# Is it Time to Tone Down the Wokeness, Especially about the Past? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 15, 2024, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287 "2024-11-15T15:14:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 53
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2025, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1068 "2025-01-25T22:13:30Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > it’s just really frustrating when someone flatly denies a fact with no explanation - especially when it’s something well known, and widely agreed to have contributed to Trump winning the election. Yes, it can be frustrating when people here make specious and meritless claims based on cherrypicked data and false narratives. It can be even more frustrating when they continue to label those claims as “facts”. > [@DemonTree](#): > > Here it is in chart form, showing illegal crossings were lower for all years under Trump and higher all years under Biden, so it wasn’t simply an artifact of Covid. No, it was an artefact of the trend under Obama. Also, the surge in attempted illegal border crossings started in May 2020. Aren’t numbers fun? Oh, and how was 2024? > **[Encounters with migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border peaked in December 2023...](https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/10/01/migrant-encounters-at-u-s-mexico-border-have-fallen-sharply-in-2024/sr_24-09-20_migrantencounters_1/)** > [@DemonTree](#): > > Who could have predicted that dropping enforcement against unaccompanied minors would lead to a surge in numbers? Funny thing about Title 42 - from [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_expulsion): > [@](#): > > [Title 42](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_of_the_United_States_Code), which resulted in many repeat attempts from people expelled,[[50]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_expulsion#cite_note-:02-50) led to illegal border crossings at record levels between 2021 and 2023, averaging around 2 million people per year,[[51]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_expulsion#cite_note-n197-51) as well as an increase in ‘gotaways’ which dropped to a record low rate after Title 42 expired.[[52]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_expulsion#cite_note-:1-52) This drop in gotaways allows border patrol to apprehend more criminals and make the border more secure.[[52]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_expulsion#cite_note-:1-52) In fiscal year 2023, CBP figures showed that 169 people on the [United States’ terrorist watch list](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist_Screening_Database) were arrested at the border, compared to 98 in the previous fiscal year and 15 in 2021.[[53]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_expulsion#cite_note-k870-53) In the year after Title 42 ended, the Biden administration deported more people than in any year since 2010.[[54]](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_42_expulsion#cite_note-:3-54) Huh. Seems like the one of the big reasons for those high numbers in 2021-2023 was due to Title 42, and illegal crossings went _down_ after it ended. Remind me who put Title 42 in place? In fact, that surge starting in 2020 I mentioned? Guess what had been implemented two months before? > [@DemonTree](#): > > Additionally, Biden assigning this responsibility to Harris came back to haunt her in her own campaign, as Republicans used it to tie her to his unpopular handling of immigration. “It’s Biden’s fault that the Republicans lied about Harris’ role in immigration” is a fun argument. You know why her “handling of immigration” was so “unpopular”? Because the right are **really good** at lying. Do you even know what Harris was tasked with doing? > [@DemonTree](#): > > By the time their asylum cases are finally heard, they’ll have jobs, families etc, and people on the left will say “we can’t deport them now, it would be cruel, it would crash the economy”. It’s the opposite of a planned immigration policy where you get to choose who comes, with consideration towards benefitting the receiving country. [Yeah, about that](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgryy0jk1zo.amp): > [@](#): > > President Joe Biden’s administration has credited the decrease to recent actions by him to tackle illegal immigration into the US, an election-year political vulnerability for the Democrats. > > “This is the product of a number of actions this administration has taken,” said Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in an interview with CBS this week. > > Mr Mayorkas said those actions include [an executive order signed last month](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cv224kdxwm4o) by President Joe Biden that allows US immigration officials to deport migrants without processing their asylum claims. > > The measure has been called one of the most restrictive border policies by a Democratic president in recent times, and was criticised by left-wing members of the party. Huh. Isn’t that the exact opposite of what you said Biden was doing? That’s so weird. > [@DemonTree](#): > > It was a very smart