291–300 of 577 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a non-native English speaker not living in the US, I've heard the word (or rather, read) multiple times but I honestly have never bothered to research what it actually means but I think I've kinda gotten the context around it(?) I've seen it being tossed around on Reddit when there's post about US politics/US social issues and it always looked to me like a generic insult thrown at somebody who doesn't like the mor…
[flagged]
Once this was pointed out, I can't unsee it. It's kind of ruined movies that involves the military or military equipment for me, since it can be really obvious when creators toe the line for the military. When I see military equipment my gut reaction is to anticipate the other shoe dropping, and to look for shoehorned hero worship or some good-versus-evil plot point.
Speaking of good-vs-evil, do you also see WWII veterans and military history in the same light? They got into war that no one asked for. I cannot imagine if US and allies had lost WWII. It is simply unimaginable. Aside: I find the WWII era military training/propaganda videos pretty entertaining: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QgXuhv7-54
The good side in WWII includes Stalin and his regime. I do think that Hitler was bigger treat to everyone (including Easter Europeans themselves) and the alliance was needed. However, that does not mean Stalin represents "good guy".
The anitisemitism was not limited to Germans. Plenty of non-Germans people cooperated with it for own benefit or out of own anti-semitism. That includes people who were victims themselves - but still disliked Jews.
Also, closer to America, in movies American army simply can not possibly commit blunder, make really bad decisions (whether practically or morally). Real WWII featured a lot of those.
Also, speaking about movies, in American war movies war essentially feel good and heroic. The good and heroes wins. civilians basically dont exist and literally never are a real character with personality, motivations or agency (as limited as it is). The damage dont to them, the moral choices they have to do or their reaction to it dont exist.
what the US figured out early is that you don't need traditional control of the population as you see in authoritarian states, you just need crafted images, media is much more powerful, they are very good at it. their skill has to be admired. they spend billions on this.
This reads like a butchered Chomsky reference. In actual fact so-called liberal democracies are free to the degree that authoritarian tools wouldn’t and can’t work.
Is the USA a liberal democracy? Authoritarian tools (like packing the courts) seem to work there. Successive UK governments have tightened control over the BBC. Assange stews in a high-security prison, untried, for reporting the truth. Craig Murray has just completed his prison sentence for reporting the truth. Neither of those jailings has received significant coverage in the mainstream UK press.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> wokeism is the theme of the day That billions of equipment and resources provided by the woke cabala? Let's talk about that instead of military covered intervention in society. As a citizen from An USA allied country, I find disturbing how much propaganda the military pushes for at global level. That's a very serious matter.
> That billions of equipment and resources provided by the woke cabala? Hundreds of millions are spent worldwide on endowments for universities to push this specific agenda. So, yes, I wouldn't find it surprising if the movie makers are sponsored, too. Now, it's clear why US army would want a positive optics. But who's to benefit from, say, Tajiks internalizing the "oppression scale"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're going off on a tangent here. By all means criticise Raytheon for the bad things they do. But why criticise their CEO for making a tweet supportive of gay rights? No evidence has been presented that the tweet is not sincere. HN all too often seems prone to spinning complex and sometimes borderline conspiratorial narratives around LGBTQ rights advocacy.
> No evidence has been presented that the tweet is not sincere. Imagine, in the age of chivalry, a lord who arrives at every battle with his forces - but who delays his arrival until the battle is already won, and always joins the winning side. You might well say arriving late is better than not arriving at all. Perhaps there are some last pockets of resistance, you wouldn't turn down his help sweeping those up. Alte…
I do wonder just how early people are required to come to the 'battle' in order to escape your scorn. If someone was an adult in the 80s, are they an insincere opportunist if they weren't speaking out in favor of gay rights then? What if they were an adult in the 1960s and didn't support the Stonewall riots?
As a gay person, it means something to me that a company is willing to speak out publicly in support of its LGBTQ employees. No-one is perfect and no-one is free from hypocrisy. All of us have probably blown with the wind on certain social issues where we could have spoken up earlier if we'd had more courage and moral clarity.
This holier-than-thou cynicism about corporate LGBTQ activism is extremely destructive, in my opinion. In the final analysis it only gives succour to those who are opposed to LGBTQ rights. For actual gay people, the massive shift in corporate attitudes to LGBTQ employees is a huge deal, and has real practical benefits in our lives.
Edit: By the way, a little bit of internet research suggests that Raytheon are actually pretty above average in their support for LGBTQ rights. E.g. they have been praised by the HRC: https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/defense-giant-raytheon-pr... And here's some news coverage dating back to 2006: https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
> I'll try an easier and more concrete one to help you out. Do you think Hollywood is at all hypocritical or insincere about their collective rhetoric about gun violence while also producing movies that glorify guns and people solving their problems with violence? The OP's argument was that modern movies are political propaganda supporting "wokeism", so a concrete example where Hollywood movies are often - intentiona…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I asked because whenever I hear about someone complaining of “wokeism” they’re complaining about things that I think are good. Giving black actors roles in areas normally dominated by white actors? That’s awesome! But whenever this happens loads of people online will claim that is “wokeism”. Representation for gay, lesbian, queer, and trans people in media? Wow that’s great! Many complain this is “wokeism”. Recognizi…
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For all the feigning of ignorance, 'woke' is well entrenched in in mainstream language now. It would definitely have made it to one of those "word of the year" things within the past few years if it wasn't for wokeism. Urban dictionary can help you out if you really don't know https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woke Pretending to be bravely battling fascism and tyranny on behalf of the oppressed while ce…
I asked because whenever I hear about someone complaining of “wokeism” they’re complaining about things that I think are good. Giving black actors roles in areas normally dominated by white actors? That’s awesome! But whenever this happens loads of people online will claim that is “wokeism”. Representation for gay, lesbian, queer, and trans people in media? Wow that’s great! Many complain this is “wokeism”. Recognizi…
I have no doubt the likes of MI5/6 “work” with British series creators too