'transphobic bigots' and guilty of a 'hate crime' (according to the law and wokies like sculptor).

Feel free to add your own scenarios for a bit of 'fun' mind-fuckery. They are quite limitless...

[Peter Kropotkin]

vegetariantaxidermy... me thinks thou protest too much...
have any unresolved issues you care to share with the class?
I suspect that there are at least a dozen serious issues
that bedevil you..... maybe more....perhaps work on those first?

Kropotkin

[vegetariantaxidermy]

vegetariantaxidermy... me thinks thou protest too much...
have any unresolved issues you care to share with the class?
I suspect that there are at least a dozen serious issues
that bedevil you..... maybe more....perhaps work on those first?

Kropotkin

Another brilliant wokie counterargument. How unexpected. Are you sure you don't want to bring in the 'b' word? What about the 't' word? The 'r' word? 'N' word? 'F' word? No? Old hat? I guess slithery passive-agressive aspersions on my personal life are the 'next best' thing when those have worn thin

ps. You can't use the 'w' word any more because apparently they don't exist now. Misogynists like you and Sculptor will be terribly confused...

[vegetariantaxidermy]

It's funny, I always thought the whole wokie/Marxist claim was just conspiracy garbage, but here we have two rabid wokies who both happen to be Marxists (or like to think they are). Hmmm.

[Agent Smith]

The OP is on point ... how does it all work though? I'm curious.

[Peter Kropotkin]

It's funny, I always thought the whole wokie/Marxist claim was just conspiracy garbage, but here we have two rabid wokies who both happen to be Marxists (or like to think they are). Hmmm.

K: actually, I am not a Marxist nor a communist... although, I am
sure you can't tell the difference.. I am much
closer to being an anarchist... and I lived the anarchist life
for over 10 years... no house, no cars, not paying taxes,
no bank account, I was off the grid... even went to
a world anarchist ''convention'' in 1990 or so..

Kropotkin

[Immanuel Can]

It's funny, I always thought the whole wokie/Marxist claim was just conspiracy garbage, but here we have two rabid wokies who both happen to be Marxists (or like to think they are). Hmmm.

That's because the Wokies themselves resort immediately to the "conspiracy theory" defense: that is, they claim that anybody who points out what they're plainly doing is merely a "conspiracy theorist."

For example, when CRT in public schools was first exposed, they argued that no such thing exists; then, when that failed, that it existed only as an academic legal theory that could not be taught; then, when it was pointed out that they were not teaching the theory itself as a theory, but making it a practice they drilled into kids, they claimed it wasn't CRT at all, and that what they were teaching was only "sex ed," or "anti-racism," and that any talk of deliberate indoctrination of Wokeness in children was again, "conspiracy theory."

The truth is that it's been deliberate all along. And the "conspiracy theory" line has been their chief defense. They hope to embarass their detractors and deflect the unconvinced by inducing shame in having followed a "conspiracy," which they know has pejorative connotations.

So no wonder you've found a couple. They aren't hiding; they're just claiming not to be what they obviously are, and calling you "conspirator" for having seen what they are.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

It's funny, I always thought the whole wokie/Marxist claim was just conspiracy garbage, but here we have two rabid wokies who both happen to be Marxists (or like to think they are). Hmmm.

K: actually, I am not a Marxist nor a communist... although, I am
sure you can't tell the difference.. I am much
closer to being an anarchist... and I lived the anarchist life
for over 10 years... no house, no cars, not paying taxes,
no bank account, I was off the grid... even went to
a world anarchist ''convention'' in 1990 or so..

Kropotkin

So a hobo then. Pick at nits if you want to. Peter Kropotkin is described as an 'anarchist communist' so he must have been following Marx's Communist Manifesto at some point. I don't know how an 'anarchist communist' lives and don't care. Doesn't sound very practical for anyone with children. Only fools stick rigidly to an 'ist', when society evolves and has the luxury of adopting the best ideas from many different political philosophies. Only an insane person would choose a miserable, uncomfortable life. I take it you are no longer an 'anarchist communist'?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

It's funny, I always thought the whole wokie/Marxist claim was just conspiracy garbage, but here we have two rabid wokies who both happen to be Marxists (or like to think they are). Hmmm.

That's because the Wokies themselves resort immediately to the "conspiracy theory" defense: that is, they claim that anybody who points out what they're plainly doing is merely a "conspiracy theorist."

For example, when CRT in public schools was first exposed, they argued that no such thing exists; then, when that failed, that it existed only as an academic legal theory that could not be taught; then, when it was pointed out that they were not teaching the theory itself as a theory, but making it a practice they drilled into kids, they claimed it wasn't CRT at all, and that what they were teaching was only "sex ed," or "anti-racism," and that any talk of deliberate indoctrination of Wokeness in children was again, "conspiracy theory."

The truth is that it's been deliberate all along. And the "conspiracy theory" line has been their chief defense. They hope to embarass their detractors and deflect the unconvinced by inducing shame in having followed a "conspiracy," which they know has pejorative connotations.

So no wonder you've found a couple. They aren't hiding; they're just claiming not to be what they obviously are, and calling you "conspirator" for having seen what they are.

