Author Topic: "Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words  (Read 169 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dutch508

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11462
  • Reputation: +1334/-1044
  • Remember
"Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words
« on: April 30, 2021, 07:11:32 AM »
Quote
Star Member Silent3 (10,798 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215385749

"Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."


— Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass

There's been a lot of heated discussion around here about what James Carville said about "wokeness", and similarly, about "cancel culture", and if it even exists or not.

It's important to realize in such discussions that words mean different things to different people. Meanings of words and phrases shift and evolve, and, whether some people like it or not, changes happen to the general understanding of what words mean that aren't to everyone's liking. Meanings seldom completely settle down either, so the same words mean different things in different contexts.

It's one thing to insist on what you believe is the "correct" meaning for certain words. It's quite another, however, to impose your own meaning on a word or phrase and then act as if what someone else has said, no matter how they might have actually meant it, must be treated as if their words bear your preferred meaning.

Someone posted that there "Ain't no such thing as 'too woke'". Well, if you insist that the only possible meaning of "woke" is a good one, meaning being conscious of privilege, and seeking and demanding justice and fairness, you'd be right. You can't have too much of that.

But do you really imagine Carville is saying, "Too many Democrats are too concerned with fairness and justice. They need dull their awareness of privilege, and let some nasty shit slip by, if they want to win elections"?

I think it's pretty obvious that Carville is talking about issues like obnoxious levels of word policing, or insisting that everyone must admit they're a racist, or be an even worse racist for not admitting to being one at all. Let's not pretend their aren't people out there in this world who get ****ing annoying about trying to one-up each other in performative wokeness.

You might still disagree with Carville, but then get to the real disagreement rather than arguing against a straw-man Carville of your own creation. Try giving Carville the benefit of the doubt about meaning something where he might, just might, have a point, and see where that takes you.

If you want to argue for what words do mean, or should mean, fine. But don't stupidly act as if other people must mean their words way you mean those same words, and then tar them with all that goes along with imposing your meanings.

 :whatever:

Notice, it doesn't explain what the words mean at all...

Quote
Caliman73 (7,724 posts)

1. Why is it that we have to give Carville the benefit of the doubt?

By doing that you assume that his intentions are to be cognizant of the experiences of people he has no idea of what they go through or have gone through.

He should have just stuck with his core idea that we need to be better at messaging and we need to use personal language to speak to different people.

When he started to say that we have a "woke" problem, he intruded into Black spaces where the word originated. He imposed his own take on what the word means to HIM and then said it was a problem (likely for people like HIM).

If people don't want push back then they should choose their words more wisely. You can comment on a situation and not provoke a reaction by utilizing words in a way that is provocative.

So, Woke is a black thing and all these white leftists are appropriating black culture.

i.e. "Damn, girl! I am so woke I realize Martin Luther King Jr. was racist as ****, yo."

or

"Woke yo fat ass up, Bitch, and go get me some Kools before the racists white folk outlaw them"

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

3. This is the problem

Carville is lecturing people about saying and not saying things that he thinks are offensive to some (white) people. But in so doing, he is offending may other (Black and Brown) people.

Yet, when we say we find his comments offensive, people jump in to explain that we shouldn't be offended, he really meant this or that, etc. But if we try to explain that what WE said doesn't mean what some white folk think it does, we're told that doesn't matter - all that matters is how they hear it.

This is a common occurrence. Someone says something that offends people of color.

We object -

and WE are told that WE are being intolerant, etc. When we say something that offends other people's sensitivities, we are just offensive and divisive and need to rethink our words. But when someone says something that offends us, they're just "speaking hard truths" and we need to stop being so sensitive.

Oh, I am betting this **** is lily white.

Quote
Loki Liesmith (4,393 posts)

4. That's largely nonsense.

His usage of the word was fine.

People are free to pushback. But for the most part I hope he ignores the pushback and continues to make his criticism.

