Is Woke a religion?

[mikkel_the_dane]

I am repeating myself on this blog, endless repeats yes woke is a religion, 'secular fundamentalism"

What blog is that?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Its marxist, its religious. woke are indeed cultural Marxists, the extreme left Woke who label all who disagree phobes-haters-bigots-fascists. Ironically like the fundamentalist, science is held in contempt by the Woke. Empirical science upholds basic biology, which like the fundamentalists also go against subjective narratives of the woke mob. As I encountered the Woksters online I found promoting facts only earn ad hominem comments leading to their blocking of myself and all who dare disagree. In a group with ‘woke mob’ members I, like all others who disagreed were designated as a ‘phobe-hater-bigot-fascist,’ thus all objective facts presented were dismissed amid frantic cyber arm waving. The facts of biology are clear, no amount of drugs, self-mutilation or ideology will alter XX or XY chromosomes. It was openly declared online by the Woke the facts of biology are of no consequence, subjective feelings transcending objective facts. The Woke promoters of gender ideology brazenly state how one subjectively feels is paramount, and is all that matters. To the woke if one wants to declare themselves a pineapple, basketball, Apache helicopter or another gender, that's what they are and you, with the rest of society must accept it or your a phoebe-hater-bigot-fascist. My banning from a woke dominated group resulted from posting that XX and XY chromosomes are not malleable. The old horseshoe theory, that opposites meet is seen in the similarities between the fundamentalists and woke, displaying how woke is very religious

All I saw was blah blah blah I can't be bothered to accurately portray this so instead heres some stuff I'll parot from highly biased RW sources.

 

[Magic Man]

Yes indeed, as I said, it's a collection of ideas that tend to be held by a certain group of people.

This post of yours is a great example of what I'll call "woke" until a better term is established. Being critical of trans rights activists (TRAs), is not
"anti-LGBTQ". In fact it's the TRAs who consistently promote misogynistic and homophobic agendas.

***STAFF EDIT*** You're not "critical of trans rights activists", "TRAs" isn't a thing, and those of us pushing for trans rights are not in any way promoting misogyny or homophobia. That's just propaganda you've fallen for.

DEI is a multi-billion dollar industry, get up to speed.

It is not. Get up to speed.

Some examples of attempts to curtail speech are: the ideas of "deadnaming" and "misgendering". The rise of "hate crime" and "hate speech" legislation throughout the western world.

Deadnaming and misgendering are not attempt to curtail free speech. They're just pointing out inappropriate ways of addressing trans people. You can still choose to be a jerk and deadname and misgender someone. You'll just be called out for it by people like me. Go ahead and give an example of legislation that "curtails free speech". No vague "throughout the western world". Actual specific examples with details.

Sorry, but an individual's lived experience is just a single data point. Policy ought to be determined by statistics.

It is not a data point. Statistics can be helpful too, but that doesn't exclude actually understanding people situations. Instead of using buzzwords, go ahead and address the actual idea. All this suggests is to listen to people and understand their experiences. You are advocating that we shouldn't listen to people or understand their experiences? We should determine policy without understanding people?

Can you give us all some examples of systemic racism?

Sure, the justice system is a great one for many reasons.

Nope, I will not agree that the woke ideas I've just listed are the new "liberal". The woke are attempting to hijack the term liberal and that hjacking needs to be resisted.

I mean, you can disagree with reality, but it's still going to be reality. The ideas you listed aren't woke, and they're not "the new liberal". Those are things American liberals accept, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

Can you define the key ideas of traditional immigration?

Can you?

You also skipped the part about MLK. MLK was pretty radical. He supported almost all the things you listed:

- intersectionality theory
- the oppressed vs. oppressor worldview
- lived experience
- DEI
- systemic racism

All of those are part of his worldview. So, good job on agreeing with all those "woke" ideas.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What is religion?

Reminds me of theists (mostly Christians who do this) who insist and demand that atheism is a religion and that atheists too have faith that similar and comparable to that of a theist's faith in god.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This post of yours is a great example of what I'll call "woke" until a better term is established. Being critical of trans rights activists (TRAs), is not
"anti-LGBTQ". In fact it's the TRAs who consistently promote misogynistic and homophobic agendas.