I'm just saying I've seen a lot of wokies lately describing themselves as Marxists. Of course that's mostly illiterate, ignorant Americans. I doubt if they actually live like 'Marxists' any more than Trump does. Hypocrisy is the very foundation of the cult of woke.

[Peter Kropotkin]

It's funny, I always thought the whole wokie/Marxist claim was just conspiracy garbage, but here we have two rabid wokies who both happen to be Marxists (or like to think they are). Hmmm.

K: actually, I am not a Marxist nor a communist... although, I am
sure you can't tell the difference.. I am much
closer to being an anarchist... and I lived the anarchist life
for over 10 years... no house, no cars, not paying taxes,
no bank account, I was off the grid... even went to
a world anarchist ''convention'' in 1990 or so..

Kropotkin

So a hobo then. Pick at nits if you want to. Peter Kropotkin is described as an 'anarchist communist' so he must have been following Marx's Communist Manifesto at some point. I don't know how an 'anarchist communist' lives and don't care. Doesn't sound very practical for anyone with children. Only fools stick rigidly to an 'ist', when society evolves and has the luxury of adopting the best ideas from many different political philosophies. Only an insane person would choose a miserable, uncomfortable life. I take it you are no longer an 'anarchist communist'?

K: still not a communist... left the anarchist life when it became
clear to me that although I believe that anarchism is the future,
it is the future in about 150 or 200 years from now...
and instead of wasting my time, trying to achieve an anarchism
in the distant future, I can achieve the next best thing today...
it is a practical thing, but as I have pointed out, we make
our own choices because of the mental construct we have
of the universe...

You are defined by your choices... as I am by mine...

and I would suggest that perhaps you might take the time to
review your choices... as I do, every single day....

Kropotkin

[vegetariantaxidermy]

K: actually, I am not a Marxist nor a communist... although, I am
sure you can't tell the difference.. I am much
closer to being an anarchist... and I lived the anarchist life
for over 10 years... no house, no cars, not paying taxes,
no bank account, I was off the grid... even went to
a world anarchist ''convention'' in 1990 or so..

Kropotkin

So a hobo then. Pick at nits if you want to. Peter Kropotkin is described as an 'anarchist communist' so he must have been following Marx's Communist Manifesto at some point. I don't know how an 'anarchist communist' lives and don't care. Doesn't sound very practical for anyone with children. Only fools stick rigidly to an 'ist', when society evolves and has the luxury of adopting the best ideas from many different political philosophies. Only an insane person would choose a miserable, uncomfortable life. I take it you are no longer an 'anarchist communist'?

K: still not a communist... left the anarchist life when it became
clear to me that although I believe that anarchism is the future,
it is the future in about 150 or 200 years from now...
and instead of wasting my time, trying to achieve an anarchism
in the distant future, I can achieve the next best thing today...
it is a practical thing, but as I have pointed out, we make
our own choices because of the mental construct we have
of the universe...

You are defined by your choices... as I am by mine...

and I would suggest that perhaps you might take the time to
review your choices... as I do, every single day....

Kropotkin

Anyone who advocates for 'anarchism' doesn't have a clue about human nature. It's the most preposterous idea that is nothing more than the 'law of the jungle'. I doubt if there has ever been 'anarchism' in the entire history of human society. There are always going to be people who are natural leaders and bullies, and there are always going to be people who want to follow. There are always going to be those who behave like shit-heads when there are no rules. I've noticed in the last couple of years though that something resembling 'anarchy' is emerging and it's not pretty. The police seem to have given up policing. People are pretty much doing as they please and making life difficult and unpleasant for others. The more people get away with the worse they are going to get. They've cottoned onto the knowledge that they don't HAVE to follow rules, and that it's most likely that no one is going to do anything about it if they break them. Rules are based on the assumption that people are naturally going to do the right thing. It worked for a long time. 'Anarchy' is something that happens when society breaks down and is no longer functioning adequately. It's not something that any sane person would aspire to have.

[Peter Kropotkin]

vegetariantaxidermy :
Anyone who advocates for 'anarchism' doesn't have a clue about human nature. It's the most preposterous idea that is nothing more than the 'law of the jungle'. I doubt if there has ever been 'anarchism' in the entire history of human society. There are always going to be people who are natural leaders and bullies, and there are always going to be people who want to follow. There are always going to be those who behave like shit-heads when there are no rules. I've noticed in the last couple of years though that something resembling 'anarchy' is emerging and it's not pretty. The police seem to have given up policing. People are pretty much doing as they please and making life difficult and unpleasant for others. The more people get away with the worse they are going to get. They've cottoned onto the knowledge that they don't HAVE to follow rules, and that it's most likely that no one is going to do anything about it if they break them. Rules are based on the assumption that people are naturally going to do the right thing. It worked for a long time. 'Anarchy' is something that happens when society breaks down and is no longer functioning adequately. It's not something that any sane person would aspire to have.
[/quote]

