Peter Boghossian - Advice on how to deal with Woke ideology.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 чер 2024
- Peter Boghossian gives advice on how to deal with Woke ideology.
I had asked my Locals subscribers what questions they had for Peter, and he was kind enough to answer them.
For more content and to join my Locals community, check out travisbrown.locals.com
0:00 Introduction
0:01 THE WOKE REFORMATION
0:13 How should we respond to someone who claims we have white privilege, and that any denial of the claim is proof of that privilege?
1:22 How do students make the tough decision to speak up when faced with Woke ideology in their classroom?
3:18 How should college students react to Wake ideology taling over their campus, and what can they do?
6:52 How do you responsibly raise children when your spouse has gone Woke?
8:23 What can people do when their community groups have been infected with Wokeness?
10:14 How should we respond to someone who says teaching CRT to kids is just a way to teach the history of racism?
10:39 What should employees do when they're forced to do DEI trainings at work
12:28 What are some tactics that can be used to help Woke people question their beliefs?
17:15 How do we defend tree speech when people say its just an excuse to be racist or bigoted? - Фільми й анімація
Don't forget to subscribe! And if you like my work, please consider joining me on Locals where you'll get exclusive content. It's a free speech platform, and I'll never have to worry about my content being banned or flagged there. You can interact with my awesome community and myself there, too. travisbrown.locals.com
Production quality is bad but you clearly know your stuff
Hey, Travis, there's a typo at 1:22. "classsroom" 😉 Just FYI.
Woke ideology has stifled peoples sense of responsibility.
how do you know that?
how come a movement asking people to recognise the origins of their wealth and take responsibility for the actions of their forefathers that their are profiting from, be a stiffening in the sense of responsibility.
And, btw, racists are building oil pipelines on the stollen lands of indigenous people at this moment, at present now. An i know that because i have seen it, and you can can be proven wrong if there is no pipeline, which there is.
laughing at woke ideology is a wonderful passtime.
I'm a psychotherapist and these communication techniques are very valuable in talking to patienrs ❤
There is also Black privilege, Chinese privilege, female privilege, tall privilege, beauty privilege, educated privilege, religious privilege etc ad infinitum...
And hierarchies within these privileges.
It all depends on context.
Dont forget skinny privilege. You just misprivileged so many people! You're getting deplatformed😂
The trouble is, nobody thinks beauty privilege is morally wrong and should go away. I tip hot waitresses more because I should. They earned it. By being hot. Nobody thinks this is bad. If they did there wouldn't be Hooters.
I told a woke person this once and they just said that was my white fragility talking. It's like trying to talk to someone in a cult. They can't break out of their programming and literally see everything as black and white.
@@gld424 send them to me. I'm Black. Their BS has no power with me.
@@Aliandrin They do. These same people believe that you have been programmed to like that hot waitress by society. To them there is nothing objective about beauty.
Regarding "white privilege": IMO, it is more correctly a societal privilege, not a color-based privilege. If I take my white self to a black neighborhood does my white privilege go with me, or does it stay back in my white neighborhood (or does it actually become a disadvantage)? If I go to a predominantly non-white country will my privilege travel with me, or does it get left behind? If my "white privilege" doesn't travel with me anywhere I go, then it is not a "white" privilege but instead a privilege based on the society in which I typically participate.
I like the idea of documenting and filming all these things. This woke ideology is a bubble waiting to bust and these schools, universities and companies should be held accountable. If that takes 5 years or even 20 years, eventually it will burst and having all this reverse discrimination/ideology documented and recorded will pay off in dividends.
@itp5x5 - Nothing will change until the diversity commissars are sacked. Every last one of them.
Not while student loan forgiveness can kick the can down the road.
I don't think you realize how deep this runs, and how the next 2 generations of woke activists have already been created in the school system by young teachers that'll be in the system, spreading their ideology for decades to come.
I hope it doesn't take that long. That's a whole generation of derangement and damage.
I like how you like this, but you may not realize how serious the consequences of their behaviour is, they are creating a hate group which is getting really big, the things that could come out of this are real and dangerous.
We might be in more trouble than just having to document it, they are protecting murderers, they created a religion where they can burn anyone on a stake without evidence, they putting deranged lunatics in power over other peoples lifes.
I pretend I'm deaf if someone accuses me of having white privelege. "WHAT?!! White BEVERAGE? No, this is whiskey. I need it." I was born in a paper bag at the bottom of a sewer. Privelege? No. Whiskey? Hell yes.
Lol
Please make the questions bigger for us myopes.
I love this guy. His way of handling these tough conversations is a skill I’m trying to learn.
Hello. I have a few suggestions to make on the format of these videos.
1) Would it be possible to have the questions written in a bigger font. They are hard to read.
2) Better yet, wouldn't it be better if you could put a voice over that asks the question and then Peter gives his response?
That would make it possible to listen to the episodes while doing something else instead of be forced to look at the screen to get the questions.
Keep up the good work.
I second this suggestion! The voice over would be great because I don’t watch I listen while working.
#2 ... I do the same. lol... Peter can wear PJ's for all I care... I'd never really know.
Oh God, go away 😆
@@pineapplegirl8078 This! I have to switch between tabs to read what the question is, and it's really inconvenient if I'm just walking out in the street.
Ok make the print bigger👍👌
But please don't begin to read the questions out loud because some of us understand how the brain retains information and having to read it goes a long way towards information retention.
Brilliant! Wisdom in this age of Wokeness!
