Russians

[Diaconis 696]

Peckris’ argument does seem valid when considering that “reported” truths and facts cannot be relied upon as such these days, i.e, truths and facts. Has the reporter done sufficient research? Who did he interview, was his information derived from first hand accounts, Chinese whispers or, dare I suggest, re-interpreted for purposes of eliciting certain reactions to reinforce certain existing beliefs. Does he even care about truth and honesty? Probably not.

However, to discount one source of information in favour of another believing the latter to be more trustworthy than the former when equally uncertain of the source of that information may be fallacious. 

As for the word woke, don’t get me started, it is the past tense of wake, nothing else.

I refuse to use the word “woke” in its current context and to acknowledge it in conversation; there’re already too many sub-standard, useless, dumbed-down Americanisms in the English language as it stands, without entertaining new ones. It grieves me just to hear it used.

Such language seems to be created by those who lack sufficient vocabulary to express themselves adequately in the first place and therefore resort to creating such rubbish out of ignorance. Some may argue that it is a progression and development of a language. I see it as a regression.

 

[TomGoodheart 373]

I have to say, this is all most interesting. I was really missing this sort of thing after Musk dumbed down Twitter and handed it to people with more dollars than sense. But now I can come here and see it all laid out again! Though I'm not sure a small coin forum is quite the replacement for TwiXer the social media world had hoped for.

[Menger 79]

46 minutes ago, Diaconis said:

As for the word woke, don’t get me started, it is the past tense of wake, nothing else.

What other word can better be used to capture the shift of the left from class based politics to identity politics?  
 

(And the parallel shift of corporations, professions and the middle class to the left?).  

Edited August 30, 2023 by Menger

[copper123 1,352]

2 hours ago, Bronze & Copper Collector said:

Genesis 2:22-23

 

22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.”

24 And man did use woman for all basic household tasks and have sex with her .

Is the old testement relevent in this day and age >NO>

 

 

 

[oldcopper 276]

2 hours ago, Diaconis said:

Peckris’ argument does seem valid when considering that “reported” truths and facts cannot be relied upon as such these days, i.e, truths and facts. Has the reporter done sufficient research? Who did he interview, was his information derived from first hand accounts, Chinese whispers or, dare I suggest, re-interpreted for purposes of eliciting certain reactions to reinforce certain existing beliefs. Does he even care about truth and honesty? Probably not.

However, to discount one source of information in favour of another believing the latter to be more trustworthy than the former when equally uncertain of the source of that information may be fallacious. 

As for the word woke, don’t get me started, it is the past tense of wake, nothing else.

I refuse to use the word “woke” in its current context and to acknowledge it in conversation; there’re already too many sub-standard, useless, dumbed-down Americanisms in the English language as it stands, without entertaining new ones. It grieves me just to hear it used.

Such language seems to be created by those who lack sufficient vocabulary to express themselves adequately in the first place and therefore resort to creating such rubbish out of ignorance. Some may argue that it is a progression and development of a language. I see it as a regression.

 

 

Well said.

The news is that 77 NHS trusts have signed up to the "Rainbow Badge Scheme" where they get points for degenderising the workplace  ie when talking to patients etc. This has apparently originated from an internal unit in NHS England and has no mandate from any of the staff - it has basically been forced on them like much else of this nonsense. Just why "breast feeding" should be re-named "chest-feeding" for instance is a mystery to possibly everyone. And mother as "birther", Peckris might think that's progress, but it's just dehumanising people.

Well said. I think providing specific information, as Paddy did, makes things much more credible. And if there's no blow-back from the NHS, then the story is of course true. Perhaps there will be, I very much doubt it though as this is an easily checkable story which the journalist will have done already. This information is also available from other sources, such as an interview by Julia Hartley-Brewer on Talk Radio, available on YouTube.

Peckris has given no facts about anything, nothing specific, as usual it's just platitudes, slogans and in this case, asserting a certain woke isn't "extreme" is his opinion. Was that his big argument? So how can he say he's stating facts or whatever. Where are they? Have I missed something?

I'll give the Mail this - though they sadly toe the line on Climate Change and other such stuff, they do now and again publicise things the rest of the media shy away from, such as Biden's corruption and the sinister absurdness of this wokery  being forced on us.

