zlacker

>>crbela+(OP)
Black person here.

Like most discussions of "woke" and "wokeness," this one too fails HARD by not fully and directly addressing the origins of the term -- and by "fails hard" I do mean will almost certainly do more obscuring than clarifying by starting from an information-deficient premise.

Including, e.g. "The term 'woke' has its origins in the Black American community as a signifier of awareness about ones political and social situation..." is a bare minimum.

>>jrm4+en1
There is so very little citation or substantiation in the entire essay. Even the footnotes are largely just more speculation. He presents it as some kind of historical record but it's literally just his thoughts.

>>causal+Qt1
It’s almost like that is the entirety of the rhetorical and argument station expectations when people comment on too much wokeness.

Vibes.

“I invented a meaning for this word that bears no resemblance to its actual meaning and then am critical of others because I think my invented definition is bad”

>>avs733+C93

  1. Build a strawman.
  2. Beat the living hell out of the strawman.
  3.”I’m sure this will trigger some people”.
  4. Get a standing ovation from Elon Musk.
  5. Lots of money from private capital.

>>kubb+dr3
He didn’t even have to build his own strawman. It is a shared strawman - which is more efficient. PG out there disrupting the bad faith argument industry.