I keep having to back up the video. I’m listening while I work, but not watching the screen. Could someone read the questions out?
Thanks to this channel and to Peter for the excellent content, however.
Please note ... This is a perfect video to listen to while doing other work around the house for example, or even browsing the web. However, the questions are not narrated and this leaves a serious gap in being able to listen and not watch. There isn't anything "to watch" so needing to watch only to be able to read the questions is a serious drawback. I hope the questions can be narrated in future videos. ... In addition, on a phone the questions are legible only in full screen mode. Again, this is a drawback.
Otherwise, great stuff! Keep up the great work! Thanks, too.
I really like how he's talking about wokeness like it's an airborne virus lol. The analogy of a woke mob being like "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" is perfect.
Share this with friends, family and social groups. Pete and Travis are doing important work.
Yes. Except he advises we join anti woke groups but then doesn't explain where any are and they are very hard to find on the internet. Can we please get a directory? The one he mentioned does not even look anti-woke
@@andysturges3979 Which one is that? There are a few that I know of. What exactly are you looking to get from the group? Some focus primarily on K-12 education and all the shit going on there, some are general discussion and info sharing on wokeism. There's also a few for individuals who need help in the workplace that are advancing DEI and anti-racist policies.
Thanks so much for posting this!
THANK YOU , MORE OF THIS PLEASE
Great vid. A lot to unpack here which can also apply to other things in life too.
Very useful, very helpful. Thank you.
Thank you so much for this, Professor Boghossian. It's very helpful.
Love the videos ... advice and all. I actually knew more than I thought about this topic. And, I actually use a lot of the same techniques with people already, just in different situations and different topics. Living in abusive situations most of my life kind of made me learn how to do things. Bravo for me, in a way, but it's always good to reaffirm that I'm actually doing things in the best way. Thanks for all of the great advice and information!
This series is very helpful. I am looking froward to your 1 minutes.
Of course I have white privilege. I had to pay full price for college and could only apply to colleges that my SAT scores got me accepted into. I wasn't given any points when I applied with hundreds of other applicants for a handful of positions, I had to get hired on my merits and had to try to beat out all the other white people who were competing solely with their merits as well. Both the black hires for those few jobs got hired because of their skin color and after a couple years of floundering, got quietly exited from the company. But that's white privilege for you. No diversity points for me on public money contracts, I have to spin off a shell division, swap stock with a "minority owned" business that contributes fuck all to the operation of the business but allows me to compete on a level playing field with all the other fake minority owned shell corporations. Yeah, that's white privilege, all right.
If you are so brilliant Anya (and perhaps you are) meritocracy should be your ultimate objective.
@Anya Wale and modest.
@Anya Wale I guess I’m biased as I work in the health field and so every non white colleague I meet is patently very intelligent so it doesn’t even occur to me think that someone’s skin colour determines their intellectual ability. So in essence I see people who come out the other end of education doing well. My partner, however, works in the education sector and sadly sees a lot of people from non white backgrounds admitted to courses he runs purely because they are not white, and because there is not the selection pressure of actual ability and intelligence he sees a lot of them dropping out with no qualification. It’s not that just by being non white they are intellectually inferior, it’s that by admitting to the course on the basis of skin colour one removes “ability to complete the course” as a selection pressure.
@Anya Wale I’m sorry to hear of your experiences. Personally I prefer interacting with people of high intellectual ability regardless of their skin colour. Makes for more interesting chat.
@Anya Wale and with that you prove your pretensions are exactly that. No point talking with you. Perhaps it isn’t your skin colour people are reacting to but your evident lack of intelligence. You are the dunning Kruger effect writ large.
This is a safe haven. Thank you
Damn, this is good advice. Many thanks for posting. I have come up against all manner of vitriol when I question. I ask for cites, data, definitions and the like. I’m stonewalled and threatened. I’ve had to shed many people as a result
Excellent advice here.
I'm reminded of Christopher Hitchens' book"letters to a young contrarian". His book quotes the famous Catch 22 line "Major Danby replied indulgently with a superior smile, “But, Yossarian, what if everyone felt that way?” “Then I’d certainly be a damned fool to feel any other way, wouldn’t I?” Remember your inner Yossarian and resist.
Your integrity is worth ten thousand degrees. Speak up.
This is good, but we need a whole lot more of these types of videos.
I'm not trying to be critical, because I completely agree with Peter on this topic, but I'm trying to understand a distinction here: In one response (I think around the 15 minute mark) he says that you shouldn't ask "why" questions because the person will explain and then become further entrenched in their own argument, but then in response to the very next question (around the 20 minute mark) he says you SHOULD ask why. I'm missing the fundamental distinction between the two scenarios and could use some help.
That's a very good question. I've wondered, myself.
Finally! Content on how to actually fight against wokeness. Seems like a couple good rules of thumb might be: work almost exclusively in questions. And: avoid questions which trigger confirmation bias.
At the end of the day it comes down to people with positions of power (i.e. government, unions, activists, school administrators, etc.) having the moral fortitude required to sacrifice their own careers by walking away when the institutions they serve become corrupt, just as Boghossian did. If more had done so in Germany, Hitler’s genocidal reign would not have been possible. Staying quiet and compliant just delays the inevitable, better to defect now and become allies with those still free enough to support you and help them build momentum for efforts which remove those seeking human destruction from the public square.
