hhh1111

"what did you think decolonization meant? Vibes, essays, papers? Losers."

“Anti wokeism” is to atheism what wokeism is to Christianity. It can turn into a religion in its own right sure but it’s origin is disbelief in another ideology.

That ad campaign was enabled by the 1st amendment but not motivated by it. You’re conflating why they wanted to do it with why they could do it

[flagged]

Differences in group outcomes are not logically equivalent to evidence of discrimination. For example, Asians, Jews and even Nigerian immigrants out earn whites and spend less time in jail than whites do. Is this racism against whites? No.

The extant data on racial outcome differences doesn’t point to evidence of meaningful systemic racism. The one data point to the contrary imo is Asians needing higher SAT scores than everyone else to get into college. I’m not Asian, this isn’t a self serving opinion.

This is a really funny response

Group outcomes certainly differ and the differences ate measurable. But the measurements don’t support your argument much.

That person would be wrong because there is objective, verifiable evidence to the contrary. There is none for the ubiquity and material impact of racism in 2025, sorry. So its more like him claiming Lyme disease or trench foot isn’t a societal problem - is he allowed to make that claim without personal experience?

They protested Starbucks all year after hallucinating some connection between the company and the Israeli invasion in Palestine. Irrational is a fine description. And a good example of the gas lighting is them saying wokeness doesn’t exist.

The behaviors labeled as wokeness have been essentially dominant on the left for a long time though. “End whiteness” is a good example of woke rhetoric and that term was shouted for years

wokeness is more or less southern Baptist fire and brimstone Christianity for posh urban white people. For western minorities it functions as a kind of nationalism

[flagged]

>a movement thats advocating for equity and trying to dismantle structural oppression.

Well, for years those advocates did so with censorship, gaslighting, destruction of property, threats and calls for violence, etc. They had a hysterical fervor and lack of rationality that did often seem quasi religious. I dont think Paul's understanding is perfect but the parallels to religious puritanism are quite obviously there.

This is a dishonest argument. Paul can oppose an ideology without agreeing with everyone and especially extremists who also oppose that same ideology.

I dont think wokeness or paul graham are communist or fascist respectively so forgive the hysterical sound of the analogy im going to make here, but i think your argument is similar in reasoning to this one:

You oppose fascism? Well, fascism opposed gulags. If you oppose gulags I guess you were a fascist after all."

"Paul Graham is an idiot. Heres the real issue: [deliberately convoluted and unfalsifiable conspiracy theories]"