Quote
stopdiggin (4,607 posts)

6. pretty much affirming exactly what the OP said 'the words belong to me' -- mean what I say they mean -- and you have no right to employ them otherwise. all right then. glad we cleared that up. Sigh.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

8. Do you see the abject fallacy in your reasoning?

Quote
stopdiggin (4,607 posts)

22. I'll admit I do not

But I do think that when we get to the place where we are lecturing people like Carville that they do not have legitimate 'place' (or opinion, or language) -- then that is getting pretty friggin' intolerant -- and perhaps a bit silly. (also destructive?) And the fact that we're having such an argument/discussion -- more or less epitomizes the basic issue.

(oh .. and welcome back .. even if you are being a pain in the b. --  ---  -- )

 :whatever:

Star Member Silent3 (10,798 posts)

Quote
10. Whether you like it or not, you're doing exactly what Carville is calling a problem.

Quote
When he started to say that we have a "woke" problem, he intruded into Black spaces where the word originated.


A great many people do not, and do not want to, treat a word like "woke" as if the word itself is a territory they must carefully tread upon.

Quote
He imposed his own take on what the word means to HIM and then said it was a problem (likely for people like HIM).


You're not getting what I mean by "imposing a meaning". He used the word the way he himself meant the word, and in a way he (correctly) knows many people in his audience will interpret the word. He did not quote someone else using the word "woke", and then interpret what another person said only in the light of his own meaning for the word. That is what I mean by "imposing a meaning".

Quote
You can comment on a situation and not provoke a reaction by utilizing words in a way that is provocative.


Or, you can comment as you wish, not carefully parsing each word as if you're walking through a lexical minefield. That is the cultural baggage of "wokeness" that Carville, and many other Americans, do not like, and which Carville rightly suspects could be alienating potential Democratic voters.

Quote
Caliman73 (7,724 posts)

26. So you are saying, that rather than educating themselves...

By speaking to people who actually have that experience, that we should take it from a White guy and just stop talking about the situation?

The cultural baggage of "wokeness" is baggage that White people have put onto wokeness. What do you think is the common experience that Carville and people who don't like and "suspects could be alienating potential Democratic voters" share?

You don't have to answer. I'll just mind my manners and sit quietly while you all save us and wait my turn...

 :whatever:

Quote
Star Member Silent3 (10,798 posts)

28. No, I'm saying there's no need to expect Carville to "educate himself"

You're admitting that there is "cultural baggage of 'wokeness'", and that's half way to the point.

I would hope all human beings, regardless of race or life experience, to at least attempt what is called "the principle of charity" when interpreting what other people say. At least make some effort to find the best possible interpretation of what someone is saying, and run that by as at least one point to consider, rather than either getting needlessly angry misinterpreting their words, or missing the main point because you simply don't care what someone meant if they offended your sensibilities by not tailoring they're words to your liking.

It's important to realize this: There is no correct way to make a point that someone won't misunderstand it. The best anyone can do, especially when listeners are lazy about applying their own preconceptions, are to hope you reach as many of the people you most want to reach. If the topic is at all controversial, a bunch of people will be pissed off and/or miss the point.

And, while vocabulary and sensitivity in wording are important, remember there are usually much more important issues on the table, and bigger fish to fry.

This is not a call for you to bend over backward, or make some great personal sacrifice for the benefit of someone else who you don't think has earned any special favors from you.

You should not view the the "principle of charity" as anything other than a favor to yourself, and better communication in general.

 :popcorn:

Quote
Caliman73 (7,724 posts)

31. Of course not. No need to understand others if you are the dominant culture.

I forgot that liberals are all about minority cultures adapting themselves to what the dominant culture says is the "objective reality". Except that is not at all what liberalism is about.

It is important to realize that there are different experiences that what the dominant culture says and that we, who are not fully in the dominant culture, have valid experiences, our own language, and cultures, You need to understand that we have had to learn to navigate our own culture AND the dominant culture while people like Carville can just go about thinking that there is only one objective experience in life, the one he inhabits.

I know what Carville wants to mean, I am just not giving him that benefit of the doubt, especially when it is clear that people are taking what he said to mean that people of color just have to suck it up, again, so that White people can win elections, Then we will get our piece of the pie.

 :yawn:

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

42. "there's no need to expect Carville to 'educate himself"'

Of course not.he's a white man. What does he need to learn that he doesn't already know?