K: not a whole lot of flexibility in you, is there?
everything is black and white... and I have bad news,
life and everything in it, is shades of gray....a long time
ago, in my thirties, decades ago, I too thought in terms
of black and white... for everything had its place and was
either right or wrong.... not so much anymore....

anarchism is just as valid a political/economic system as
capitalism or communism... and I would even go so far
as to suggest, it is in many ways, a culmination of what
it means to be human... to freely choose who you
are and what it means to be human is what we are,
or we ought to be aiming for...

anarchism is simply a means of making choices...
capitalism, communism, Catholicism, Buddhism
are means by which others/society makes our choices
for us... I believe in us, human beings making our own
choices... if you believe in democracy, you should
really believe in anarchism...for anarchism is just
democracy taken to the next logical step...

and as I said, I do believe that the future will be an
anarchistic one, just not today... that anarchism will
not only be possible, but it will be inevitable....


Kropotkin

[Immanuel Can]

I'm just saying I've seen a lot of wokies lately describing themselves as Marxists. Of course that's mostly illiterate, ignorant Americans. I doubt if they actually live like 'Marxists' any more than Trump does. Hypocrisy is the very foundation of the cult of woke.

They're "Neo-Marxists." They claim that what Marx taught was "crude Marxism" (their term), and that Cultural Marxism of their kind is the "real" Marxism, the "sophisticated" Marxism, the one that will work where Marx failed.

But there are a couple of types of Wokies, so they're not all the same. Some know full well they're Neo-Marxists. The BLM founders are quite proud of being "trained Marxists" (as they themselves say). Some, including many academics, have a sense they're some kind of "Socialist," but don't have enough depth of knowledge to know where their ideas are coming from. Most, the greater part of them, including most who have been educated in grievance studies subjects and so forth,are more likely just to be opportunists and go-alongs, who want not to work, or to have their debts paid off, or to have government pay for other free stuff for them, and who have very little idea about the derivations of the foolish ideas they have in their heads. They just think of it as "political correctness" or "social justice" or "anti-racism/sexism/whitism," or "social welfare thinking," rather than anything that goes back to Marx.

Nevertheless, it's all really Hegelian in origin. Marx made Hegelian dialectics and historicism into a Materialist theory. The Neo-Marxists have made it into a popular cultural delusion that goes under those other names, including "social justice" and "Wokism", by steps that are very clearly historically traceable. It came over from Europe with "The Frankfurt School," with people such as Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse, but drawing on characters like Lukacs and Gramsci, as well. James Lindsay does a great job of unpacking it in his recent book, Race Marxism.

The hypocrisy is that those people who crow about "social justice" never want it applied to them...just to other people. For themselves, they expect exemption. For example, they're not giving up their own cushy houses, university positions, jobs or social programs in order to aid the Developing World. They expect the people they hate, the alleged "1%", to do that for them -- not realizing that THEY are the "1%", (or at least the highly privileged 10%) when considered on a world scale.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I'm just saying I've seen a lot of wokies lately describing themselves as Marxists. Of course that's mostly illiterate, ignorant Americans. I doubt if they actually live like 'Marxists' any more than Trump does. Hypocrisy is the very foundation of the cult of woke.

They're "Neo-Marxists." They claim that what Marx taught was "crude Marxism" (their term), and that Cultural Marxism of their kind is the "real" Marxism, the "sophisticated" Marxism, the one that will work where Marx failed.

But there are a couple of types of Wokies, so they're not all the same. Some know full well they're Neo-Marxists. The BLM founders are quite proud of being "trained Marxists" (as they themselves say). Some, including many academics, have a sense they're some kind of "Socialist," but don't have enough depth of knowledge to know where their ideas are coming from. Most, the greater part of them, including most who have been educated in grievance studies subjects and so forth,are more likely just to be opportunists and go-alongs, who want not to work, or to have their debts paid off, or to have government pay for other free stuff for them, and who have very little idea about the derivations of the foolish ideas they have in their heads. They just think of it as "political correctness" or "social justice" or "anti-racism/sexism/whitism," or "social welfare thinking," rather than anything that goes back to Marx.

Nevertheless, it's all really Hegelian in origin. Marx made Hegelian dialectics and historicism into a Materialist theory. The Neo-Marxists have made it into a popular cultural delusion that goes under those other names, including "social justice" and "Wokism", by steps that are very clearly historically traceable. It came over from Europe with "The Frankfurt School," with people such as Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse, but drawing on characters like Lukacs and Gramsci, as well. James Lindsay does a great job of unpacking it in his recent book, Race Marxism.

The hypocrisy is that those people who crow about "social justice" never want it applied to them...just to other people. For themselves, they expect exemption. For example, they're not giving up their own cushy houses, university positions, jobs or social programs in order to aid the Developing World. They expect the people they hate, the alleged "1%", to do that for them -- not realizing that THEY are the "1%", (or at least the highly privileged 10%) when considered on a world scale.

I'm so fed up with fucking stupid labels. You are an anti-choice, woman-hating religious nut-job, yet we agree on this ONE thing. What does that mean? If we are lumped into the same 'box', what will the label on that box be? As a matter of fact you have more in common with the wokie cult than I do i.e. it hates women.