Only to people like you, people like you who call women misogynist when they disagree with you, a man.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Reminds me of theists (mostly Christians who do this) who insist and demand that atheism is a religion and that atheists too have faith that similar and comparable to that of a theist's faith in god.

Well, yes. Atheists are not religious as such. But we are all subjectivists when it comes to morality as far as I can tell, so we all have beliefs without evidence.

 

[Magic Man]

This is a complex topic, but MLK was about judging people by their character, not their skin color.

No, that's the quote conservatives like you focus on solely to the exclusion of everything else he said. What that quote actually says is:

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

He dreamed of a time in the future when Black people would be judged by the content of their character. To get to that point he advocated some pretty radical ideas. He also promoted DEI, anti-system-racism, and ending the oppressor-oppressed way things work.

Of course it's complex. That's no excuse for not standing up and admitting it if you think these ideas have merit. I have many times on this forum listed exactly what ideas I support as a classic liberal. I have not once seen a poster admit that they support the ideas I listed above.

Huh? I just pointed out who supports them. I support them (except for the gender ideology, which, as I said, isn't a thing, and the curtailing of free speech, which also isn't a thing). The other ones are very typical liberal (America) ideas. System racism is real and needs to be addressed. There is an oppressor vs. oppressed system that needs to be addressed. WE should definitely listen to people about their experiences so we can understand where they're coming from. DEI is a way to fight racism and bigotry.

 

[Magic Man]

Woke is the new twist on the old demon of totalitarianism. Freedom is fought against by the left with redefined terms. Today words are VIOLENCE or even words are defined as TERRORISM. Divergent beliefs are HATE SPEECH or expressions of PHOBIA. Books they don't like are OFFENSIVE or INSENSITIVE to targeted VICTIM identity groups-the list of which grows longer and longer, class against class(marx) now we are even told STANDARDS are "oppression" - and this is all alien to us who love LIBERTY. Have we lost the culture? Words are not violence- speech is not terrorism- disliking , disagreeing is not phobic- - loving liberty is not fascist, agreeing with God and basic biology does not render one a bigot . Placing FACTS above feelings does not nessessary render one "insensitive. "

This is a bunch of nonsense. If you feel like making actual declarations with any kind of detail, instead of this vague drivel, let me know. Then we could actually hash out the exact problems with your claims.

 

[Magic Man]

Nope.

And it seems nothing will change your mind, so this isn't really a debate. With that I'll stick with what I said above.

Nope.

Even starting a thread for this topic was a pretty clear indication that it's not about debate for him or the possibility of changing his mind or even considering anything else. But then his use of "cultural marxism" seals the deal. It's guaranteed when someone throws that term out there, they're just going to spew some propaganda and ignore any actual facts presented.

 

[Eddi]

I am repeating myself on this blog, endless repeats yes woke is a religion, 'secular fundamentalism"

Is there such a thing as a Woke house of worship?

Does being woke entail certain beliefs about the afterlife?

No on both counts

It is a world view, an ideology. Certainly.

But not quite a religion

Does anyone actually identify as having "woke" as their religion????

 

[icehorse]

My main point is that the term "woke" has become so weaponized and malleable as to be unhelpful more often than not in any serious discourse. Case in point: the way you're using it above seems to me to essentially imply that being "woke" is an inherently negative thing, but that would be the case only if one were to agree with the definition you're using for the term and your assessment of the views you believe fall within that definition.

I started off by asking for a different term, correct?

I have answered both in previous discussions we have had and have also seen others do the same, and I have no interest in revisiting that topic with you at the moment. Good luck if you decide to do so, though.

I recall many answers, none of them of high quality. But if you dismiss the term gender ideology out of hand, you bring the question back up again.

What constitutes "intersectionality theory" or an "oppressor vs. oppressed worldview" is left vague on your list. Any given person you're talking to may use either term to mean something other than what you have in mind, and this often leads to miscommunication and talking past each other, especially if either of you assumes that the other means the same things you have in mind without asking.

Does that mean these ideas don't exist? Of course I realize that these are complex ideas and not at all binary (haha), but that doesn't mean they cannot be used to categorize or characterize arguments and beliefs.

For example, we hear the term "colonizer" used over and over again these days. To me anyone who uses that term is either weak on history, or has made some (unconscious?) decisions about what context is appropriate.