This was the first week of my graduate program in social work and I encountered two Marxist professors, antiracism lectures, talk of oppression, and ended one class with two minutes of healing after difficult discussions (of which zero people seemingly disagreed except for myself and maybe a few hidden others) I’d like to speak up but I figure, why? These people are so far off the reservation I would just be further ostracizing myself and I’ve got two years to go. Having said that, I won’t lie. I’ll keep my head down and get my degree so I can help people in the way I choose.
I have a family member who's swallowed by the woke rabbit hole and I no longer try to reason with her in any way. It's 100% futile; their brains are hard-wired to protect the oppression narrative at all costs and never, EVER question a single aspect of it. In their minds, challenging one tiny aspect threatens to destroy the whole structure. No matter how diplomatic, cautious, open-minded and carefully I listen to her side of it, the instant I offer a counter viewpoint she gets hysterical, defensive, angrily spouts quickie point and then shuts down the conversation as fast as possible.
Their brains literally perceive questioning as a dangerous threat to their safety. Hence why we call it a religious cult.
My husband was a sociology major back in Cali, and he was told that his denial of white privilege's was a "failure in learning" and they tried to kick him out of his program. It was the most stressful thing ever. He literally got sick to his stomach because he was only one semester away from his 3 year graduate program and they tried to kick him out. He told them, "how am I displaying "failure in learning" because I disagree with your claim that all white people have white privilege's? I am a straight A student. And I was born in a poor community, I did not have any privilege's trust me". They told him he aced his classes because he was a white man and had "power, especially over his black professors, and that is why they gave him A's". The minute we graduate we moved and left California. They also told him that they do not accept the traditional definition for racism, they only follow Critical Race Theory definition of racism, that was such BS too. Oh one last thing, and even though I'm Mexican, these fools say that Latina's who marry "white guys" inherent their whiteness and privilege, we couldn't wait to graduate and leave that state. Good job on keeping your head down, good luck!
@@techybecky402 Good god, they couldn't sound more like a religious cult. How the hell did he have "power" over his black professors to make them give him A's? Like he could pull them aside and give them a whipping if they didn't? I will never respect an ideology that rejects logic and thinks in such vague terms.
This video started with a woke ad about anti-racism. Lewis Hamilton is an extremely high paid black F1 driver complaining about racism 🤣🤣🤣
He’s mixed race.
His mum is white.
@Anya Wale Anti-racism makes claims that no blaq person can get ahead in life. It's yet another case of rich people telling poor people that other rich people are making them poor.
@@NoLefTurnUnStoned. if he was absolutely certain that blacks have disadvantage, then he would assert and cling to his white side to get ahead in life. It is the case with many that are of mixed race. It turns out that the color white contains all colors; and that that color black is the absence of color (this true scientifically and as it pertains to races of people), since everyone on earth has roots in Africa. We are all African.
@Anya Wale Hamilton has privilege I can never have, and probably privilege that you can never have. I am a 29 year combat veteran, so I don't have trouble with having meaning in my life. I am curious why you would say I am jealous of a privileged, rich idealogue that uses his authority and position to spread lies about the world though. He is supported by rich race enthusiasts that have benefitted from the work people like me have provided for him, such a an F1 race can never happen in DR Congo or Sudan.
@Anya Wale you should probably watch the video.
Thanks!
Thank you!
Great video! I must say, however, that your intro music makes me feel like I'm at a funeral! Soooo depressing!
It's not my fault that mt ancestors were the most innovative and brilliant people in history and that other groups were too stupid to compete.
Equating mass genocide of native populations to innovation and brilliance helps explain why there will never be an understanding of differences.
@@the_village_elder Conflating a hundreds years long war with genocide is racist. Just because they lost and absolutely refused to surrender doesnt mean they were some innocent little weaklings who were pummeled by an oppressive empire. They were extremely worthy opponents. Able to fire 3 arrows a second to our one bullet per minute and a half. Mandatory torture of any POWs. Scalping. Killing of women. Kidnapping. Absolutely savage brutality. And they werent even united. You ought to actually learn about the war. Its quite interesting, and nothing like we are told.
Also, a ridiculous amount of human innovation comes from war. Does that somehow strip it of its brilliance or ingenuity? Even if something is completely morally repugnant, can it also be brilliant? Did nuclear bombs not require great intelligence to invent - because they killed so many?
Not that I think innovation is why the war was won. I think it was simply because of a united front and sheer numbers. Even then, it took forever.
@@the_village_elder you mean the natives killing off other tribes first? Or just the natives killed after.
Which genocide?
@@snafuAB The natives and indigenous the world over, had conflicts but also merged, united and intermarried. See the Mayas. Also, the natives welcomed Columbus and every other explorer with mostly open arms so no, no people were as megalomaniacal and demonic as Europeans.
If you're seeking a genocide then simply pick a country and time period. Americans & Australians, who were both derelicts from Britain, slaughtered the Aztecs, Tainos, and every other dark tribe in the Americas, Australians slaughtered the Aboriginees, Tazmanians, etc., even the Argentinans committed genocide against their native populations in the 20th century. Once you got tired of killing them because the false Christianity you spread spoke against murder, you sent them to concentration camps aka boarding schools to cleanse them of their culture.
Stop it with the narrative that they were killing each other and you offered a 'softer and more subtle' murder.
I can go on for days with atrocities ya'll committed.
@@kronk358 I'm glad you acknowledge the superiority of bows and arrows. The European won through deception however. Agreed to treaties for peace then broke every last one of em' (just like today), turned tribes against each other etc. Don't forget how ya'll sprayed machine guns and killed entire tribes after surrender. This of course was sponsored by white jesus and the Catholic Church.