move by certain Republican governors to bus asylum seekers to liberal cities that had promised to welcome them, without previously having to act on those promises. It’s much easier to be generous with other people’s money, and much easier to welcome immigrants when the burdens and disruption fall on distant border states. If by “smart move” you mean “dishonest, cruel, performative and of questionable legality” I suppose you’re right. But then those adjectives can apply to pretty much every immigration policy the GOP have, as well as those on most other subjects. > [@DemonTree](#): > > On the other side, it’s true that Trump influenced the Republicans to block a bipartisan bill of border reforms, a deeply cynical move. But Biden could have acted without that - in June 2024 he issued an executive order significantly limiting numbers of people allowed to enter and apply for asylum, which greatly reduced the inflow. “It’s Biden’s fault the GOP caved to Trump and shot down a bill that gave them everything they asked for” is another fun argument. You do know executive orders can’t allocate additional funding, right? ---
**Author:** ![CairoCarol](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cairocarol/32/3825_2.png) [@CairoCarol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CairoCarol)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2025, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1069 "2025-01-25T22:49:35Z")
I came late to this thread and so admit I haven’t read it carefully from start to finish (maybe if I had I wouldn’t have embarrassed myself by missing a whoosh/sarcasm when I posted yesterday). But I’m going to try again, this time with regard to something I’ve had reason to think about personally: the distinction between “homeless” and “houseless” or “unhoused.” Maybe because I live in Hawai’i, where it is understood that Hawaii is “home” for Native Hawaiians in a way it is not for the rest of us, I see a clear distinction in meaning between the two concepts. “Home” is where the heart is. A “house” is a place where you take shelter. When The Standells sang, “Boston, you’re my home” they didn’t just mean “Boston, you are where my house is.” They meant a place where you feel rooted. A place you have affection for, despite all its flaws and foibles. A place whose culture is your culture. By that definition of “home,” I am actually just about homeless. I’m not rooted anywhere: while I was growing up, I lived in Pennsylvania, New York, Missouri, Maryland, and New Hampshire - all by the time I was in high school. Since my college years I’ve lived in Massachusetts (multiple addresses); Virginia; Jakarta and Ubud, Indonesia (with something like 6 or 7 different residences in Jakarta - I’ve lost count); Cairo, Egypt; Pohnpei, FSM; and Maputo, Mozambique. Now I am a transplant to Hawai’i. I intend to remain in Hawai’i for the rest of my time on earth, so to me it is “home.” But it’s not “home” the way it is to Native Hawaiians - a disproportionate number of whom make up the significant population of unhoused people who hang out in the park across the street from where I am sitting as I type this. By some measures, I am housed but homeless. The Hawaiian guy who sleeps on the front deck of the gallery I’m in right now? He’s not homeless; his home is Hawai’i. But he is unhoused. Anyway, I’m not on the warpath that people should say “unhoused” instead of “homeless.” As a grant writer who is often told to limit my answer to 1000 or 2000 characters, I’d much prefer to write, for example, “disabled people” (15 characters) rather than “persons with disabilities” (25 characters). Homeless and unhoused are each 8 characters, so that’s all good. But it pays, sometimes literally, to be sensitive to the preferred language, and I am happy to discard outmoded and subtly or not-so-subtly offensive terms. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2025, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1070 "2025-01-25T23:28:22Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > This is one of those topics where there are arguments on both sides. I agree publishing the org chart plausibly puts those people at risk, it was bad, and Walsh shouldn’t have done it. Right: so one side has shown the receipts, let’s hear the other side. > [@DemonTree](#): > > AFAIK the motives of the shooter were never identified, but no honest person could deny that the frequent accusations that Trump was a fascist, was going to end democracy, etc etc, could plausibly motivate an attempt to kill him. Ah, so good old speculation based on nothing. If you mean the first shooter, it seems he just wanted the notoriety of killing a candidate; he had also made plans to assassinate Biden and others, Trump just came nearby first. And while many left-wing commentators have correctly called out Trump’s fascism, I’m not aware of any that have suggested actual violence, unlike multiple GOP members including Trump himself retweeting actual violent memes and outright threats. So try again with this “both sides” shit. ETA: Also note how your cite of how crazy wokeness has got was shot down and there’s was no reflection over that; no consideration that maybe this is largely bull thrown up by conservative media (and very effectively too). Instead it’s just a shift to some other topic that supposedly will make it both sides. ---
