World Wide Woke thread

J

jonp 1000 years of ire...

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2023
Messages
383
Reaction score
296
.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-11-11 at 10.59.44 copy.jpg
    Screenshot 2023-11-11 at 10.59.44 copy.jpg
    86.1 KB · Views: 46
tldr

tldr

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2023
Messages
824
Reaction score
705
'Johnson is one such dissenter. The history professor found himself the subject of a five-month investigation by the college after he criticized a 2019 Facebook post of English Professor Andrew Bond in which Bond called the United States a “piece of s**t nation.” Bond had added, “Go ahead and quote me, conservatives. This country has yet to live up to the ideals of its founding documents.”

Johnson did quote him, with the caption: “Do you agree with this radical [social justice warrior] from BC’s English Department? Thoughts?” A commentator on Facebook later added “Maybe he should move to China, and post this about the PRC in general or the Chinese Communist Party and see how much mileage it gets him. I wonder, do they still send the family the bill for the spent round?’”

Bond responded in September 2021 by filing an administrative complaint against Johnson for harassment and bullying. Although Johnson was eventually cleared, the college issued a clear warning to him that it would “investigate any further complaints of harassment and bullying and, if applicable, [taking] appropriate remedial action including but not limited to any discipline determined to be appropriate.”

Johnson said that he has experienced retaliation and harassment due to his opposition to DEI policies. Judge Baker’s review of Bakersfield’s policies found that they are clearly mandates, not suggestions. He found that the college used mandatory “shalls” to state the expectations of faculty, including “teaching, learning, and professional practices that reflect DEIA and anti-racist principles, and in particular, respect for, and acknowledgement of the diverse backgrounds of students and colleagues to improve equitable student outcomes and course completion.”

Bakersfield also requires that faculty “promote and incorporate culturally affirming DEIA and anti-racist principles to nurture and create a respectful, inclusive, and equitable learning and work environment.” Judge Johnson found that the claim of the college that these are merely “aspirational goals” is “disingenuous.”

This is not the first such free speech controversy for Bakersfield College. Another Bakersfield College history professor, Matthew Garrett, was previously fired for speaking out against social justice programs. He and other professors are now suing.

After that controversy, John Corkins, vice president of the Board of Trustees of the Kern Community College District Board (which oversees the college), declared, “We have to continue to cull” problem faculty. He added: “Got them in my livestock operation and that’s why we put a rope on some of them and take them to the slaughterhouse. That’s a fact of life with human nature and so forth, I don’t know how to say it any clearer.” He later apologized.'

https://jonathanturley.org/2023/11/...tory-and-unconstitutional-in-california-case/


No wonder they want to abolish Americas founding documents.
 
tldr

tldr

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2023
Messages
824
Reaction score
705
tldr said:
'Humorists are often seen as insignificant contributors of society. People consider humorists no more than just “entertainers”, willing to make fun of anything in order to make a crowd laugh, however, has the audience ever contemplated why humorists are the some of the only people who are allowed to critique anything that crosses their mind without consequences? Alain de Botton, claims the vital role of humorist is, “to convey with impunity messages that might be dangerous or impossible to state directly.” I agree with Alain de Botton’s claims, that humorists do hold an important role in society, which is far more than to entertain. They break the ice on delicate topics, communicating the messages to society. '

https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Alain-De-Botton-Humorists-PJ54QRDHDT


This brings us neatly into the social necessity of the watershed, and the segregation of publication in the public square.

To illustrate this let's turn first to content that would be considered to adult (consisting of upsetting material to juvenile or more vulnerable population sets). I've added it under the spoiler rubric given its distasteful content, one would be well advised to avoid it - given it is merely offered as an example and is not the central argument of the post. It's something one might find in the unsavoury corners of the internet, and is inappropriate for general viewing.


Reuters: Heads of the corporate media mandate a new look to their late night shows, an inside source has revealed.

"K-suite has approved a new format for its top personalities - Late Night Comedy is going Big Titty! Colbert is thrilled about the transformation and is deep in post-op visualisation, Kimmel can finally use his private collection of brave and fabulous pertinences, Meyers can't wait to bring rubber and urine to his show, while Fallon will revise his role as 'barely cis' (O'Brien had to retire because he was too butch). This will totally shake the industry up, and totally rock the audience numbers! It's soooo exciting and I'm sooooo jealous."

Planning photos have surfaced.



3.jpg



1.jpg


Meanwhile, it's rumoured, that this has sparked debate in the industry about the social impacts of unfair comparison.

​

​

General viewing is a standard by which every society has to measure decency, with decency meaning the provision of a benign environment for the young to mature, and those with vulnerabilities not to feel particularly targeted for scapegoating or exploitation. It is the instantiation - by customary rule - of the virtues that are common to all the great world ethical systems.