So is innovation the reason why Americans like war so much? lol I agree, we aren't told everything because of white fragility - so fragile that Florida made laws to protect your ilk from being offended. Can't make this shit up smh
Unfortunately the blood thirsty American perpetual quest to dominate the planet to avoid your perceived extinction/replacement, is still ongoing.
I'm currently attending the teacher education in Sweden and recently had a mandatory gender studies class where we learned that water is sexist......I have begun to question the teachers spreading this nonsense more frequently and I'm happy i can watch this video and learn how to approach it further from someone who's more experienced. Thank you sir.
How is H2O sexist???
Det här woke viruset sprids snabbare än covid
@@pdxnikki1 apparently the teacher, who is a joke in my opinion, said that since water can be described with masculine terms such as raw, hard and rough that is a sign of sexism in our society...
Didn't Sweden change the pronouns of its language because they were sexist or something? Jesus your country is hopeless.
@@BlackJezuz69
Licenced to be absurd.
Harrison Bergeron is the logical conclusion of Woke Ideology ... so I just point people to that short story and ask where on the slope to that destination is good stopping point.
At around 11:50, he mentions checking to make sure that the words mean what they say they mean. I would suggest looking to buying an etymological dictionary, as that can help show you not only the definitions, but how the ROOTS of those definitions came to be. A common example is how they say "instead of 'history', we should have 'herstory'" sometimes it might be for a pun, but sometimes they genuinely have no clue (or count on you having no clue) on the background.
❤❤❤
The best way to help your children is to involve them in your life and be a role model for them, they have to respect you and want to be like you. That's the only way they will listen to what you say. Teach your kids stuff that is useful in the real world and listen to what they say. It's not hard. Most parents are just lazy and don't want to put effort into something when they get home tired from work. It's by design.
Removing the child from the household and putting him into a public school is how they take away control from the parents and give it to the government. The government becomes a surrogate father and mother.
counter wokecraft with lindsay and pincourt is a succinct read
This is the most practical Public Service Announcement I've ever watched. The woke campaign to curb free speech scares the fck out of me. In 2018 i was terrified of Right Wing nut jobs taking over. I will never forgive myself for being so short sighted and gullible.
I don't like the term "white privilege". I think that it is probably easier to be a part of the majority demographic, which could be called "majority advantage", but I don't think it's specifically white.
Also, I don't think it's a privilege, since it's not a legally granted special permission. I do think they chose that word intentionally through, so that when the oppression starts, they can claim that they are just taking away unfair privileges.
In other words, you can oppress people while pretending that you are just making people equal.
Combine that with the fact that progressive clergy believe that historical discrimination can only be remedied by present and future discrimination in the other direction. I think it's pretty obvious what their plans are.
Just identify as transgender and flip the woke game on them. I dont know why more people dont just do this. Instant victim status and therefore elite status at the same time 😂😂😂
Hysterical and accurate 👌🏼
Out-woke the woke!
It doesn’t work, dude. Trans people who aren’t woke still get called transphobes. Blaire White is a good example. Caitlin Jenner now gets bullied by both the woke and the right.
Exactly. And watch them dare to question my gender expression! I've turned the woke tables on younger generation family members with a different nationality and thus past history to feel ashamed of, and they had no response. Two can play these games.
Don’t forget to add your pronouns!
Please don’t ever have text on a screen that is not read out loud.
And remember whenever you have text on screen that you wish to be read the time that you leave it on screen should be you reading it out loud twice.
I would argue if there is anything approximating white privilege, it’s that any other racial group outside of black Americans can work any job or pursue any passion without their racial identity being questioned as a result. The problem with calling it white privilege is that it applies to other racial groups in the United States. I would argue the same rules apply to Asians and Hispanics.
It’s like black Americans have placed themselves into a box and then they decided to blame white Americans for doing it.
You make very good points, I hadn't thought of these things but as soon as I read your post recognised immediately the truth of what you say.
By insisting there exists white privilege, all Black activity including thought has to be bound by imposed rules. So it takes away choices from Black individuals. It's not liberating at all.
I just tell the Woke I don't believe in any of their assumptions.
'Privilege' is a contraction of 'private legislation'. It's a portmanteau same as 'spork' and 'smog', just older. Originally it meant a special benefit granted by government to an individual or group. It still means exactly that when it comes to things like driver's licenses. But "It was my privilege to meet him" and "The senator's children are privileged" are metaphorical exaggerations. It's like saying "She sporked my socks off".
No legislation exists in the US granting special benefits to white people. Whether "white privilege" exists metaphorically or not is a matter of opinion. I think that for those who believe in it, it's more a matter of faith. It's analogous to 'The Devil' for believers, really. And despite what seems to be a mountain of evidence for The Devil's existence, there is no actual reason to think he's anything but imaginary. In any case what sporks one person's socks off may well leave someone else completely flat. No legislation can ever change the fact that opinions will vary.
The use of the term privilege is it delivered attempt to bully innocent people. If the woke were committed to speaking the truth in love they would say white advantage. 100% true without the stabbing. But since they're all about stabbing people with bogus accusations that's not an option for them.
underrated comment. also i had no idea ‘privilege’ was a portmanteau. thanks
Hmm. So are there specific groups which are granted benefits by government legislation? Perhaps we could speak of those as having privilege, if they exist.
@@trippyliquids It's probably a portmanteau of the Latin terms. I think I recall privilegium is the original Latin word for privilege, and I think legium means law.