Quote
Star Member Demsrule86 (53,168 posts)

36. Liberal was a fine word and description of a political ideology for years but then it was hijacked by the right and became a word used to criticize and sneer at Democrats which is why most Democrats call themselves progressive. The same will be true of 'woke'. And by the way the term 'whitey' is pretty much an insult and uncalled for IMHO. It is going to take all Americans to end police brutality and racism. We need a coalition of like-minded people and to attack those who are on your side is pointless really.

Quote
Beastly Boy (3,035 posts)

19. We don't. Carville left no doubt what he meant.

In his comment, Carville did not intrude into Black spaces at all. On the contrary, he made it clear that his problem with how "woke" is being used originates outside of Black spaces where the term has a well established meaning that doesn't require further explanation.

He was talking about Democrats using the term, specifically those Democrats who do not define Black spaces. His point was that when, as an instance, a white Democrat talks about "wokenesness" to an audience of apolitical Latino immigrants, it is like someone who just learned a foreign language speaking that language to an audience who don't understand it at all.

Try to imagine a blind person describing what a flower looks like to a deaf person upon hearing the description from a black person. We can all see a problem with this scenario. That's the problem Carville is talking about.

 :whatever:

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

7. Sounds like you're doing damage control for Carville.

Here's the thing. Why doesn't he come out and explain himself? Because white conservatives, Democratic or Republican are going to look at it one way, and progressives are going to look at it another. No benefit of the doubt. Carville needs to come out and tell us just how he meant it. And, don't be surprised if it doesn't go your way.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

9. Only Black and Brown people and our allies are expected to explain ourselves and adjust our words so that they don't offend any white people.

White people can say whatever they want and if anyone of color is offended, they need to get over themselves, stop being so sensitive and why do they always make everything about race anyway?

 :whatever:

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

16. Nope. The burden of proof is not on the people who will be most harmed by the misunderstanding.

This becomes a dog-whistle in reverse. You're talking about Carville who played a huge role in the Centrist era, where they very intentionally tried to silence minority issues, just to be sure they didn't lose the moderate white voter. That was actually a thing.

Quote
Star Member Silent3 (10,798 posts)

20. They why would Obama have said pretty much the same thing?

The concept is either valid or invalid, regardless of whether you think Obama, as a black man, simply has more right to talk about it than Carville.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/10/30/barack-obama-on-political-purity-obama-foundation-summit-chicago-sot-ctn-vpx.cnn

Some Democrats are alienating people by excessive, performative piety and purity tests.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

21. Obama didn't say the same thing

He never said that the party needs to abandon "wokeness."

Being woke is not a purity test nor is it "excessive, performative piety." It simply a matter of being aware and sensitive to the realities of institutional racism and its impact on people of color.

Quote
Star Member Silent3 (10,798 posts)

24. That's what wokeness means *to you*.

But it is fairly clear that, when someone is speaking about "too much wokeness", they are almost certainly talking about too much "excessive, performative piety" and not too much awareness and sensitivity.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

25. That's what wokeness means

It's what the people who first appropriated it 60 years ago coined it to mean and it's how it's been used for the last 60 years until a handful of white people "discovered" it and decided to be offended by it And then took it upon themselves to try to redefine it.

Most words and phrases have objective meanings. The fact that someone decides to interpret them differently is their problem. But when they do try to change the meaning of it to suit their own ends, they shouldn't whine about cancel culture when they're called on it.

Take the word racist. If I decided to call someone on this board a racist, I don't think I'd be given a pass by saying "That's not offensive at all. I'm using racist to mean something different than you think it means."

If Carvel wants to describe something as political purity, he should just say political purity rather than use a different term that has a completely different long established meaning - at least if he wants to be understood.

 :whatever:

Quote
Caliman73 (7,724 posts)

27. Oh come now StarfishSaver...

You can't expect people to respect the actual origin and usage of the word for 60 years!! We just have to adjust our reality to what the right and our friends say the word means, because that is important. Our experience of the world doesn't matter as much as winning elections and we need to just back off.

Quote
Star Member Demsrule86 (53,168 posts)

39. Nobody has to explain themselves...everyone can have their own opinion. I agree with VP Harris. This is not a racist country but there are racists in this country.