There is difference in capacity - physical, intellectual and vocational - that must be acknowledged so as not to disconnect the nature of the world from culture, thus making it illusory, but there are appropriate forms, conscient with the whole, established through successful historical iterations, that do not intimidate to manifest, enabling a general reassurance. Thus social value is a valuable phenomenon. However, false claims to it through browbeating - physical or verbal - should receive the opprobrium appropriate to the fraud or bully. True value is self-evident to the untwisted observer.

The young have a natural track to maturity which should not be interfered with, especially by those who wish to profit from them. There has always been an element in the natural world of the consumption of the young, in civil society this can and must be prohibited since the interest is to facilitate the attainment of their full human potential.

Thus, they should follow the course of their maturation, as enshrined in their material dasein, before they can decide to make any alterations to it. There is a range of proclivity that should be accommodated, but these should not be artificially maintained. Predators should be preyed upon - ruthlessly. Especially those who would maim the young - spiritually, corporeally or psychologically - to make them their fettered serfs.

This is a wisely directed society - the safe working load of everyone within that society should not be exceeded within the shared public space. However, there are loads that are greater than this that must be, necessarily, handled if the culture is not to fracture under the weight of the full challenge of reality.

This is why there is a compartmentalisation of spaces that only the qualified should participate in. Here, standing and breadth of implication, as well as specific expertise, determines qualification for the normally functioning adult member of a society to the particular issue at hand. A citizen abrogates their duty if they do not participate in issues that threaten the society as a whole, or brings injustice on particular members of it. The civic space should be restricted to the citizen for example - there may be additions of information from other sources but the deliberative capacity rests with them. Similarly, themes of an adult nature should be restricted to adults. Spaces particular to the sexes to each of them. Topics of a violent nature to those fitted to review them with impassive competence etc.

If a person is not, or does not feel, capable to handle one of these spheres then they should be able to opt out of it. They can, and perhaps should, conduct a period of instruction which innures them to anxiety, and gives them a lucid basis for participation but, if they are not of the minimum grade specific to participate, then their inclusion only causes i) a depletion of necessary attention and resources, (ii unneccessary and unproductive personal trauma, and (iii the lackey problem.

It should be safe for anyone to walk the streets - particularly in daytime - without encountering intimidation or lewdity. That is the reason for the watershed - the watershed does not exist as a factional device. The Overton window is a sorting mechanism for discredited information (like flat earthism), not as a screen behind which interest is formented free from contestation. Furthermore, there are open forums where any and all topics may be opened to debate such as in a university. These topics may not be suitable for secondary school instruction, however, and may then be, rightly, prohibited from discussion.

It is an obscenity to introduce pornography to schools as part of the cirriculum. The motion of parents to prohibit it is therefore entirely justified - given their standing and the scope of its impact. Furthermore, its presence indicates a failure in the formation and exercise of those entrusted with the educative trust. The principal and staff of a school hold their authority from the proxies provided by the parents - they must be obediant to them.

That which is said in the comedy club may be proper to it but may not be proper to primetime television. Nonetheless, within that space, the bounds are unfettered. It is up to each adult person to conserve their own moral integrity - no one else can do it for them - however this moral freedom does not extend over the right to interfere in the moral integrity of another, especially when that other is either vulnerable by age or circumstance to the imprinting of some fetish.

The private space is a compartment not subject to the rules of the public space. To seek to overreach into using justifications proper to the public space is a hallmark of a malicious actor seeking to isolate and disrupt the clarity of those they wish to misuse. It is a parody of a wisely directed society. Indeed, the reason why comedy has its potency is that, ultimately, wicked conditions, and the wicked themselves, are farcical.

If the compartments of a people are dismantled, and the public spaces overran, then the society, to which they ally, risks sinking into hubris, ignominy and servility.
Click to expand...


Told you. Colbert's going under the knife. Big reveal coming! So brave.

CBS’ ‘Late Show’ Off Air This Week After Stephen Colbert Suffers Ruptured Appendix - Hollywood Reporter
 
C

clarke-connolly

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2023
Messages
3,805
Reaction score
3,398
SeekTheFairLand

SeekTheFairLand

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2023
Messages
2,398
Reaction score
2,851
Wolf said:
There's hope for NZ yet.......

www.rte.ie

New Zealand to scrap world-leading anti-smoking laws

New Zealand's plans for world-leading anti-smoking laws will be revoked, Christopher Luxon confirmed after being sworn in as prime minister, in a move described as a "huge win for the tobacco industry".
www.rte.ie www.rte.ie
Click to expand...
Do people think the health implications of smoking has been overstated.

A early version of climate change, covid and eating meat.


[please be true]
 
M

Mad as Fish

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
3,232
Reaction score
4,253
SeekTheFairLand said:
Do people think the health implications of smoking has been overstated.

A early version of climate change, covid and eating meat.


[please be true]
Click to expand...
I'd say not and would mistrust any attempt to debunk it, a, because it was from a time when science was more a noble pursuit rather than the dirty scramble for money, grants and 15 minutes of fame that it has descended to, and b, because big pharma is always looking for sick people to treat, never to cure. They'd just love a return to the coughing and cancers of smokers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Top Bottom