They want the freedom to legally discriminate.
American conservatism is a fascist movement. It only works if you have an enemy.
The billionaires care because it helps them continue with their looting. The mob cares because they have been actively de-educated to care.
I would challenge the notion that conservatism is about white supremacy, as one poster upthread said. I know a great many Hispanics and Asians who are full-on QAnon/Trump and certainly are not white supremacist.
What keeps conservatives going is this sense of righteous anger. That’s a drug that anyone can get addicted to, regardless of skin color. The conservatives love this idea that they’re going up against cartoon-like villains who are absurdly evil (drinking babies’ blood, etc.), along with the fun of trolling people by deliberately suggesting things they know anger others (such as proposing that Ukraine should give in and cede territory to Russia) and that gives them the dopamine they crave. I see skin color playing relatively little role, if it’s even a factor at all.
I pointed this out to my mother recently - that she often deliberately supports things that she knows are wrong, because it gives her a thrill. That didn’t go over well.
Well there’s the problem in your argument right there.
Difference is good if you’re a person who likes differences. Lotta folks intensely dislike difference and instead are only comfortable in the presence of mass uniformity and mass conformity. Anything else is scarily unpredictable / inscrutable. In their limited worldview something that can’t be understood must be feared.
They’re idjits, but they’re numerous idjits. And as @Velocity just said so well they’re easily led, and more importantly easily mis-led, idjits.
Ok, so fear. And lack of education. Republicans continue to attack education.
Maybe. But the difference between trolling someone over a protected trait or demographic category, and being discriminatory about that trait or category is not all that relevant, and becomes even less so as trolling continues. Though these fine distinctions may play a role in rationalizing lousy actions, it is not the responsibility of people to tease out these relatively insignificant distinctions in the stories that trolls may tell themselves.
I read something interesting once about fraternity hazing. Everyone who goes through it hates it, but once they’re accepted into a fraternity or sorority, many will actively participate in hazing the next group who wants to join. They rationalize it to themselves by thinking that they had to go through hazing to be accepted into a group, so any newcomers who want to be accepted should have to earn their way in, too.
I sometimes wonder if a similar thought process goes in to the hatred of immigrants. I occasionally see liberals make the argument that almost all Americans are immigrants, or descendants thereof, so they should be more accepting of people who want to immigrate now. The problem is, our immigrant forebears faced their own discrimination when they were new arrivals in America. I can easily imagine someone thinking “my Irish great-grandfather had a terrible time when he came to this country. He had to live in a hovel, and faced plenty of anti-Irish discrimination. Why should I accept immigrants from Mexico or Central America with open arms? Let them struggle and suffer for a couple generations like my family did.”
People are not purely rational. We carry grudges we’re not even aware of, act on them in ways that don’t make sense, and make up reasons to rationalize our beliefs.
I’m also surprised by Asians and Hispanics who align with Trump or Q. You don’t tend to see that in Mexico proper. But I also get surprised by Americans of Hispanic origin who sometimes profess to see little value in learning Spanish.
“Woke” is just the latest incarnation of “politically correct”. It’s a meaningless buzzword used whenever a conservative needs to take a reactionary position against something. Frank Wilhoit put it best when he said “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”
Whenever people demand the in-group be bound, or the out-group be protected, that’s wokeness, political correctness, whatever you want to call it. It can be literally anything, from teenagers receiving gender-affirming care to spotted owls stopping a lumber harvest. Whatever it is that stands in the way of the Conservative proposition, that is the enemy.
“Don’t woke, go broke!” 
Why? This seems pretty typical of immigrants as the years roll on. We have a lot of ethnic Germans here in the United States, but most of them don’t speak German. If I head on down to Stuttgart, Arkansas I can find a few old timers who still know a little German, but most of the people descended from the German settlers sure don’t.
It’s not generally my place to say what people should or shouldn’t do. German was once popular enough, three centuries ago, to be proposed as a US national language and still retains pockets where it is used daily. But the States are a long distance from Germany. Historical events occurred in the intervening period.
Migration from The Americas by Latino people was often more recent, many more communities in the US are said to frequently use Spanish, many elderly people may speak better Spanish than English, Mexico and the Americas are geographically closer, immigration from these countries is currently higher, and there are cultural reasons to speak a language apart from pragmatic ones.
Not that my expectations matter, but I have sometimes seen not speaking Spanish as a desire to better fit in, a wish not to be identified with more recent immigrants, a lack of educational opportunity or cultural appreciation, an expression of the considerable differences between countries in The Americas (which many Americans and Canadians do not appreciate), or a self-identity emphasizing being mainly American and so expressing indifference. This crude generalization is likely often mistaken, and I apologize if this is the case. Yet it still surprises me a bit.
The parents’ desire to help their children to better “fit in” is often part of an overall effort to help them avoid the same kind of discrimnation they experienced. Latinos have it tough. If they adhere to their roots they’re often looked at as not being American enough by society at large but on the flip side if they’re not Latino enough they might be judged negatively by their peers. It seems like an exhausting set of social expectations to try to navigate.
That’s a good point. But one wonders whether learning a language would greatly change the amount of stereotyping, microaggressions or unfair treatment. Canada is largely a nation of immigrants. I know many people from many backgrounds who, as second generation children, were forced to endure language classes in many different idioms. I am sure how useful this was varied, but suspect many now see value in it. A skill is a skill.
These delicate social expectations may be hard to balance. One might say something similar about many other cultures. But I agree Latinos attract more attention (good and bad), are gaining influence, and the national and social differences can be quite considerable, even as unsophisticated people lump them all together.
Another salvo in the “war on ‘wokeness’” was just launched – this time, out of Colorado’s GOP.
Pure hate. I love it when they say the quiet part out loud:
He seems nice. Countdown to ‘awkward encounter in a public mens room’ moment…
They’re losing. They’re losing and they know it, and are lashing out as they’re ideas gasp for air. They wont win, and their fear about LGBTQ people harming children is misdirected.
Meanwhile over in the rectory:
I guess those are “godly groomers”?
“Where they burn books, they will in the end also burn people.” - Heinrich Heine
I wonder if they would be okay with the rainbow flags if we hung them upside down?
Then it’s just a rainbow smile.