**Author:** ![DocCathode](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doccathode/32/18773_2.png) [@DocCathode](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DocCathode)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1071 "2025-01-26T00:32:12Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > I have personally experienced this many times, but I can’t really cite lived experience. 🤷 I googled, and someone wrote an article about it: Okay, technically I suppose it is an article. “The New York Times admits that kids are being mutilated” Note the use of the word “kids” rather than the less emotionally charged but still accurate “minors”. Plus, the use of the word “mutilated”. These are not surgeries. They are ‘mutilations’. Yeah, if the words The American Conservative didn’t convince readers that the article was biased, that should. " the _Times_ confirmed that “top surgery”—removing the breasts of otherwise-healthy female patients confused about their sex—is performed on children across the United States." They are not really trans men! They are just “confused about their sex”! Thanks for clearing that up! They are not just minors! They are “children”! This article is one revelation after another! “Ghorayshi and Walsh were observing the same fact pattern. But Walsh, noticing and condemning the same development that progressives welcome and celebrate, was called a terrorist.” As has already been said, he was actually called that for doxxing people. Would he have been called a terrorist if he had just shouted a lot? I somehow doubt it. "some hospitals do, in fact, perform “gender-affirming” hysterectomies on children as young as 16. " Why the quotes around gender-affirming? If the writer has evidence to argue against the decision to add gender dysphoria to the DSM, why doesn’t he present it? If he has any credentials that qualify him to disagree with the DSM, why doesn’t he present them? He also uses the word “children” again. " It is worth considering why the _Times_, which is politically and philosophically wedded to the claims of transgenderism, would run a piece admitting that top surgeries are being performed on minors across the United States. Perhaps they did so to get out in front of what they suspect is a coming deluge of regret and recriminations from young people sold a bill of goods by the trans lobby. More likely, I think, is that they want to frame the coming debate in terms favorable to their side: should we start carving up “trans people” at 17 or 18?" Here at least, he admits he is just speculating about the Times’ motives without any evidence. “Perhaps they . . .” and “More likely, I think . . .” I really love his description of surgeries performed in a hospital by licensed professionals as “carving up”. “That framing is not favorable to our side. Neither is it grounded in truth. There is no such thing as a “trans kid,” who needs to be “protected” from puberty.” That is a statement of fact. It contradicts not only scientific opinion but evidence. What credentials does he have to make such a statement? What evidence does he base that statement on? Can somebody kindly show me that in the linked article? " In fact, there is no such thing as a “trans person”; there are people who identify as “trans,” and people who have gender dysphoria. There are people with chromosomal abnormalities, people with psychological scars, and people swept up in a social contagion. But there is no essential category of being denoted by the word “trans.” There are men, and there are women, real people, children and adults, with gender dysphoria who deserve better than lies and mutilation." Again, what are his credentials? What is his evidence? Again, he calls surgery “mutilation”. " One girl who underwent top surgery told the _Times_ that the surgery took from her “something about myself that I could have loved, I could have enjoyed, I could have used to feed children." She exists, even if the critics say she does not." Wow! The existence of an out of context quote from an individual we have no details about proves that all the other patients who underwent top surgery and had positive outcomes are wrong! Why didn’t I think of that? I now realize that ‘The mean height of full grown men is higher than the mean height of full grown women’ is completely disproven by the existence of Danny DeVito, Vern Troyer and The WNBA! On a more serious note, I have had chronic depression (among other problems) for a long time now. I have tried many many different medications to treat this over the decades. I distinctly remember when Prozac hit the market. My pschiatrist prescribed it and we were very excited. Even without the internet, Prozac was all over the media. It was hailed as a miracle of modern science and had very positive reviews. It did not do a single thing for me. As I had said, I have been on many different medications. I asked what side effects I should watch for. I asked what time of day I should take it. Should it be taken with food? etc I also knew that most antidepressants take time to work- usually two weeks at the bare minimum. After a month, I reported that I had no side effects and no improvement. My psychiatrist said to keep taking the same dosage and just give it more time to work. He repeated this on the next few visits. I explained to my parents what was happening and insisted I get a new psychiatrist. Prozac _is_ a miracle of modern science. It has done a great deal of good for a whole ot of people. My experience only proves that it did not help _me_. The same is true of top surgery, puberty blockers, and the rest. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 8:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1072 "2025-01-26T08:47:31Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > But ‘stochastic terrorism’ is one of those terms that tends to be applied in a very one-sided way by the supposedly neutral media. Because it’s a one sided phenomena; almost exclusively something done by, and _encouraged_ by the Right. For decades now. And the media leans heavily rightwards, it’s not neutral. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 11:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1073 "2025-01-26T11:29:15Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > No, it was an artefact of the trend under Obama. Obama took over at the height of the Great Recession. High unemployment at the start of his terms made the US a less attractive place for immigrants. He also made some policy changes that reduced illegal immigration and increased deportations, and had a pretty good record on the issue IMO. So yes, when Trump began his first term he inherited a fairly reasonable situation, and his plan to build a wall seemed both unnecessary and likely ineffective. However, Trump’s first presidency appears to have negatively polarised a lot of people on the left to support something akin to an open borders position. Biden’s stated stance on the issue was rather different from Obama’s, and had very different results: Immigration had surged in 2019, and Trump was able to quickly reduce it again. However, when it rose to ever greater heights during Biden’s presidency, Biden did little, and continued welcoming and paroling record numbers of migrants until election year. It almost certainly contributed to Trump winning the popular vote this time around, since the issue has greatly increased in salience, and the majority of people are unhappy with Biden’s handling of it. > [@Gyrate](#): > > Oh, and how was 2024? > [@Gyrate](#): > > Huh. Isn’t that the exact opposite of what you said Biden was doing? That’s so weird. As I said: > [@DemonTree](#): > > But Biden could have acted without that - in June 2024 he issued an executive order significantly limiting numbers of people allowed to enter and apply for asylum, which greatly reduced the inflow. He could have done that 2 or 3 years ago, once it was clear the rise in numbers was not simply due to the end of Covid restrictions - but he chose not to. Additionally, with the election approaching and public disapproval of Biden’s policies clear, the Biden admin pressured Mexico to reduce numbers reaching the border, and the Mexican authorities started arresting migrants and sending them back south. I think voters were correct to be sceptical whether these last-minute moves represented a real commitment to reducing illegal immigration in the long term. > [@Gyrate](#): > > Huh. Seems like the one of the big reasons for those high numbers in 2021-2023 was due to Title 42, and illegal crossings went _down_ after it ended. > > Remind me who put Title 42 in place? In fact, that surge starting in 2020 I mentioned? Guess what had been implemented two months before? It likely resulted in more encounters, but reduced the number of migrants admitted to the US, which was the actual aim. Why do you think Biden continued it if the results were so bad? > [@Gyrate](#): > > “It’s Biden’s fault that the Republicans lied about Harris’ role in immigration” is a fun argument. You know why her “handling of immigration” was so “unpopular”? Because the right are **really good** at lying. Because she was part of the Biden admin, and represented a continuation of it. If the Dems had held a real primary, they could have picked someone who took an ideologically more hardline stance on illegal immigration, and could convincingly claim they would do things differently. Too late to change that, though. > [@Gyrate](#): > > Do you even know what Harris was tasked with doing? According to the quote in my previous post, he asked her to address the ‘root causes of emigration’: > [@Washington Post](#): > > Soon after, Biden assigned Harris to lead a new effort to address the “root causes” of Central American emigration, including the economic, political and safety issues that spur people to flee. That’s difficult, because the ultimate root cause is that the US is richer than other countries and people can earn more money and have a better quality of life there. That’s why even immigration from developed countries in Europe would rise if it wasn’t restricted. The US has rather limited powers to address economic and safety issues in other countries, unless it’s willing to take them over and become a genuine empire. > [@Gyrate](#): > > If by “smart move” you