zlacker

You are dismissing the issue by implying it is a right wing thing.

Obama is using the term and criticising people who do it in this clip. I in no way consider him to be right wing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaHLd8de6nM

>>gitfan+(OP)
Not too mention Bill Maher who is also firmly on the left.

>>lazyey+s5
Firmly? Come on

>>lazyey+s5
Yeah. If the left (and the democratic party more generally) throws out all the "anti-woke" people, there won't be many people left.

You'd lose Obama, Bill Maher, Joe Rogan (yes really.), Stephen Fry, Bernie Sanders, and on and on it goes.

I hate puritanical finger wagging. I think most people feel the same way. That has nothing to do with my political opinions on other topics, like abortion, gun control and so on.

I think the left in the US makes a massive strategic error by claiming that everyone who doesn't like "woke" is right wing. The right wing is delighted to have all of those voters.

>>lazyey+s5
He is absolutely not. He’s a science denier and routinely has anti vaxxers on without pushing back on their ideas

>>HDThor+PX
You’re never gonna believe this but the hippie granola left were the original antivaxxers. The first places where you started hearing about measles outbreaks in the US were all affluent left leaning communities with a strong granola contingent, like Santa Monica, California.

>>toaste+T21
You’re never going to believe this but those people are no longer on the left. Its passed them by

>>gitfan+(OP)
At this point is probably not meant as 5 years ago. But even 5 years ago the meaning of the word had shifted away from the original meaning.

>>HDThor+D61
That is kind of the point Paul is making in his essay. The most progressive people are pushing an ever evolving definition of what it means to be racist or anti-science or a bigot.

This is why Trump won. People got tired of being told they were a bigot if they expressed any concerns that were not inline with the most recent trends of progressivism.

>>lazyey+s5
He isn't though.

He represents his own distorted view of reality that's increasingly disconnected at a classiest level

>>gitfan+bD1
> That is kind of the point Paul is making in his essay. The most progressive people are pushing an ever evolving definition of what it means to be racist or anti-science or a bigot.

This isn't what progressives are doing as much as it's what conservatives characterize it as what progressives are doing.

> This is why Trump won. People got tired of being told they were a bigot if they expressed any concerns that were not inline with the most recent trends of progressivism.

This isn't why Trump won, data we have access to shows that.

>>btreec+2P1
Just read the threads here. People are specifically saying Obama's criticism of Woke are no longer valid because the word has changed. But Paul is using the same definition that Obama used.

Is is the progressives who have decided unilaterally that woke is now a pejorative that racists use to demonize progressives and doesn't mean what it used to mean 5 years ago.

>>gitfan+RW1
Obama isn't progressive!

He's not using the progressive definition, hes using the conservative one, just like PG is. Both are wrong in this aspect.

>Is is the progressives who have decided unilaterally that woke is now a pejorative that racists use to demonize progressives and doesn't mean what it used to mean 5 years ago.

this is incorrect. I welcome you providing some sort of "proof" otherwise?

>>btreec+Qc2
Just look up the history of the word on wikipedia. You think a right wing person got edit access to that page and added the most recent change?