There is a very good article on this in, yes, The Daily Mail, which also contains a piece by Professor Angus Dalgleish, Professor of Oncology, whom I have seen give a public talk before, about the corrosive effect of all these Diversity, Equity and Inclusion courses all NHS staff now have to their waste time on, rather than actually doing their job. 

[Peckris 2 2,044]

16 hours ago, Menger said:

This may be a difference in perspective. Iain McGilchrist looks at it in terms of left-brain and right-brain perspectives: from the one, things can appear more binary when stripped of the context and nuance that comes from the other.  This may be an inherent problem with top-down technocracies where certain narratives are treated as “fact”.  The dichotomy between the theories of the “experts” and the real life experiences of the people being analogous to the left and right brain. This then creates division between those that have faith in that narrative as “fact” and those that see a different perspective or a broader picture.  McGilchrist argues that a structural shortcoming of the left-brain is that is it is unable to perceive the nature of the right-brain. 

 

See below...

 

10 hours ago, Paddy said:

... and are you not also ignoring facts - as displayed in the Daily Mail - simply because of your bias against that paper?

 

The specific fact you conveniently choose to ignore was my reply to your "Universities "cancelling" any speaker whose viewpoint is not up to date with woke culture smacks of extremism". Whether you agree with this or not (and in my own opinion it would depend on which speaker it was), I told you quite clearly that this was going on 50 years ago and quoted a specific example. THAT, my friend, is a FACT, not a bias.

[Paddy 1,543]

... and I did not dispute that "fact" though I have seen no evidence to support it. If it happened 50 years ago, it was wrong then and remains wrong today. I doubt that it was as wholesale and targeted in the past. I was at university 45 years ago and I recall very little of what you describe.

My fact, supported by current evidence, was completely discounted based on left wing bias against any media that does not support their narrow viewpoint.

What really gets me is that the Labour party, supposedly champions of the working classes, for which I laud them, has now become the puppet of wealthy, privately educated and privileged trendies from London.

[Diaconis 696]

6 hours ago, Menger said:

What other word can better be used to capture the shift of the left from class based politics to identity politics? 

No idea. I don’t claim to an innovater in the English language, I’m no Shakespeare,  but I think the question should be posed to you. Why do you believe that the word woke so succinctly sums up the essence of your definition?

Please explain because I am honestly at a loss here? 

If, as I suspect, theres no direct correlation and we’re just looking for a word to tag on to a theme then in answer to your request, I suggest decentrithorkusmogrificarbiturb, its just as absurd as using the past tense of wake IMO.

[blakeyboy 1,603]

Thick men tipping crap into trucks were called 'Binmen'.  Then they became 'refuse operatives' or some such.

Failing education departments re-labelled  year 5, 6 or whatever as 'Key Stage' something or other to make it sound like they had a clue what they were doing.

The plastic sheet on your car seat when it comes back from a garage isn't to keep the seat clean- it's to make you think that the engine job they did is somehow 'better'.

All this is commonplace and _we_ have allowed it to develop.

When a village pub closes, people are up in arms, but when questioned, admit they hadn't had a drink in there for years....

You have to actually DO something to stop/change things.

It can't be changed by talking on forums, but at the ballot box...if anyone is worth voting for....

 

 

Hope        doesn't      change       reality.

 

 

I invented 'Woke' years ago- I failed to get it into the Meaning of Liff because I missed the deadline.

To 'Woke' ( present participle 'Woking' ) is to wander round the house trying to find that half- finished cup of coffee or tea that you put down

absent-mindedly, and is going cold somewhere.

 

I watched the Trump election success while in Las Vegas, in the Sports Bar at Caesar's Palace. What a bizarre night.

The next evening, in a restaurant, a local came over on hearing my accent, and said how he was embarrassed at what I would now think of America and Americans.

I replied that every country gets the government it deserves, and he ambled off quite contentedly.

[Peckris 2 2,044]

1 hour ago, Diaconis said:

No idea. I don’t claim to an innovater in the English language, I’m no Shakespeare,  but I think the question should be posed to you. Why do you believe that the word woke so succinctly sums up the essence of your definition?

