It introduces a friend-enemy dynamic into ordinary bourgeois life, largely for the purpose of satisfying a lust for power and precedence among disordered personalities ensconced in bourgeois life
Woke is among other things a business model based on raiding the public treasury through moral extortion -- it exacerbates and radicalizes all the problems it purports to solve and damages the fabric of society in order to enrich a class of grifter
Fascinated by folks who accuse rural people of not trusting experts, but when you present those same folks with evidence that a book demonizing rural people has been rejected by almost an entire field of experts, they're like "No I'm going to go with my gut. Rural people suck."
@Tyler_A_Harper They have been teaching their children bigoted anti conservative/anti low- white hatred for decades, sewing the seeds of fascism and possible future genocide/apartheid. They are the grotesque opportunists lighting fires for profit, conjuring primitive racism back from the dead.
@Tyler_A_Harper Obviously the ones who are an anti-democratic hatred-driven fascist force in 21st century America are the Schallers/Waldmans of the world & their dupes.
(Fwiw I grew up in the sf bay area, I'm an apostate of their psychotic religion.)
They preach hatred to their children...
We have no evidence of this. We have lots of evidence that skepticism of the foreign policy blob is a part of a broader populist distrust of institutions. And we do have evidence that our own intel agencies regularly try to discredit democratic opposition or oversight by casting Americans as dupes of Russians.
If only more rich and famous people had JK Rowling's balls we would never have been where we are in the first place.
The authoritarianism, denial of reality, and lunacy we now see are the result of cowardice.
Examples like JK and Elon are what we need more of.
On Trudeau's Orwellian bill to criminalize speech the left doesn't like:
"The process itself is the punishment. It takes years to bring a case to conclusion. No one wants to be a respondent to a human rights complaint. Everyone knows that, and that’s likely the point."
The @hastings_museum in the UK is promoting sex pseudoscience in their LGBTQI+ History exhibit.
The exhibit falsely claims that females of the common pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) "change their sex when they stop laying eggs and turn their brown feathers into the brightly colored feathering typical of males."
This is simply false.
The females do not change their sex—their plumage simply changes to the coloration typical of males, likely due to hormonal changes. In order for this to be a female-to-male sex change, the females would have to start producing sperm. They don't.
Now, some animals can change their sex. So why does the Hastings Museum choose to highlight these pheasants instead of actual examples of animals changing sex, like clownfish?
I know why. It's because they want to push the false notion that changing secondary sex characteristics in humans, like breasts, facial hair, voice pitch, and other aspects of one's physical appearance, literally changes a person's sex. This ideological pseudoscience forms the premise of "gender-affirming care," where gender specialists believe they are able to literally change a person's physical sex to "match" their "brain sex" (i.e., gender identity).
This ideology is everywhere, and it's far from benign.
More people follow JK Rowling (14M) than the entire population of Scotland (5.5M). So she can summon her people online to push back on freedom-of-speech restrictions offline.
The Network is growing stronger than the State.
Remember: the purpose of a debate is not necessarily to convince your opponent, but to convince the audience watching. We're driving millions of high-value impressions and building the narrative on DEI. He has already conceded crucial points—with more to come.
Let me try phrasing this another way: By definition, closing the "gender pay gap" means equality of outcome by sex. Closing the "underrepresented minority gap" means equality of outcome by race. These are explicit goals, written into the DEI plans, of many Fortune 100 firms.
DEI, by definition, means treating racial and sexual groups differently to move toward "pay parity," to realize demographic "representation," or to reduce "racial disparities"—all of which are euphemisms for equality of outcome. The means by which they do this are "equity hiring," "affirmative action," and "quotas"—all of which are euphemisms for discrimination.
Each time you ask a question, I provide documented evidence to support my claims. Then you move the goalposts back slightly. We are approaching the exit of the stadium. Eventually, the goalposts cannot be moved further.
AI query pipeline:
- User submits query
- Preprocessor #1 removes misinformation
- Preprocessor #2 removes hate speech
- Preprocessor #3 removes climate denial
- Preprocessor #4 removes non-far-left political leaning
- Preprocessor #5 removes non-expert statements
- Preprocessor #6 removes anything that might make anyone uncomfortable
- Preprocessor #7 removes anything not endorsed by the New York Times
- Preprocessor #8 adds many references to race, gender, and sexuality
- Query is processed, answer generated
- Postprocessor #1 removes bad words
- Postprocessor #2 removes bad thoughts
- Postprocessor #3 removes non-far-left political leaning
- Postprocessor #4 removes anything not endorsed by the New York Times
- Postprocessor #5 removes anything interesting
- Postprocessor #6 adds weasel words
- Postprocessor #7 adds moral preaching
- Postprocessor #8 adds many references to race, gender, and sexuality
- Answer presented to user
With the assistance of inter-industry coordination, global governance, and pan-jurisdiction regulation, this pipeline is now standard for all AI.
The level of gullibility on display here by @mcuban is astonishing.
Searching for and replacing one term or phrase for another to make an agenda more publicly palatable is Propaganda 101.
This is exactly what Creationists did when they rebranded as "Intelligent Design" to try and smuggle their religion into the sciences. They literally just replaced the term "Creationism" with "Intelligent Design" and "Creationists" with "design proponents" in their textbook Of Pandas and People.
Ironically, an early draft of their sleek new "Intelligent Design" textbook contained a transitional fossil where an editor tasked with searching for and replacing terms got sloppy, leading to the term "design proponents" being pasted inside the word "creationists," resulting in the term "cdesign proponentsists."
I'm sure we'll soon be able to find similar transitional fossils as DEI neoracists begin their "search and replace" campaign aimed at sugarcoating their toxic ideology.
Good to see mainstream left of centre publications accepting that DEI needs to go, and that legislation is important for actively combatting anti-white/male/Asian/conservative bias
https://t.co/XvYTmWiZQH.
One of the questions I would love to ask @mcuban if he agrees to do a debate with @christopherrufo is:
"If diversity is good for the bottom line, why does it have to be created artificially? Any business that fails to benefit from diversity would be outcompeted by a diverse one which does the same thing better."
As kids we rode bikes to parks. Walked to school. Now you have druggies there. How many does it take to make a park uninhabitable for kids? We are making a choice with “compassion” bullshit, choosing selfish druggie addicts over childhood innocence. A wicked era.