Conservative pundit can't define 'woke'

[Gerarddm]

‘This is Gonna Be One of Those Moments That Goes Viral’: Conservative Pundit Short-Circuits When Asked to Define ‘Wokeness’ (msn.com)

OF COURSE she can't.

I find it is easy: a decent respect for the points of view of marginalized people. Y'know, a little bit of humanity.

[wizbang 13]

Lotta people can’t define “woman”. I can’t .

[L.W. Baxter]

should have consulted osborne russell on the split screen

[Kevin T]

Wow if you follow the links to actual video on Mediate, it's almost as if she had a mini-stroke right after the question was asked and then attempted to answer and delivered nothing but a tasteless word salad.

[Paul Pless]

dumbass

[Paul Pless]

^ not you gerard, bruce, lee, nor kevin

[Figment]

"wrote a whole chapter on this..." but can't bottom-line it. What's the pricetag on that book?

One would THINK that the rest of the woke-crying right is huddling up to agree on a coherent definition right now, but that might take a minute.

[LeeG]

“Ah knows it when Ah sees it!”

[John Smith]

Of course they can't define it. I'd say it's the opposite of asleep. I'd say it's paying attention.

Doubt they'd like any of those.

[Paul Pless]

“Ah knows it when Ah sees it!”

past tense of wake?

[hawkeye54]

It is a word they commandeered, so they could have something that sounds 'official' , I guess ( What's that they say "Remain silent and be thought a fool, or open your mouth and remove all doubt " )

[JimD]

Open minded? Inclusive? Tolerant? Who would want that in their own back yard?

[CWSmith]

OF COURSE she can't.

I'm not surprised. When those who play follow-the-leader latch onto something, they don't normally stop to evaluate what it means.

[CWSmith]

Open minded? Inclusive? Tolerant? Who would want that in their own back yard?

Actually, I've seen it used in terms of "You can't express your political opinions by boycotting stores you don't like."

Like many memes, if that's the word for it, it takes on new meanings as it gets thrown around.

[rbgarr]

The current MAGA/Fox claim that the recent bank failures are due to 'woke' directors is pretty humorous. How many of the largest corporate bankruptcies do you think had boards entirely made up of white men? Take a guess: https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-c...in-us-history/

[Figment]

WSJ even printed a thing Monday which included the phrase "I'm not saying 12 white men would have avoided this mess, but the company may have been distracted by diversity demands"

I mean W T A F was going through that editor's head when he gave that one the thumbs up?

[Boatbum]

I wonder....How much better do you think Joe Biden would have done answering that question? Or Trump, Or chuck Schumer, or Mitch McConnell?

[L.W. Baxter]

I wonder....How much better do you think Joe Biden would have done answering that question? Or Trump, Or chuck Schumer, or Mitch McConnell?

i'm sure they would handle it fine. but why should biden or schumer be on the spot over the meaning of "woke".

"i dunno, you tell me"

[Breakaway]

WSJ even printed a thing Monday which included the phrase "I'm not saying 12 white men would have avoided this mess, but the company may have been distracted by diversity demands"

I mean W T A F was going through that editor's head when he gave that one the thumbs up?

Was it a news piece or an editorial/ op ed?

Kevin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[David G]

I'm not surprised. When those who play follow-the-leader latch onto something, they don't normally stop to evaluate what it means.

Indeed. It's not meant to be a word with actual discrete meaning.

It's just the latest 'blanket perjorative' term that they don't try to define, or care about the actual meaning.

[Boatbum]

i'm sure they would handle it fine. but why should biden or schumer be on the spot over the meaning of "woke".

"i dunno, you tell me"

So then you don't think any of them use the term? Think again.

And I don't think any of them would be any good at all at defining Woke. I don't think most people can. They might be able to spot it when they see it bu tI think most would have the slightest idea how to define it.

[Figment]

Was it a news piece or an editorial/ op ed?

Kevin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

opinion column written by a ex-silicon-valley hedge fund guy.

[Johan R]

i'm sure they would handle it fine. but why should biden or schumer be on the spot over the meaning of "woke".

Perhaps because Biden just recently said he was "actively supporting gay marriage since 1959", but his record shows he actively campaigned against it till 2008.

[Jimmy W]

Was it a news piece or an editorial/ op ed?

Kevin


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Andy Kessler

[David G]

a Wall Street Journal op-ed by Andy Kessler

WSJ is a strange critter. Bifurcated. The news side seems to have managed to maintain its independence and excellence, while the editorial side is topheavy with troglodytes. Want an easy way to judge what policies are on the right side of history? Do the opposite of what their editorials espouse.

[L.W. Baxter]

So then you don't think any of them use the term? Think again.

And I don't think any of them would be any good at all at defining Woke. I don't think most people can. They might be able to spot it when they see it bu tI think most would have the slightest idea how to define it.

think again about what.

in my observation, the word "woke" is used far more often by reactionary pols and media than by anybody on the left.

when lefties do use it, it is to defend the term, as the concept of awareness and desire for social justice, from the anti-social justice warriors of the right, who employ the the word as an epithet. most of know that "woke" is a term that has been in black american lexicon for almost a century. it is grotesque for reactionary ignoramuses to ridicule it, without even being able to define it.

so, give me a quote. joe biden using the term "woke". to describe himself, another person, or a policy.

show me joe stumbling over the meaning of "woke". you pose the hypothetical. why is it hypothetical?

[John Smith]

They can't define it. They don't need to. They just tell their followers "woke' is bad, and their followers ask no questions.

[elf]

"It's sort of the understanding that we need to re-imagine and re-do society in order to create hierarchies of oppression".

I think she did just fine. This is exactly the way both sides experience society. Her group experiences it as people who think like her at the bottom. Progressives experience it as people who think like them at the bottom. Both groups would like to re-order power structures in society such that they are not experiencing being at the bottom.

The problem is that she doesn't understand that it goes both ways.

[Osborne Russell]

"It's sort of the understanding that we need to re-imagine and re-do society in order to create hierarchies of oppression".

I think she did just fine. This is exactly the way both sides experience society. Her group experiences it as people who think like her at the bottom. Progressives experience it as people who think like them at the bottom. Both groups would like to re-order power structures in society such that they are not experiencing being at the bottom.

The problem is that she doesn't understand that it goes both ways.

We need to create new hierarchies of oppression?

Who decides who needs oppressing by these new hierarchies?

[Osborne Russell]

Can one be woke and opposed to CRT?

[gypsie]

We need to create new hierarchies of oppression?

Prezactly - define that MF statement!

[David G]

Indeed. It's not meant to be a word with actual discrete meaning.

It's just the latest 'blanket perjorative' term that they don't try to define, or care about the actual meaning.

It's THIS same sort of hysterical, wedge-issue, nonsense --


Tennessee Republicans target America's greatest threat: Drag shows. That'll save us!

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...q/11393431002/

[Gerarddm]

[Canoeyawl]

Not Woke

0A01C0DE-63E1-4A17-A3AC-DB893806B17E.jpg

[John Smith]

They don't care what it means. They're against it.