Please explain because I am honestly at a loss here? 

If, as I suspect, theres no direct correlation and we’re just looking for a word to tag on to a theme then in answer to your request, I suggest decentrithorkusmogrificarbiturb, its just as absurd as using the past tense of wake IMO.

I agree with you. I think 'woke' is simply a modern redefinition of 'political correctnesss'. PC did have a germ of truth in it, probably based in the rather abstract musings of psychologists and sociologists, but got exaggerated and blown out of all reality by the Murdoch press when they realised that it roused the ire of certain sectors of the population, which then sold more copies of their papers.

[Menger 79]

6 hours ago, Diaconis said:

No idea. I don’t claim to an innovater in the English language, I’m no Shakespeare,  but I think the question should be posed to you. Why do you believe that the word woke so succinctly sums up the essence of your definition?

Please explain because I am honestly at a loss here? 

That is a different question from mine.
 

I think the answer is that use of the word became widespread at the same time as the political shift by the left from class to identity politics and the contemporaneous shift of corporations to the left. So it has emerged with the phenomenon that it describes.

Of course, its widespread use emerged in the US. It coincided with the shift from the unifying message of Obama’s first campaign in 2008 (“Yes we can!”) to the more militaristic battle cry of the “rainbow coalition” adopted by the second campaign in 2012 (“Forward!”).  That is about when the left consummated its shift from blue collar to white collar. We have not looked back since.   

The meaning of words generally is primarily a matter of currency through usage and so this seems no different. 

Edited August 31, 2023 by Menger

[Menger 79]

6 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

I agree with you. I think 'woke' is simply a modern redefinition of 'political correctnesss'. 

The left (and much of the establishment) have long been “politically correct” but they only recently became “woke”. 

[oldcopper 276]

4 hours ago, Menger said:

The left (and much of the establishment) have long been “politically correct” but they only recently became “woke”. 

Political correctness, woke - it means using whenever possible words like "NazI" and "far-right" to constantly vilify people who don't subscribe wholly to their creed. No grey areas are allowed. It's been infused into us for over 60 years and  accelerated strongly about three years ago with the advent of George Floyd and Coronavirus. No coincidence of course and all planned. It means ignoring or downplaying Pakistani grooming gangs yet visiting people's houses who have eg misgendered someone on social media to record an Orwellian "non-crime hate incident". 

I'll give you a perfect example of this propaganda from the Guardian a few years ago, the title "Most child sexual abuse gangs made up of white men" 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/15/child-sexual-abuse-gangs-white-men-home-office-report

and from the BBC's report on the grooming gang paper in question from the Home Office:

• "Research has found that group-based child sexual exploitation offenders are most commonly white."

See, what are these far-rightists going on about?

From the main three studies quoted, in one 42% were white, 35% ethnic (the largest of which was black at 17%), from another the figures were 30% whites to 28% Asian, so quite close. In another, out of 52 of these gangs recorded, half were Asian and only 11 were white. None of these figures were given in the Guardian article, but can be got from the Home Office report via the BBC article. But what a slam dunk! 

But hang on, aren't most murderers in China going to be...errr...Chinese? For example.

Exactly, firstly the white population of the UK is about 6 times larger than the ethnic population, and nearly 15 times larger than the Pakistani-origin Muslim one. Not mentioned. Secondly figures aren't currently available from large towns and cities where active investigation was still occurring such as Telford, a massive Pakistani grooming centre, and thirdly, the police didn't always record the ethnicity of offenders for some unknown, perhaps politically correct, reason. These factors weren't mentioned either. And where were the whistle-blowers in these Pakistani communities? Literally thousands were involved, spanning decades. One can only assume no one saw anything wrong with it, or they all lived in fear. 

So the Guardian, in order to get to its big point,  deliberately misleads its readers. They're so keen on the over-representation argument when it suits them, such as the police/race dynamic in the US (very misleading if you look at the violent crime rates), but cannot mention a much greater over-representation when it doesn't suit them. And let's not forget the grooming that is overtly racist, as white girls are nearly always the victims of Pakistani-origin groomers. They don't seem to do it to their own. This wasn't mentioned either. What a surprise.

