Fail to be woke at your own peril.
05-16-2021, 07:42 AM
#41
That/It/Thang
Joined APC: Aug 2020
Posts: 2,909
Because people who post their beliefs on social media are delusional to the point they think others care about their views, leading to the added delusion that what they say won’t be used against them.
05-16-2021, 09:13 AM
#42
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,031
05-16-2021, 09:16 AM
#43
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,031
If they pulled the CVR and didn't like his politics maybe that's different. That's not what the CVR is there for.
05-16-2021, 09:38 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 496
‘Wise guy talks.’ Ugh sounds like an awful 4 day work companion much like most of the grumpy old dudes on this thread.
05-16-2021, 01:07 PM
#46
Perennial Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,112
But it’s not just him. Threatening to boycott someone’s company simply because someone legally expresses their first amendment opinion - without representing it as is/her employers opinion - strikes at the heart of freedom of speech and a civil public dialogue. These are things we ALL ought to value.
05-16-2021, 01:59 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Supreme Allied Commander
Posts: 1,074
The “woke” contingent, which views the world through a Critical Race Theory lens, operates with a much different definition of “racism”. Their definition can be distilled down to “prejudice plus power”. They acknowledge that racial prejudice exists, but if that prejudice isn’t wielded by someone outside of the hegemonic power group, they simply don’t care about it. To them, it can’t be “evil” if it comes from below the class/group that holds hegemonic power.
The matrix of intersectionality is used to determine one’s level of victimhood, and therefore to which degree their “truth” matters. This is the type of thinking going on at large scale at both individual and institutional levels these days.
The discourse is toxic right now because one half defines racism as systemic problem that manifests itself in unequal outcomes, while the other half views equality of opportunity the ultimate goal and operates under the classic definition of racism as being a sin of the individual heart.
Unfortunately we are in a time filled with labels, tribalism, demagoguery, and rhetoric that many people on both sides are unable to acknowledge the valid points of the other side and the shortcomings of the views on their own side.
One thing that is for certain, though, is that we are definitely being challenged as a culture and society. When we fail to have things in common, or the desire to believe and agree on things in a universal sense, it will be very difficult to survive as a flourishing country.
The matrix of intersectionality is used to determine one’s level of victimhood, and therefore to which degree their “truth” matters. This is the type of thinking going on at large scale at both individual and institutional levels these days.
The discourse is toxic right now because one half defines racism as systemic problem that manifests itself in unequal outcomes, while the other half views equality of opportunity the ultimate goal and operates under the classic definition of racism as being a sin of the individual heart.
Unfortunately we are in a time filled with labels, tribalism, demagoguery, and rhetoric that many people on both sides are unable to acknowledge the valid points of the other side and the shortcomings of the views on their own side.
One thing that is for certain, though, is that we are definitely being challenged as a culture and society. When we fail to have things in common, or the desire to believe and agree on things in a universal sense, it will be very difficult to survive as a flourishing country.
We unite by focusing on the things we have in common, while respecting differences. We divide when we segregate into groups by our differences, and ignore what binds us.
05-16-2021, 02:25 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Position: C-172
Posts: 463
But it’s not just him. Threatening to boycott someone’s company simply because someone legally expresses their first amendment opinion - without representing it as is/her employers opinion - strikes at the heart of freedom of speech and a civil public dialogue. These are things we ALL ought to value.
05-16-2021, 03:04 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,490
And to answer the original question, I don’t think he should be fired. It doesn’t really apply to the comparison I was calling out because he wasn’t intentionally using his work place as a platform. But it wouldn’t surprise me if he was fired or reprimanded in some way. Companies are terrified of the online mob.
05-16-2021, 03:42 PM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,269
But it’s not just him. Threatening to boycott someone’s company simply because someone legally expresses their first amendment opinion - without representing it as is/her employers opinion - strikes at the heart of freedom of speech and a civil public dialogue. These are things we ALL ought to value.
Not shopping somewhere/boycotting because an employee of said company upset you is just as much a right as being able to say something that may offend. I still truly believe the majority really don’t care. Some guy wants to go in some political tirade about how bad liberals are? Fine, good for him. Some athlete wants to kneel to protest police brutality? Good on them too. Who cares.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