Do you by any chance have AS? I do too. Good luck if it is that, it hurts like shit.
4:13 is this IG deleted already?
Great video. Love the comments. Trying to morally and/or philosophically equate Wokeism with "Trumpism" is tired, old & silly. This is one of the errors of modern classical liberalism. Along with insisting a premise as undisputed fact - this is limiting and, in my opinion, damaging current classical liberalism.
I remain politically homeless.
Peter rocks that shirt !!!
I don't think what you refer to as Classical Liberalism IS Classical Liberalism.
For example, do you know the difference between English Classical Liberalism and European Classical Liberalism?
The importance of English Common Law is that it starts from the premise that you are free and the government is there to serve you.
The European model is that the state awards the citizenry with 'rights' and without rights you have no freedoms.
The American constitution is a rights based decree guaranteeing freedoms, those freedoms having been granted by the state to the people.
The irony is often that people suppose there is some police force somewhere that will depose the state of it misbehaves.
In the USA it is supposed that this police force is the armed citizenry. But when half are on one side and half are on the other side this means violent conflict.
Classical English Liberalism assumes the state only has two claims upon your freedom.
Statutory law. Rules agreed to from open debate.
Judicial Precedent. Well reasoned arguments that are constantly evolving for and against resolving differences between competing claims that freedoms are being abused by competing interests.
The judiciary and parliament are an ongoing live debate. Statutes are pauses in that change.
Rights are declarations of principle, the politicians and judges are not responsible for upholding them.
Rights are inert and dead areas that serve as ballast to prevent radical ideas swaying the legal system.
The UK has a Bill of Rights, which is a statute, it doesn't have a written constitution, it has a Constitutional Monarchy.
The Monarchy is a test of civility, the people view it as they might view senior members of their family.
Disrespect of the Monarchy is treated withdisdain, so long as the Sovereign is not self evidently responsible as a result of their conduct.
It means the country is a meta tribe that has established a social pact. Very different from the frontier Mexican stand off in the USA.
Countries that chose to remain with the Constitutional Monarchy of the UK retain this civil pact. Rather than Reihifying the people, they accept they are in relationship with each other and seniority is won through testing the mettal of argument and through honouring the social pact.
It's a subtle difference and neither is superior, it is impossible to invent a Constitutional Monarchy, it's a fragment of feudalism, and it is not possible to establish a republic without a constitutional pact.
Does anyone know the instagram page he was referring to?
@wokeatpsu
Deep
Woke frailties are a horrible life to try to live with.
We are all waking up to how toxic woke has become. Ads and media are also to blame. Why are ads not just trying to sell a product but just trying to push extreme views on everyone.
I enjoy the content of this but it’s somewhat inconvenient that the questions weren’t read aloud
I'd rather be able to just LISTEN to this item--no disrespect to Mr. Boghossian! But it seems oddly "hybrid" to be forced to read the questions, when they could have been read aloud.
Agreed. I watch on double-speed, which doesn't work when the questions aren't shown long enough to read them, and they aren't read aloud.
BoOhOoHoo! BaD mAn MaDe Me ReAd!1!1
Also the print is too small
I guess hitting pause is too much an effort for you so that you can read the text? Lame.
You know this video hits the other side hard when they are going out of their way to fill the comment section with ‘anti-racism’
Can anyone link the reverse Q&A mentioned in the video?
EDIT:
I found it, I think:
ua-cam.com/video/01VAJHhfklg/v-deo.html
Maybe post the link in the description?
ALso maybe links to the books mentioned?
What does woke means and how do you know that?
The consequences of not speaking up are worse than bad grades. If you feel you are a coward, it will likely ruin the trajectory of your entire life. Of course, you could think of yourself as a tactician and play the long game, which might work.
Watched hundreds of street epistemology videos , and recently watching Peter boghosian videos and was surprised to hear the term "woke" so much.
I never really cared what woke ism was before and wasn't aware of what wokism was.
So now I'm woke of wokeism. Lol
Hearing the term woke was associated to hearing right wing videos at least in my experience. Personal experience I accept as not being a reliable method to knowledge, test with outsider test it doesn't work.
Peter's first answers will simply be regarded as derailing or whataboutism. If you're going to use analogy, you have to explain why your analogy is or should be valid, _in your opponent's view._ But even then, it probably isn't going to work.
You are the man
What can often help is to establish agreement on regarding definitions. For example, if you can't agree on what defines a "privilege", then there is no point in going into any kind of analogy. it would be a waste of time.
But the opponent has to test the analogy first, without help. And then, as needed, walk them through it.
👋
"The more ideologically captured one is, the higher number they would give"
I'm not sure this is articulated well enough to agree with. Is that a linear relationship? On a scale of 1 to 10, do we really believe that someone who says "7" is more ideologically captured than someone who says "6"? It's hard for me to buy that argument. It's more likely that the relationship doesn't hold particularly strongly until you get to either extreme of the scale.
any video with Peter gets an automatic like
If I am 100 percent sure that men cannot be women and women cannot be men, is that a dogmatic religious position? It seems to follow from what you said that it is. If someone asked me under what conditions could that belief be false, I would have to answer: None. Does that make me an extremist? In other words, are there exceptions to falsifiability? Or is falsifiability an absolute, unfalsifiable condition of dialog? If so, under what conditions could that belief be false?
for those of us washing dishes with headphones and no wayy to read the screen.... please reiterate the wrritten questions verbally. thank you.