This is how much propaganda works - it's lying by omission. You are only given the part of the picture to make you think what they want you to think. The same of course goes for the Home office paper, obviously slanted as much as possible to muddy the waters and happy to assert the meaningless "most are whites" comment without context. But the figures still speak for themselves

So what the Guardian headline should have said was: "Whites and Chinese least likely to form child sexual abuse gangs." I'm guessing the Chinese aren't big offenders.

Woke also means the constant demonisation of white, Western societies as fundamentally bad and built on oppression and racism. The "far right" is always used a a bogeyman, yet in reality means people who object to mass immigration, and lately the sexualisation of very young children and the sexual mutilation of children and young people (see the latest Costa advert), and much more of what the globalists decree as our new Orwellian truth. Even Ulez protestors are "far-right extremists" according to Sadiq Khan, whom it's now known has pressurised scientists and falsified the scientific evidence for introducing it. 

This woke illness has come from the top and promoted by the media with its excesses brushed under the carpet. Quota systems, identity politics - if people don't see what a danger this poses to any meritocratic society and the incentive to work hard, use your brain and be a success, then they are naive to say the least. Stupid and evil could be two other words that apply.

[Peckris 2 2,044]

17 hours ago, Menger said:

The left (and much of the establishment) have long been “politically correct” but they only recently became “woke”. 

I think you'd have to explain that? Keir Starmer's near silent endorsement of Brexit would seem to indicate something different. Labour are a very broad church (as the Tories used to be pre-Boris) but generally they are more or less Blairites in their political colour, which itself is to the right of 60s and 70s Labour.

[Menger 79]

4 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

think you'd have to explain that? Keir Starmer's near silent endorsement of Brexit would seem to indicate something different. Labour are a very broad church (as the Tories used to be pre-Boris) but generally they are more or less Blairites in their political colour, which itself is to the right of 60s and 70s Labour.

Again, I think it is in the shift of the left from class politics to identity politics.  This applies to the Anglo-sphere generally, most acutely to the US but also the UK. Blue collar to white collar. Working class to upper middle class.

This is why the parties of the left have become the parties of the big banks, corporations, professions (always teachers, but now also lawyers and doctors) and even big oil; whereas the right has become populist. Big business is now also “Blairite” (globalized but regulated economy) and has also embraced identity politics and middle class activism through ESG and diversity. 
 

The shift to “woke” describes this shift of the left from class to identity politics and the parallel  shift of big business to the left. What was mere insufferable “political correctness”  on the left has in parallel mutated into the intolerant cancel culture and authoritarianism of “woke”. 

[oldcopper 276]

7 hours ago, Menger said:

Again, I think it is in the shift of the left from class politics to identity politics.  This applies to the Anglo-sphere generally, most acutely to the US but also the UK. Blue collar to white collar. Working class to upper middle class.

This is why the parties of the left have become the parties of the big banks, corporations, professions (always teachers, but now also lawyers and doctors) and even big oil; whereas the right has become populist. Big business is now also “Blairite” (globalized but regulated economy) and has also embraced identity politics and middle class activism through ESG and diversity. 
 

The shift to “woke” describes this shift of the left from class to identity politics and the parallel  shift of big business to the left. What was mere insufferable “political correctness”  on the left has in parallel mutated into the intolerant cancel culture and authoritarianism of “woke”. 

Encapsulated by Labour's take on the Alison Rose saga. Because the bank had wrapped itself in this hard-left ideology, much of it pushed through by Rose, she was "one of them". So Labour had no comment on  her 5.2 million pound salary, and subsequent 2.4 million pound payoff. Rather they weirdly defended her in an identity politics victimhood scenario with Rachel Reeve saying she thought Alison Rose had been "bullied". No evidence was provided for this as none is ever needed of course for the woke oppression narrative.

Some victim, broke the rules and gets an x million pound payoff! An interesting theory suggests this corporate wokery all really got going around 2010 as "Occupy Wall Street" were pressurising the financial sector, compounded by the bad publicity about greedy bankers as a result of their reputation for being massively overpaid and incompetent since the 2008 crash. 

