I actually think we're probably already at the point where the marginal bit of anti-wokeness is on balance more bad than good.

(Not the same as wokeness being good, because anti-wokeness doesn't just fight wokeness, it also has many, IMO mostly bad, side effects)

I actually think we're probably already at the point where the marginal bit of anti-wokeness is on balance more bad than good.

(Not the same as wokeness being good, because anti-wokeness doesn't just fight wokeness, it also has many, IMO mostly bad, side effects)

https://twitter.com/0FJAKE/status/1783928239099875386

ironic in all of this is "anti-wokeness" is anti-history, since "woke" has long been ascribed to Marcus Garvey who said, "Wake up Ethiopia! Wake up Africa", and the Negro Mine Workers who in 1940 issued the statement, "We were asleep. But we will stay woke from now on," in advocating against discriminatory pay

Marketing @kiosk | jamesbeck.mirror.xyz

prev: @consensys @metamask

| 中文 e tropeçando em portugues

Completely agree. The irony is in v treating the linked tweet as a good faith "two sides" argument when anti-wokeness is just a neologism trying not to sound like what it is: racism

Where is the irony? Isn't the root of the entire modern "anti-woke" movement that diversity is bad, equity is bad, and inclusion is bad? Isn't the entire purpose of their movement to justify discriminating against minorities, especially in the workforce? It's the same ugly racism that's always been there.