When I was teaching, I saw it as my duty to indoctrinate students into critical thinking (i.e. not letting people bullshit them). That's how I know others are also indoctrinating students with their preferred ideology.
Providing tools that allow one to logically critique an argument and form more cogent ideas of their own, i.e. critical thinking, is not indoctrination, it's education.
Telling them what to think is indoctrination.
@@MrProy33 Yeah dude, it was a joke. I'm saying that I understand the passion with which people go into teaching; they see it as an opportunity. Unfortunately when they want to blow people's minds, they don't do it by opening them, but by closing them off to reason.
A side question, can we use the same techniques to religion fanatics especially those ones from the cults?
While the consequences of speaking up in university are real, I think he should point out that if you don’t speak up there you are laying the foundation for a pattern that will continue into the workplace and you will become an unwitting slave to the ideology for the rest of your miserable existence
I refrain from the use of the term "woke" in relation to varying political stances like this, that have nothing to do with being "awake". But I know what they mean when we use it. I just feel like there should be a more appropriate word. Maybe whiny?
Great talk though!
Woke doesn’t mean awake in American slang but offence-taking. It means prompt to take offence before the other might attack. Stay woke means tolerate no infringement on the gang’s status in the hood.
@@MrMirville sounds obnoxious 😁
The consequences of not speaking up is worse because you die inside. You have abandoned all that makes you you.
Actually, the denial that you are a witch did mean you were a witch.
"Speak up and risk getting poor grades" (at 2:05) What a breath-taking claim against college teachers. Peter ~ philosophers are professionals whose academic lives are guided by evaluating claims and their arguments on their merits. Hearing a student's intuitions for their claim against a particular 'woke ideology' can teach us all something, including philosophers.
At 2:58 Peter claims that it's the role of a professor to indoctrinate students into a particular ideology or worldview." After 24 years doing philosophy with students at Wayne State University, that claim couldn't be more errant, not only about my own work with students but about the work of my colleagues as well.
@@markwenzel1738 just because you don't do it doesn't mean others are the same. I went to university in 2005 and I had one professor who was just like he said. She was by far the least intelligent and least liked teacher in our program. He even said that he doesn't think it's most professors It depends on the program and the school
So you are stuck in there game of false virtue, "I would never think like that, thus surely no one of my fellow professionals would too", this theology depends on that thought....surely they don't mean that.....whilst the cult walks straight over you.
I don't find it breathtaking at all. If people can be so biased just because they're white, and do so much against so many without even knowing it, if every last white person does this, I don't find it too weird that people do the same sort of bias and underhanded (maybe even unconscious) punishing of the wrong ideology that they do to the wrong race.
Don't like being slandered because of what you must have done, based on the assumption that your unconscious biases certainly made you do it?
.......Yeeeeah. Nobody else neither.
@Anya WaleSo you going to address what I said or just strawman me?
Why would I not be "privileged" in the European country where I belong over foreigners? Why would Europeans be treated equally in Asian countries where they don't belong? The United states are a country founded by European immigrants, whether you like it or not, they were not founded by Armenian immigrants, nor by the "natives" (who migrated from Asia earlier on), nor by the African slaves imported to the New World by a few that aren't even of European descent. All these external people were allowed access to the country and its resources despite having no right to it, purely out of generosity from the European founders. They made a mistake dictated by pity, a mistake populations of non European descent don't make.
One would think, judging from the media, that we are a majority black or brown people, with whites occupying the role of dufus.
Your comment highlights the difficulty in pushing back on left wing extremism. While people imply stupid racist nonsense like, “Slaves were imported by the generosity of European founders”, it makes most people want to oppose them and “anti-racism” is the game to do that in town right now.
@@JonCookeBridge That's not what I said. I said that ultimately they benefitted from the resources of the country European settlers founded.
African slaves were NOT trafficked by Europeans, they were trafficked by Africans and the group we shall not name unless we want to end up like Kanye West. I suggest you do more research on the topic.
@@golDroger88 Adds in a dose of anti-semitism too. Largest individual company exporting slaves was the Royal Africa Company. But not really the point. You aren’t supporting the points PB is making.
@@JonCookeBridge You didn't adress what I stated in any way, you immediately went to namecalling. How typical. The people who trafficked were not European even though they lived in Europe (some). IF we have to hold "white" people accountable then why can't we hold accountable who was really responsible? I am not anti-semitic, you are anti-white.
Why do I have to support everything Boghossian says?
No degree or certification is worth lying for. Period. Exit the system that requires you to be evil.
17:34 - Um, didn't you just get finished telling us not to ask why someone believes something?
Can you measure privelege? I don't think so. Until it can be measured, quantified, proven, it's an absurd concept.
We measure elections by votes and some ppl still won’t believe and accept 2020 results so this isn’t a good measuring stick.
It’s awful that you have to have Doublethink just to be a student these days
Isn't it sad that we have to have videos like this? "How to deal with the woke cult" as if this can be a civil matter. I do hope civility and peaceful discourse can change these cult members minds. But I'm a bit black pilled on it. Good luck out their folks.
Marx gets a raspberry
So being white is exactly like being Jewish in in 1932? How valuable is education as “woke”follows obvious progression?
Using ‘witches’ as an analogy was poorly chosen - witches were found guilty if they denied they were witches!
Otherwise - I love this man’s refusal to capitulate and his calm and reasoned rebuttals to cult captured ‘thought’.
Sorry, but this line of question does not work.