How to neutralise this? - pretend you're on their side, talk the language of the adolescent woke left, have it enforced by ESG, perhaps another protective mechanism from the world's most powerful financial organisations, and finally frame the narrative carefully through the corporate-owned media. Then the financial sector will be free to carry on making their zillions without anyone even raising a murmur. Well it has certainly worked.

The left are so gullible that 15 years go they were outraged at bankers' hugh bonuses, as was everyone else, but now they're complete kittens to corporate greed, because these corporations fly rainbow flags, swear allegiance to BLM and have DIE courses. 

 

 

[Peckris 2 2,044]

19 hours ago, Menger said:

Again, I think it is in the shift of the left from class politics to identity politics.  This applies to the Anglo-sphere generally, most acutely to the US but also the UK. Blue collar to white collar. Working class to upper middle class.

This is why the parties of the left have become the parties of the big banks, corporations, professions (always teachers, but now also lawyers and doctors) and even big oil; whereas the right has become populist. Big business is now also “Blairite” (globalized but regulated economy) and has also embraced identity politics and middle class activism through ESG and diversity. 
 

The shift to “woke” describes this shift of the left from class to identity politics and the parallel  shift of big business to the left. What was mere insufferable “political correctness”  on the left has in parallel mutated into the intolerant cancel culture and authoritarianism of “woke”. 

Interesting analysis. I agree that the left have become 'Blairite', i.e. more representative of "big banks, corporations, professions (always teachers, but now also lawyers and doctors)", and that the right has become populist, if by that you mean 'Trumpite'.

However that has little to do with 'cancel culture' which I believe is one of the many culture wars and therefore largely non-political. I'm mostly against it - fatuous and offensive positions should be exposed to view so they can be mocked, rather than cancelled. But I still am no wiser as to what 'woke' actually means.

[1949threepence 3,366]

1 hour ago, Peckris 2 said:

Interesting analysis. I agree that the left have become 'Blairite', i.e. more representative of "big banks, corporations, professions (always teachers, but now also lawyers and doctors)", and that the right has become populist, if by that you mean 'Trumpite'.

However that has little to do with 'cancel culture' which I believe is one of the many culture wars and therefore largely non-political. I'm mostly against it - fatuous and offensive positions should be exposed to view so they can be mocked, rather than cancelled. But I still am no wiser as to what 'woke' actually means.

When in doubt look up

[Menger 79]

4 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

But I still am no wiser as to what 'woke' actually means.

I thought I gave an explanation as to what woke means. Two prongs: left shift to identity politics; corporate shift left.  
 

On the left, this is a shift from obsessing about disparities between the bourgeoisie and working class to disparities within the bourgeoisie based on race, sex, sexual orientation, “gender” and other supposedly immutable wot not. 
 

In corporations, it is the shift to work policies and marketing focused on the same identity politics, as well as other leftward reorientations from climate emergency, to zero covid and the notion of a U.S./NATO/EU led world order. 

So Biden’s support of Zelinsky is not “woke” - but if Pizza Hut were to produce a pizza in the colours of Ukrainian flag that would be “woke”. Biden’s focus on “equity” (celebrating group identity based on race and sexual orientation or, say, disabilities; and seeking to eradicate disparities in outcome between such groups) is however “woke”.

As to “populism”: yes, Trump (unlike the Republican establishment) is clearly populist, as is Farage (but not the Tory establishment). One of the great ironies is that some issues that were hitherto hallmarks of liberalism (such as free speech and a restrained foreign policy) have become “populist”. 
 

God help us. 

Anyone got a better definition of “woke”? 

Edited September 2, 2023 by Menger

[Kipster 157]

5 hours ago, Menger said:

As to “populism”: yes, Trump (unlike the Republican establishment) is clearly populist

Trump is a different animal altogether. He's the world's greatest living con man, and he's played a blinder with the red parts of the American public. 

His bottom line is self-aggrandizement and his own pocket,  and would literally say anything if those stumping up the cash were willing, or stupid enough, to pay his price. That's not to say that other American politicians are much better, but once you're in bed with Fat Anthony Salerno, the smell never leaves you.

