“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.
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
I think you describe it really well. There is certainly a large pocket of black communities on social media sharing dreams of a Western takeover, ranging anywhere from outright (fraudulently) claiming inventions they never invented, brazenly replacing characters in every form of entertainment, all the way to openly proposing a white purge, let's call it. Very concerning.
What's even weirder is that this content was rarely ever flagged in the Twitter days, and still prevails on X today. Demonizing anyone of white European descent on Reddit is also completely acceptable, and doesn't result in moderation.
He doesn’t have an argument. He’s simply stating his opinion on something he’s never experienced. It’s a bit like someone saying “The California wildfires aren’t that bad” but they live in Sweden.
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?
> There is none for the ubiquity and material impact of racism in 2025
What do you mean? Many ways in which people of color are being disadvantaged (net worth, income, representation in positions of power etc.) are very measurable, in 2025 as much as in 1990.
Which argument? There are disadvantaged groups in the society (including by race), and several important aspects of them being disadvantaged are measurable. That's my whole argument here.
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.
you got so mad at a blog post that you made a new account just to spam childish insults at anonymous commenters online. You are a man child and I feel bad for your family and the people around you.
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines. You can't post like that here, regardless of how right you are or feel you are, or how wrong others are or you feel they are.
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines. You can't post like that here, regardless of how right you are or feel you are, or how wrong others are or you feel they are.
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 can oppose an ideology without agreeing with everyone and especially extremists who also oppose that same ideology.
He's doing it by conflating 'priggishness' (puritanical moral conservatism) with a movement that's advocating for equity and trying to dismantle structural oppression. He's deftly sidestepping the power dynamics at play, which fundamentally distinguish these two things. It just so happens that he's in a class of people who sit at the top of a tower of structural advantages benefitting him as he tut-tuts people who are pointing out that they're oppressive to some groups.
Ultimately he's just building a massive wall of text strawman for things he doesn't grasp and attacking it. We're fully in the era of this lazy take, like a dam breaking loose, lots of people who have been threatened by those movements are finally feeling free to attack them en masse.
>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.
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.