mean “dishonest, cruel, performative and of questionable legality” I suppose you’re right. But then those adjectives can apply to pretty much every immigration policy the GOP have, as well as those on most other subjects. @GIGObuster seemed to think it was a good thing: > [@GIGObuster](#): > > > The transports might also yield unexpected benefits for migrants, with a free ride bringing new arrivals closer to family and friends and moving asylum seekers to locations where immigration courts have had far higher asylum grant rates. Service providers in border cities, which have been struggling to receive the rising number of migrants and support transportation for those who cannot afford bus or plane tickets, may also benefit from the state-sponsored relocations. Truth is, the Federal government should have been doing this already, if it was unable or unwilling to reduce the numbers entering through the border. Moving migrants from border towns and cities with already stretched resources to big cities further north that have promised to welcome them is a pretty reasonable thing to do, and plausibly benefits the migrants themselves. And making Democratic politicians and voters deal with the consequences of their policies is only fair, and helps keep them honest when weighing costs vs benefits. > [@Gyrate](#): > > You do know executive orders can’t allocate additional funding, right? No, I don’t. This sounds like one of those things that’s technically true but in practice full of loopholes. Oh look: > **[Fact check: Presidential spending through executive orders is possible](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/21/fact-check-presidential-spending-through-executive-order-allowed/5582667002/)** > > The Constitution gives Congress the power of the purse, but presidents have a lot of room to decide where money Congress has appropriated goes. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1074 "2025-01-26T11:53:14Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > Truth is, the Federal government should have been doing this already, if it was unable or unwilling to reduce the numbers entering through the border. Moving migrants from border towns and cities with already stretched resources to big cities further north that have promised to welcome them is a pretty reasonable thing to do, and plausibly benefits the migrants themselves. And making Democratic politicians and voters deal with the consequences of their policies is only fair, and helps keep them honest when weighing costs vs benefits. Truth is, If Biden had done that, he would had been accused by the right of being “woke”. I think this inane point does ignore always that the right has a lot of power controlling the narrative in the media. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1075 "2025-01-26T11:59:23Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > Truth is, the Federal government should have been doing this already, if it was unable or unwilling to reduce the numbers entering through the border. Moving migrants from border towns and cities with already stretched resources to big cities further north that have promised to welcome them is a pretty reasonable thing to do, and plausibly benefits the migrants themselves. And making Democratic politicians and voters deal with the consequences of their policies is only fair, and helps keep them honest when weighing costs vs benefits. Except there’s not much point in them being where the work _isn’t._ We aren’t bringing them here to “welcome” them, we are bringing them here to exploit and abuse them. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1076 "2025-01-26T11:59:34Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Truth is, If Biden had done that, he would had been accused by the right of being “woke”. I think this inane point does ignore always that the right has a lot of power controlling the narrative in the media So? If the right is going to accuse him of things either way, shouldn’t he just do what’s right or what’s best for the country? Without the information of who is doing it, is it good or bad to send newly arrived migrants to welcoming and relatively wealthy sanctuary cities? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1077 "2025-01-26T12:03:03Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > Without the information of who is doing it, is it good or bad to send newly arrived migrants to welcoming and relatively wealthy sanctuary cities? To do what? ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1078 "2025-01-26T12:04:25Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And the media leans heavily rightwards, it’s not neutral. Cite that the media leans heavily rightwards, please. > [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Except there’s not much point in them being where the work _isn’t._ We aren’t bringing them here to “welcome” them, we are bringing them here to exploit and abuse them. There’s a lack of work in New York city? 🤨 Yet again, your comments cast Democrats in a more negative light than Republicans: according to you, Democrats want migrants to stay in border states so they can be exploited, Republicans want to send them to Democratic cities so those cities can take a bigger share in supporting them, and also deal with the consequences of their chosen policies. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1079 "2025-01-26T12:08:45Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > No, I don’t. This sounds like one of those things that’s technically true but in practice full of loopholes. Oh look: Oh, look a reply that lacks context as the very article quoted warns. The context shows that many times there is a political penalty for a president to do that. And the hubris for ignoring the economical wellbeing of the American people (the main reason why Trump won) is not going to look good at all. Hubris like his is at Napoleonic levels. We are talking about invading Russia in winter levels now for Trump. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1080 "2025-01-26T12:10:09Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > Yet again, your comments cast Democrats in a more negative light than Republicans: according to you, Democrats want migrants to stay in border states so they can be exploited, Republicans want to send them to Democratic cities so those cities can take a bigger share in supporting them, and also deal with the consequences of their chosen policies. No, the Republicans want to murder them all. White nationalists are like that. The Democrats want to exploit them. Capitalists are like that. And nobody is “supporting them”; _they_ are supporting _us._ For all our collective whining, we are exploiting them, not the other way around. We’re just so hateful we are willing to ruin ourselves, thus we elected Trump because we’re willing to burn the nation down if it hurts brown people in the process. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1081 "2025-01-26T12:19:32Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > So? If the right is going to accuse him of things either way, shouldn’t he just do what’s right or what’s best for the country? Well, another point that ignores the evidence that he was doing better than Trump now. As pointed before, to make this “work”(that in reality has very little to do with being woke or not), Trump is breaking treaties with many nations, he is more likely to use punitive tariffs to force his immigration dictates. He is currently stomping on refugee agreements in draconian ways, etc. No, Trump is not doing better than Biden. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1082 "2025-01-26T12:23:25Z")
What’s “right and best” for this country _is,_ well, being “woke”. “Toning down the wokeness” and doing good are mutually exclusive. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1083 "2025-01-26T12:24:25Z")
> [@CairoCarol](#): > > Maybe because I live in Hawai’i, where it is understood that Hawaii is “home” for Native Hawaiians in a way it is not for the rest of us, I see a clear distinction in meaning between the two concepts. I hesitate to say this because you obviously have good intentions, but what do you mean by ‘Native Hawaiians’? Is a white person born and raised in Hawai’i a native? To prevent this being a ‘gotcha’: when answering, please consider how anti-immigration movements in various European countries will interpret what you say. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1084 "2025-01-26T12:26:09Z")
The issue isn’t that it’s wrong to send migrants to blue cities, it’s that it’s wrong to lie to and manipulate human beings, put them on a bus and send them somewhere they have no knowledge of, with no plan for their future, intending both to harm these migrants and harm the blue cities they’re sent to. Violating human rights, and deliberate cruelty, to make a dumb political point, is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1085 "2025-01-26T12:31:46Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > To prevent this being a ‘gotcha’: when answering, please consider how anti-immigration movements in various European countries will interpret what you say. They’ll interpret it as “kill anyone who isn’t us”, just as they interpret anything else said. Or not said. There’s no point in worrying about the reactions of hate-driven people who live in their own fantasy world; they aren’t listening in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1086 "2025-01-26T12:35:01Z")
And, if the now apparent point from the right wing is that human rights are “woke”, they need to explain why it was a woke thing hundreds of years before woke was a thing. The truth remains, the right wing nowadays is using the asinine “woke” accusation to also dismiss human rights. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2025, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287/1087 "2025-01-26T12:40:01Z")
And there’s the issue of if human rights are woke, then how can we justify “toning down the wokeness” as the OP asks? We can’t. Let’s face it, while there’s a refusal from the Right to clearly define “woke”, _in practice_ the way they use it amounts to “being a good person”, and _that’s_ why the “empathy is a sin” crowd hates it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287.md?page=52) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-time-to-tone-down-the-wokeness-especially-about-the-past/1010287.md?page=54)