One thing I have seen is that some people take perceived or real misuse of a term or concept, such as overly broad application thereof, and dismiss the entire term or concept on that basis. I view that as an act of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

We're largely agreed here. I think much of what I'm - FOR THE TIME BEING - calling woke is ideas that started off with good intentions, but have been hijacked. So I agree that there can be some utility in intersectionality, but it has been distorted and is now often (not always, bu often), used to ill effect.

 

[Viker]

Clear definition cultural marxism;

The Woke mob departs somewhat from the Marxists of the last hundred years, dressing themselves up in slightly different rhetoric replacing economics with race and sex. Having grown up around fundamentalists and now seeing the growth of Woke there is little to differentiate the secular Woke from the fundamentalists, the similarities are in fact striking.



--The Woke have replaced Marx's ‘proletariat’ with ‘marginalized. ’



--Marx's ‘economic struggle’ is now replaced by ‘intersectionality.‘



--Marx’s utopian fantasy, from socialism to communism has been replaced with the woke fantasy of, ’ inclusive equitable society.’ Both fundamentalism and the woke entertain grand fantasies, utopian visions.



-Marx openly hated democracy which he saw as empowering oppressor/ victim, giving more power to the bourgeoisie with greater abilities to exploit the proletariat. The Woke, unlike liberals are not concerned with equality of opportunity but the equality of outcome. The woke, unlike the traditional Marxists see oppressor/victim as primarily racial and sexual with only an omnipotent state structure the means to enforce ‘equity.’ Democratic institutions to the woke are inherently phobe-hater-bigot-fascist, and racist, and, in lockstep with Marxism, as a consequence must be overturned.



---For the Marxist totalitarian the collectivist ideal is the goal, not the individual who must be subservient to the collective ideals, that has stayed the same with the emergence of Woke.



--Both protestant fundamentalism and Woke hold subjectivity above objective facts rendering both religions, their narratives, dogmatically foisted are religious claims.



--A common saying among the Woke faithful is ‘Your truth/my truth’ meaning no objective standard for truth exists. The fundamentalists say they know something is true ‘in their heart,’ further examples of both being religious.



--Both are ridged and dogmatic thus rejecting debate or critical analysis. The fundamentalists say free inquiry, open debate gives open air to Satan and his minions, declaring debate should be suppressed because it breeds ‘contentiousness.’ The Woke say debate gives exploitative powers to various oppressors. Other reasons offered by the woke to suppress debate and discourse in general are declarations like, “debate causes division!” Open debate is expository, revealing in the dialectic process objective facts and sometimes truth. When one accepts objective reality lies are short circuited thus facts have no fear of free inquiry or open debate. A lie hates free inquiry and as a consequence totalitarians strive to suppress free inquiry, free speech and debate. Once I knew an exchange student raised in a dictatorship. This young woman openly stated ‘debate’ about government policies in her country was considered ‘disrespectful ‘ to authority. I asked the young lady “Why in a democratic republic does anyone with any civil authority need to be ‘respected,’ exalted in any way more than anyone else?” I added the mere notion that ‘government’ knows whats best is something beyond my understanding of what the function of government is. To my points the young lady had no rebuttal, rendered uneasy by the topic matter.

Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory - Wikipedia

'Cultural Marxism' Catching On

 

[Viker]

No such thing as "cultural Marxism". It's another far right invention intended to denigrate their opposition, people actively seeking justice and equality. The civil rights people are made out be the "bad guys" or just like their alleged allies the communists. Malarkey.

 

[icehorse]

***STAFF EDIT***

It is not. Get up to speed.

Again, DEI is a multi-billion dollar industry:

Global Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Strategic Research Report 2024: Market to Reach $24.4 Billion by 2030 - Top Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Trends for 2023 and Beyond

Sure, the justice system is a great one for many reasons.

specifics?

Can you?

Traditional immigration: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. The host country decides which applicants to approve based on the applicant's abilities to contribute to the host country.

You also skipped the part about MLK. MLK was pretty radical. He supported almost all the things you listed:

- intersectionality theory
- the oppressed vs. oppressor worldview
- lived experience
- DEI
- systemic racism

All of those are part of his worldview. So, good job on agreeing with all those "woke" ideas.