[Menger 79]

1 hour ago, Kipster said:

Trump is a different animal altogether. He's the world's greatest living con man, and he's played a blinder with the red parts of the American public. 

A con man Trump may or may not be, but that is a separate question as to whether he is “populist”.  
 

Trump was well ahead of the curve on China, the southern boarder and “forever wars”. Trump’s position on these three issues was contrary to the establishment position (in the media and both parties), but resonated with the working classes (what Americans call “middle classes”). This combination is what makes Trump “populist”.

So “populist”  might be contrasted  with “elitist”: the establishment position (aka “leave it to the experts”) or woke policies generally (“leave it to the social scientists/universities ”). 
 

One can be a con man (or not) and “populist”, just as one can be a con man (or not) and “elitist”.  

Edited September 2, 2023 by Menger

[Kipster 157]

11 minutes ago, Menger said:

Trump was well ahead of the curve on China, the southern boarder and “forever wars”.

Trump knew which buttons to push to make himself seem populist, stoking the fears of the target base, recognising it as a tried and tested method of aligning the masses to the end goal. He still uses China to enrich himself though.

So I would agree with you that Trump is populist, even though he himself really isn't.

Anyway, this thread has digressed from Russians to Trump, although you could argue that they are one and the same.

Enjoy your Saturday everyone.

[Menger 79]

1 hour ago, Kipster said:

Trump knew which buttons to push to make himself seem populist, stoking the fears of the target base, recognising it as a tried and tested method of aligning the masses to the end goal.

Sounds about right. 
 

I do sense though (more generally) that elitists tend to see populists as somehow “tricking” the masses (rather than giving them what they actually want); just as populists tend to see the elitists as implicated in a premeditated conspiracy (rather than incompetence).  I think the one underestimates the intelligence of the other; and the other overestimates. 

[Peckris 2 2,044]

19 hours ago, Menger said:

In corporations, it is the shift to work policies and marketing focused on the same identity politics, as well as other leftward reorientations from climate emergency, to zero covid and the notion of a U.S./NATO/EU led world order. 

So Biden’s support of Zelinsky is not “woke” - but if Pizza Hut were to produce a pizza in the colours of Ukrainian flag that would be “woke”. Biden’s focus on “equity” (celebrating group identity based on race and sexual orientation or, say, disabilities; and seeking to eradicate disparities in outcome between such groups) is however “woke”.

I'm not sure I'm with you here, not at all. Clearly climate emergency, zero covid, US/NATO/EU 'world order' are not 'leftward' in any way shape or form. You'll have to explain that.

And if Pizza Hut did produce a pizza in the colours of Ukrainian flag, how is that woke? It sounds much more like a commercial way of jumping on the bandwagon to create more sales.

[Menger 79]

3 hours ago, Peckris 2 said:

I'm not sure I'm with you here, not at all. Clearly climate emergency, zero covid, US/NATO/EU 'world order' are not 'leftward' in any way shape or form. You'll have to explain that.

And if Pizza Hut did produce a pizza in the colours of Ukrainian flag, how is that woke? It sounds much more like a commercial way of jumping on the bandwagon to create more sales.

These issues have become associated predominantly with the left (just like identity politics) and just as climate denialism, Covid minimalism, anti-lockdown, anti-vaxer and Putin sympathizing are terms used (predominantly on the left) to describe the contrary positions on these issues, associated predominantly with the right.  
 

Clearly this is not absolute (Trump was big on the Covid shots; Boris Johnson was big on net-zero and Zelinsky) but then neither is identity politics limited to the left (the Tories have been implicated in woke as much as anyone). If is just a question of what is characteristic.  We can guess Trudeau’s or Jacinda Ardern’s or Starmer’s position on these issues, just as we can that of Desantis or Farage  or Georgia Meloni.  

As we noted before, there are two prongs to “woke”: the shift of the left to identity politics; the shift of corporations (and establishment) left. 
 

That is how a corporate (say, Pizza Hut) hypothetically pandering to any one of these issues (e.g., the Zelinsky pizza, the net-zero pizza, the trans-pizza) might be described as “woke”. 
 

I am just explaining use of the term for you; not seeking to justify it. 
 

Edited September 3, 2023 by Menger