I'd disagree with the claim that people have white privilege. They have privilege because they're the majority. There are large numbers of white people in the US who have very little privilege.
Believing without evidence is NOT religious belief. Dr. Boghossian, you ought to be more precise. The belief in Jesus walking on water is not meant to say that's naturally possible to walk on water - it's exactly the other way around: some people testify they saw an impossible thing, so they come to believe Jesus was more than a normal man. Of course it's possible and, at first, reasonable to doubt about this testimony - in fact no one is convinced by a single isolated fact, but by a set on converging signs; instead, the naturalistic mindset pretend to have absolute control on facts, to be able to repeat and dissect them at will, which is *obviously* a dead path if one means to investigate God - who, by definition, is not controllable. If one asks why God does not show up with undeniable evidence to our senses, the answer is
1) God does not want logical coercion, but free spiritual commitment of the "heart", and
2) the dynamics of this relationship and of our capacity to "see" is shaped by what is called "sin" in religious tradition.
But spiritual things are, to the naturalistic mindset, just epiphenomenons emerging casually from a material universe without intrinsic meaning.
Producer terrible. Subtitles unreadable.
I've watched a number of Peter's videos on UA-cam. His arguments sound convincing. He's a talented, charismatic public speaker. That said, Peter caters to a particular audience and that would be those who are all things anti Woke. And I get it. It's his bread and butter. His audience pays to listen to him speak. This in turn pays his bills. Fine. But from what I've seen thus far, Peter has no interest in questioning the opposite side of Wokeism, and I'll call this Trumpism. For instance, I've yet to see a video where he challenges the ideology of those who believe the 2020 election was stolen. Many of these people believe there was ballot swapping, that the Italian government hacked US satellites to penetrate and change the votes on Dominion voting machines, they believe Antifa posed as Trump supporters to invade the US Capitol, and a whole host of other whacked out conspiracy theories. This is just as dangerous to American democracy as Wokeism, yet Peter has shown absolutely no interest in exploring the other side. Peter, if you're reading this, will you make an effort to balance your efforts?
The way I see it, he IS balancing things. When you have a situation so loopsided, fighting only for the right wing ideas make sense, as the entire freaking establishment is already supporting the narrative of the left. Also, I don't know if it was staged or what, but the capitol tour was the most overblown event of this century. I am not even from the US, but damn the leftists establishment can really make a story out of nothing.
He has too much on his plate to handle other subjects. Maga and the woke are the same especially in that they're incapable of fact-based rebuttal. There's nothing wrong to sticking to your subject.
I’ve actually been asked that by people when I myself discuss the negative implications of the woke ideology. My answer is this:
Yes, the Trumpist side of the aisle is equally deranged in its sense of superior idealism. The issue as I see it is more that many of the people who are unquestionably in favour of Trump, regardless of his own questionable history, are not of a new sort. I truly believe that many of the self-identified Trumpists were of that mindset prior to Trump. Trump’s rhetoric gave them a focal point for to gather around, but did not in my opinion create a new issue, instead bolstering an old one that has not been a popular doctrine within society for a long time.
I also believe that not as many people out there are “Trumpist”, but are rather supporters of Trump because he is countering the current political climate. In other words, Trump’s base is made up of two groups, those that believe in extreme ideals and those that support a counter to the popularized and pervasive woke culture. The same could be said about the left side of the aisle as not all believe wholly in wokeness. Many simply don’t like Trump or are just anti-republican, seeing the woke as a lesser of two evils. The labels have great power over many people.
With that being said, I will more succinctly address your point. When I look at this divisiveness, I see a cause and effect that is continually re-occurring between the opposite factions. Group A says “this”, Group B responds with “that.” I would argue that Trump’s victory in 2016 was a catalyst for much of the divide that keeps growing every day, however, as I stated, I do not see the extreme ideals of his supporters being seen as favourable by many people whatsoever. As an aside to that, those ideals are not taught in schools, meaning they are not perpetuated through societally expansive institutions because we all know they are not objectively good.
The reason that the woke ideology has more value in challenging is because of its nature. Wokeness employs empathy in a malevolent way in order to push itself further into culture. It proposes that people should feel guilty for not agreeing and that disagreement is harmful to those that hoist it up. It purports that having a difference of opinion means you should have rights stripped away from you. And it does that through empathy. And furthermore, it has, without public knowledge or consensus, been pushed through the education system, starting from universities and now into elementary schools. It’s foundation is just as shaky, questionable and illogical as the extreme right ideology, but it is being taught as objective truth while vilifying those who question it - and there are many questions.
In conclusion, we as a society have already concluded that the far right teachings are not good for society, and so countering them equally is somewhat redundant though still relevant to a degree. The woke ideology is new, very questionable and being used to indoctrinate children, and it does so while saying that it’s the “good” thing to do, which is manipulative at the very least and demonic at its extreme. I believe there will be more room for questioning the other side, but in current times there is a clear example in wokeness of something that needs to be questioned harshly and fairly just as the rhetoric of the right has been for generations.
I do believe that the existence of one extreme will strengthen the other so in the end this script may flip in a relatively short period of time. I hope that those in the centre of the aisle can reestablish a moderate approach to the future, but the more this stuff is allowed to pervade public institutions, the less likely that is to be the case.
In the end, I believe Peter is targeting what he sees as the greater of two evils, which I would agree with because we already know far right thinking is evil, but many are being led to believe that the far left is not, which is terrifying and historically damning to societies.