Again, with jazz hands:

Many of these woke ideas started off well but have been distorted over time. I think MLK would be horrified by a lot of today's wokism. That of course is an opinion that would b impossible for anyone to prove or disprove.

 

[icehorse]

Only to people like you, people like you who call women misogynist when they disagree with you, a man.

Anyone who supports misogynistic policies is a misogynist in my book. Now in the case of supporting TRAs I think a lot of people support them in good faith, without an understanding of their agendas, and those people ought to get a pass.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Anyone who supports misogynistic policies is a misogynist in my book. Now in the case of supporting TRAs I think a lot of people support them in good faith, without an understanding of their agendas, and those people ought to get a pass.

You have a funny book the way it has you telling women who disagree with you they are all misogynist. Most the active members here have seen you do this.
If we look at stats overall women are more likely to accept and evem support trans people than men are.
And that leaves us here with you, a man--who as a group are more likely to be antagonistic towards trans people--telling a group--women--they are misogynist for doing what they are more likely to do.
Now who is the misogynist?

 

[Magic Man]

***STAFF EDIT***

Again, DEI is a multi-billion dollar industry:

Global Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) Strategic Research Report 2024: Market to Reach $24.4 Billion by 2030 - Top Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Trends for 2023 and Beyond

Again, no, it's not. But let's even put that aside. Even if it was, so what?

specifics?

The war on drugs is a big one.

Traditional immigration: Immigration is a privilege, not a right. The host country decides which applicants to approve based on the applicant's abilities to contribute to the host country.

That's not "traditional immigration". That's just immigration. That's my point. There's no such thing as "traditional immigration". It's a fabricated term to make you feel better about making a nonsensical distinction.

Again, with jazz hands:

You mean with the facts that disprove your claims? I guess you could call it jazz hands, but that's a weird way to put it.

Many of these woke ideas started off well but have been distorted over time.

Nope. They started off well and have been maintained well. You're just trying to wiggle out of your true convictions.

I think MLK would be horrified by a lot of today's wokism. That of course is an opinion that would b impossible for anyone to prove or disprove.

No, it's very easy to disprove. We've already done it here. The very things you suggested are "woke" are things MLK explicitly advocated. You're just attempting the typical conservative narrative here. This has been part of conservative propaganda for a while: using a distorted version of that one quote by him while ignoring everything else he said, so that you can pretend to be on the right side of history, even though you're directly going against the very things he promoted.

 

[Argentbear]

the Woke are secular fundamentalists. Like the fundamentalist the woke deny science, the fundamentalist deny existence of fossils and the age of the earth while the Woke deny the basic biological differences of male and female.

How exactly is being alert to discrimination denying science?

In denial of scientific fact both fundamentalism and Woke culture make war on reality itself — a deliberate denial of the existence of any objective truths about ourselves or the world around us.

you mean like the objective truth that NeoMarxism is nothing like you are claiming?

They seek to replace objective reality with social constructionist theories denying physical biology and all scientific evidence showing how our species developed and has been shaped over millennia into what we are today: that is people with certain innate qualities related to our race or sex (gender). The renunciation of scientific fact is unashamedly, overtly promoted by the both the fundamentalist and woke.

 

[icehorse]

You have a funny book the way it has you telling women who disagree with you they are all misogynist. Most the active members here have seen you do this.
If we look at stats overall women are more likely to accept and evem support trans people than men are.
And that leaves us here with you, a man--who as a group are more likely to be antagonistic towards trans people--telling a group--women--they are misogynist for doing what they are more likely to do.
Now who is the misogynist?

And here is a nice bit of "identity politics" performance art, I think you help me make my point

 

[icehorse]

That's not "traditional immigration". That's just immigration. That's my point. There's no such thing as "traditional immigration". It's a fabricated term to make you feel better about making a nonsensical distinction.

That's how immigration has been for decades.

These days it's common for "the woke" to push for open borders and that's simply a bad approach to immigration.

With that said, I'm all for substantially increasing aid in place policies.

You're just trying to wiggle out of your true convictions.

Another example of you making my points for me. It ought to be clear to anyone reading this thread that when you stoop to strawman arguments like the one you just made, you don't have a good argument. Thank you!