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

51. Excuse me? The Woke community is being called out by name, here.

All the woke community has done is to bring attention to racial imbalances in this country. And now, suddenly, big names are being dropped in order to rein them in. As long as people, like Carvel, bring them up in his conversation, he can expect push-back. There is no way to confuse his intentions.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

52. That's not what she said

She was very clear that there is a long history of racism in this country and much of that racism is ingrained in the systems still in place. This goes beyond simply having some racists in the country.

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

56. She made a sweeping comment that the US is not racist.

Many would disagree with her. Racism is institutional and we have a fight on our hands. Kamala's statement made it sound like it was in the past tense.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

58. She in no way suggested this was 'past tense"

Institutional racism is here and now and needs to be addressed and that's basically what she said.

If racism was no longer an issue because it was in the past, this wouldn't even be a topic of discussion or a policy priority for the Biden administration

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

61. Everyone is basically characterizing it the same way.

Harris agreed with Tim Scott that America is not a racist country.

From my experiences, from living in a suburban white island, I know that's not true.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/04/29/kamala-harris-responds-tim-scott-saying-america-not-racist-country/4886682001/

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/29/politics/kamala-harris-tim-scott/index.html

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

66. No, she didn't agree with Tim Scott

Read what Scott said - not just one sentence - and read what Kamala said.

Tim Scott it only denied that America is a racist country, but then proceeded to claim that racism is not a serious problem.

Kamala gave a very detailed and nuanced answer explaining that America is indeed saddled and continues to suffer from the damage racism causes and called for us to remedy it.

And let's be real. There is no way Kamala could have said America is a racist country and not spent the next four years digging herself out of the crap that would be headed on her. There are some things a Black woman - even a vice president - cannot say. She was way to wise and savvy to fall into that trap.

 :thatsright:

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

44. Obama doesn:t "have" to do anything

He definitely doesn't "have to explain himself" to anyone.

And not it because he was perfectly clear. The only people who seem to be confused are those who want to use his words to justify their own obtuseness.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

55. He had to walk a very fine line while he was president.

Most of his comments and observations about the racism directed at him were made after he left office.

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

57. Not true. Not true at all.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

59. Well, you sure set the record straight with that pithy and well researched response

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

60. I know definitely that he was talking about racism around that second election because

it was the moment that everything changed. Those four years before, he was walking the full Centrist line, not saying too much about minority issues, in order to avoid upsetting the moderate swing-voters. But then, Trayvon Martin was killed on February 2012. Obama said that he could have been his son. Of course, the moderate swing-voters were turned off by it, but that's when the issue of racism began to get legs. By the time the election came up in November, Obama clearly stated that the resistance he was facing from the Senate was racist-related.

Then, after Obama came BLM, followed by the huge win in awareness with the George Floyd prosecution. And now, they want to put the black genie back in the bottle. Good luck with that.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

62. Anecdotes about the few times Obama mentioned race in no way obviates my point

Do you have any examples of President Obama calling out white supremacy by name in any speech to a joint session of Congress or, for that matter, in any other major speech while president?

Or perhaps you can find instances in which he spoke in depth in interview after interview about systemic racism?

Or how about examples of policies that he put into place specifically and expressly designed to root out and remedy institutional racism in government?

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

65. You sound like someone who is bobbing fiercely to stay afloat.

In 2012, Obama made the changes that would gradually grow to the point where we are today. I'm sorry if he wasn't militant enough for you to satisfy your position. But, for his moment in time, he stepped up to the plate. And I'm satisfied with it.

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

67. You have spent the last several posts pulling things out of thin air I did not aay

I let it go because your comments wee ao weird, but claiming I that Obama wasn't militant enough for me based on what I've written is pretty wacky.

Not sure how you extrapolated that from my pointing out that there are things that Obama couldn't say as a Black man that Biden, a white man, can say. Maybe it was just easier to throw that against the wall that to actually answer my questions.

I see you.

Quote
Star Member Baitball Blogger (38,178 posts)

71. No, you don't see me at all.

Biden has had an interesting journey. The Biden of today is very different and changed from the Biden of the nineties. If he is able to now represent minority issues, it might Be because he owes his presidential win to the ascension of minority voting power. He is listening to them because he sees them. He can say the things he says because the political changes have taken place.