Sorry for the short essay, but there is a lot to be said on the issue. I hope that we can all get along relatively well once again and move forward in a mutually beneficial way. There are steps to take towards this goal and I think Peter is taking the right ones. In time, I’m confident that we will see the discussions of Trumpism, but we already know what to call it as we’ve had those discussions in the past and have come as a collective to understand them as illegitimate. I’m sure the same conclusions will be drawn.
I wish you the best.
Cheers!
@@Christopher-iv6sn Good post. Was a pleasure reading it, especially with readable paragraphs that are not that common in you tube comments. I only want to add that it is not true that Trump was the catalyst for the divide, but rather Obama vas. It is during his leadership that the woke religion went into overdrive, and especially anti cop and anti white hate became acceptable. You are correct about the differences. The right wing is like the virus we already know of, and have a vaccine against, but the new woke cult is more like COVID was in 2020.
@@julius43461 I appreciate your kind sentiment. I would however stand by my position as Trump being the catalyst. I think Obama started the fire, Trump poured gas on it, which in turn is not as bad as it sounds.
A fire that burns that hot without a strong foundation will go out much faster. If it had been allowed to simmer longer, we might have ended up in an unstoppable inferno without even knowing it was coming. So in a strange way, the catalyst exposed the problem earlier so that we could snuff it out more easily. Not very easily, but more easily.
Or perhaps they were both catalysts as the whole ideology was birthed out of political elements from over 40 years ago. Either way, Trump’s behaviour and rhetoric stoked (triggered) the far left to expose themselves as the extremists they are.
PS, I thoroughly enjoy the virus/vaccine comparison. Not only is it accurate in depiction, but also very poignant considering recent events.
This is so bitterly disappointing. Peter actually started me on my road to critical thinking with his talks and books, first by questioning religious faith, and then questioning all ideologies (including my own). Peter knows better than most how we are all BIASED to all kinds of things...Biases are our inclinations, our tendencies, our slants that partly inform our worldview, and sometimes our actions.
And not all biases are wrong; I have a strong bias that gravity will always be in effect. I was raised that way, all of my experiences have so far confirmed it, and I've been very successful in my life utilizing that bias. When I have QUESTIONED that bias through experimentation, my bias so far has been justified and warranted.
Where biases become dangerous is when they are not QUESTIONED by the individual. Because of my upbringing and experiences, I have a bias toward interracial couples... I was not raised around interracial couples, it wasn't my "norm." Fortunately, I have QUESTIONED this bias and found it to be totally unfounded and ridiculous. I'm now as happy for interracial couples as I am for ANY other couple, straight, gay, polyamorous, bisexual, and same-race. My upbringing, experiences, and what I'm "used to" have NO BEARING on whether interracial couples are "normal" or not.
So by questioning my bias, it never turned into a PREJUDICE (like what is being demonstrated here against some definition of "woke"). Prejudices can eventually inform one's actions and lead to actual discrimination and harm to individuals and society.
Notice in this video how Peter asks people for THEIR definitions of the words they're using, but Peter doesn't even DEFINE "Woke Ideology." He just kind of expects those who are viewing this video (and as far as I can tell, love his spiel) to already KNOW what "Woke Ideology" is supposed to mean.
When you ask most people who are against "woke" what their definition of "woke" is, they can't even give specifics...it's basically them just being against ideas that challenge what they are comfortable with and already want to believe.
This is not open-mindedness, and the vast majority of these "anti-woke" people have probably NEVER questioned or critiqued their OWN epistemologies that led them to their beliefs and opinions...they simply found podcasts, blogs, and online videos such as this one that matched what they already wanted to believe.
We're human...most of us look for echo chambers, it's easier, more satisfying, and less confrontational than engaging in actual productive debate.
In another shorter video, Peter goes from a definition of "woke" as "The recognition of oppression, discrimination, and injustice towards immigrants, racial minorities, and women"
to "People who think 1) censorship is necessary, 2) some groups have more power than others, 3) what groups you belong to are more important than who you are as an individual and 4) lived experience is more important than empirical evidence."
I can only speak for myself that I'm "woke" by the FIRST definition above and can even agree with 2) of the SECOND definition. I also totally agree that 1), 3), and 4) can't be supported.
Which is why I would never identify with the SECOND "woke" definition, which simply smacks of biased rhetoric.
"Wokeness is a universal solvent that destroys everything it touches."
This reminds me of the Nazis saying Judaism destroys everything it touches. This is NOT Peter being a legitimate professor, a scientific investigator, or desiring an open dialogue. This is something that people belch from megaphones on street corners...and Peter is BETTER than that.
The bitter irony here is that Peter said that other university professors were trying to indoctrinate THEIR students, but with this statement, that's EXACTLY what Peter is trying to do.
This is not a total condemnation of Peter. He is amazing and has done so much good, but he's not perfect. He has done MUCH with teaching critical thinking skills and other methods of intellectual pursuit, and I've looked up to him (and still do) on those other subjects...but he's better than this "anti-woke" BS.
0:31 how you know this guy is gonna turn out to be a grifter like Sam Harris
Because you disagree with him? Ok, sure. Logical.
@@thesignalproductions is grifter the newest way to attempt to discredit any information put forward by people? I viewed the usage a lot lately..
@@snafuAB It's just an idiotic go-to insult used as a substitute instead of actually engaging with someone's ideas or "arguments without agruments" as Thomas Sowell put it.
40 seconds in and I'm out. Once an arrogant leftist, always an arrogant leftist.