Quote
Star Member Demsrule86 (53,168 posts)

38. This is revisionist history. When Clinton ran for president, we had 12 years of GOP presidents.

12 years! The country was very much to the right. Clinton ran to the middle; it was the only way he could win...and consider that even that was not enough for a majority win. Clinton did not win a majority. And without Perot, likely Clinton would have lost. All this sneering at the moderates who took back the presidency after 12 years is ridiculous. I would remind you Clinton is the reason we had Ginsberg. Democrats moved to the middle in the '90s because they had no choice. We have a 50 50 majority and are fighting to hold onto it in 22.

Quote
PurgedVoter (1,238 posts)

11. Carville worried about our wording?

Stupid, Carville, damned stupid. Carville needs to first get his wording right or shut up. But then this is Carville talking. We won the election. We will never convince the idiots who think Trump one. Carville needs to look at the statistics and shut up till he has a clue and not a clue handed to him by his wife who voted for Trump in 2020. Carville thinks we can throw a few racist dog bones to the Q crowd and get more votes. Not happening. Not ethical.

Backing down has never worked with the Republicans. Reaching across the isle when they hold onto the insane attacks on Obama and Hillary, just makes us look weak. Joe is crazy popular and Carville wants to throw the Stacy Abrams crowd under the bus. Carville did nothing to help Joe win. He is doing nothing to help secure anything except his next interview.

The media owners always love it when a pundit says the Democrats need to dilute and try to appease the far right. The undecided, come on, they just witnessed the Trump years and Joe in contrast. If they are still undecided, giving into the word weasels on Fox is not going to help decide them.

Quote
Star Member Silent3 (10,798 posts)

35. I listened to a video with a crazy women afraid that vaccinated people were a danger...

...to unvaccinated people, just by being near them. She claimed that women were getting terrible menstrual cramps from mere proximity, and that this was all a plot to sterilize people against their will.

She admitted that she had no proof, but then claimed she was an "intuitive", and she just knows what she knows. And if you don't believe her?

Patriarchy!

Yes, expectation scientific of proof was "patriarchy" to this woman.

Am I, as a man, totally disqualified to speak to this, not knowing the fullness of her feminine experience?

 :thatsright:

Quote
Star Member StarfishSaver (14,927 posts)

17. A big part of the problem is that too many people who have never experienced racism and don't seem willing to even acknowledge it want to tell the people who've experienced it every day our whole lives that our lived experience is meaningless and our definition and understanding of racism is not as valid as theirs - in fact, they say our understanding is unreliable because we're too close to it to be objective and we need them to tell us what it REALLY is and how it REALLY works.

Quote
Blasphemer (3,220 posts)

40. It was never papered over for me. It became blatantly obvious during the 2016 primaries...

I started calling it the culture war on the left. As a Black woman, I do not assume the Democratic party to be a safe space when it comes to race issues. I realized many years ago that my live experienced of racism will never match the definitions used by most of those who do not routinely experience it. I will say that as a GenX'er, my experience of millennials and younger generations does give me some hope. I generally feel more comfortable talking about race with younger people.

 :whatever:

Quote
Star Member ismnotwasm (40,125 posts)

37. Bull ****ing Shit.

Carville is well aware of his position as a pundit and ignoring whiteness as a social structure is just a convenient way to allow people to get a little more comfortable with the unacceptable.

Used to have a friend who would say, “when you first step in fresh dog shit barefoot, it’s not bad, it’s soft, and it’s warm. You don’t notice the stink until you stir it up”

When becoming an active anti-racist, as I would hope every Democratic person, every progressive person, every far left person would want to be, it means you have to get past that soft dogshit feel and starting smelling the stink —-and get uncomfortable enough to start scrubbing it off.

Quote
ck4829 (29,824 posts)

75. And where was "cancel culture" when people were being fired for simply being gay?

 :rotf:
The torch of moral clarity since 12/18/07

2016 DOTY: 06 Omaha Steve - Is dying for ****'s face! How could you not vote for him, you heartless bastards!?!

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22204
  • Reputation: +2053/-260
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: "Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2021, 07:36:31 AM »
"black spaces" 🙄


1229001534459568128" border="0
According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."

Offline USA4ME

  • Evil Capitalist
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13232
  • Reputation: +1621/-71
Re: "Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2021, 07:39:31 AM »
Wow! These idiots are exhausting!

“Woke” means white people must admit they’re all racists and beat themselves up about it every second of every day. “Cancel Culture” is what libs will try to do to you if you disagree with modern-day liberal ideology.

Now primitives, how tough was that to do?

.
Because third world peasant labor is a good thing.

Offline SVPete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19293
  • Reputation: +1049/-191
Re: "Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2021, 08:52:43 AM »
Wow! These idiots are exhausting!

“Woke” means white people must admit they’re all racists and beat themselves up about it every second of every day. “Cancel Culture” is what libs will try to do to you if you disagree with modern-day liberal ideology.

Now primitives, how tough was that to do?

Defining words and definitions are racist and exercises of White Supremacy!
ADAB

Facts don't matter to DUpipo

SVPete, aka PeteS in CA, aka Traddles

Offline thundley4

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40019
  • Reputation: +2115/-124
Re: "Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2021, 05:01:22 PM »
Words can hurt! Remember, we are dealing with people that get upset with "Democrat Party".  :-)

Offline enslaved1

  • If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn?
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
  • Reputation: +25/-0
Re: "Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2021, 09:22:17 AM »
Probably not worthy of it's own thread, so I'll throw this in here

Glenn Danzig Says Modern Punk Explosion Won't Happen Due to Cancel Culture and Woke Bull**

Quote
“You could never have it. It would never have happened. We’re lucky it happened when it did, because it’ll never happen again. You won’t have any of those kinds of bands ever again. Everyone’s so uptight and P.C., it’s just like, ‘OK, whatever.'”

Now, Glenn has a history of being a diva and a bit of buttweasel, but I'm seeing keyboard kommandos out in force complaining about how he was nothing, the Misfit's didn't really do anything, and how his offensive lyrics would deserve to be canceled.  Most cited example is Last Caress, which talks about killing your baby and raping your mother. 

It's funny because punk started with the intent of offending people.  Sid Vicious wore a swastika tshirt, not because he was a nazi, but because it offended people, and is still a punk icon.  Now Johnny Rotten was sighted in a MAGA shirt, and he's vilified.  AntiNowhere League wrote about bestiality, gay sex with old people, STDs, and drugs, all in the same song (So What, also covered by Metallica, like Last Caress) and are still playing.  Punks used to want to destroy "The System" now they want you to vote Democrat.  Dead Kennedys compared Jerry Brown to a new Hitler, unbeholden to any specific party.

 Moonbats and proggies live by Calvin's words in my avatar, "When in doubt, deny all terms and definitions."  Wokeness is absolutely a snake eating it's own tail, the question is if it will finish devouring it's self before it's thrashing destroys the rest of  society around it. 
Romans 6:17-18 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

Offline SSG Snuggle Bunny

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22204
  • Reputation: +2053/-260
  • Voted Rookie-of-the-Year, 3 years running
Re: "Woke", "cancel culture", and the meaning of words
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2021, 09:33:19 AM »
Probably not worthy of it's own thread, so I'll throw this in here

Glenn Danzig Says Modern Punk Explosion Won't Happen Due to Cancel Culture and Woke Bull**

Now, Glenn has a history of being a diva and a bit of buttweasel, but I'm seeing keyboard kommandos out in force complaining about how he was nothing, the Misfit's didn't really do anything, and how his offensive lyrics would deserve to be canceled.  Most cited example is Last Caress, which talks about killing your baby and raping your mother. 

It's funny because punk started with the intent of offending people.  Sid Vicious wore a swastika tshirt, not because he was a nazi, but because it offended people, and is still a punk icon.  Now Johnny Rotten was sighted in a MAGA shirt, and he's vilified.  AntiNowhere League wrote about bestiality, gay sex with old people, STDs, and drugs, all in the same song (So What, also covered by Metallica, like Last Caress) and are still playing.  Punks used to want to destroy "The System" now they want you to vote Democrat.  Dead Kennedys compared Jerry Brown to a new Hitler, unbeholden to any specific party.


Don't forget these fine fellows:



According to the Bible, "know" means "yes."