Woke
All posts tagged Woke
‘The recently founded University of Austin is reinventing higher education, with plans that include banning tenure, ditching doctorate requirements for faculty, and hiring the “leanest possible administration.”
The College Fix spoke by phone to President Pano Kanelos about the process of building a new university in the heart of Texas, from staffing to admissions to facilities.
Fourteen months ago, the university’s founders “promised an education without the censorship and enforced ideology present at most traditional universities,” The Fix reported November 2021.
Since then, the university has collected $105 million in funding. The institution was only an “idea” a year ago with no alumni to draw support from, said Kanelos (pictured), former president of St. John’s College in Annapolis.
Just one week after announcing the university, also known as UATX, it received over 3,500 inquiries from prospective professors. It has now received notes of interest from nearly 5,000 people, who Kanelos said represent a broad range of disciplines.’https://www.thecollegefix.com/we-dont-want-to-be-yale-university-of-austin-constructs-a-new-model-of-excellence/
What are your thoughts on this?
‘Before turning against the U.S. military to command the Confederate army, Robert E. Lee served as the superintendent of West Point, the hallowed military academy that produced patriots like Ulysses S. Grant, Douglas MacArthur and Dwight Eisenhower.
But in the coming days, the storied academy will take down a portrait of Lee dressed in his Confederate uniform from its library, where it has been hanging since the 1950s and place it in storage. It will also remove the stone bust of the Civil War’s top southern general at Reconciliation Plaza. And Lee’s quote about honor will be stripped from the academy’s Honor Plaza.
The moves are part of a Department of Defense directive issued in October ordering the academy to address racial injustice and do away with installations that “commemorate or memorialize the Confederacy.”‘https://www.npr.org/2022/12/22/1145107950/west-point-confederate-symbols-robert-e-lee
‘Major corporations including Telstra and Channel 10 have declared they will not celebrate January 26 as a national holiday.
Both organisations have advised staff they can choose to work on Australia Day and nominate another day of leave instead.
Network 10 created headlines earlier this week when they advised that Australia Day was “not a day to celebrate” for Indigenous Australians and staff were therefore free to celebrate the national day on a date of their own choosing.
An email sent to Network 10 editorial staff said: “We aim to create a safe place to work where cultural differences are appreciated, understood and respected. For our First Nations people, we as an organisation acknowledge that January 26 is not a day of celebration.
“We recognise that there has been a turbulent history, particularly around that date and the recognition of that date being Australia Day. We recognise that January 26 evokes different emotions for our employees across the business, and we are receptive to employees who do not feel comfortable taking this day as a public holiday.”
Meanwhile, a Telstra spokeswoman told the Daily Mail: “Our employees have the choice to work on Australia Day or take leave on another day.”
Other organisations to follow suit include Deloitte, KPMG and EY.
A KPMG spokeswoman said the company’s “cultural leave policy” meant that staff could celebrate Australia Day on a date that was “relevant to their culture” and “beliefs”.
Various local councils around Australia have boycotted Australia Day in recent years, arguing that it does not align with their values. But the move of corporations to boycott the national day is new.
January 26 is celebrated as Australia Day because it was on that day in 1788 that the First Fleet arrived at Sydney Cove and Governor Arthur Phillip raised a Union Jack flag on Australian soil.
Last week Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ditched a rule made by the Coalition government that forced councils to conduct citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day.
Councils are now free to hold citizenship ceremonies on any day in the week beginning January 23.’https://www.rebelnews.com/woke_companies_tell_staff_they_can_work_on_australia_day?
This is from an email I received this morning. The illustration fits with the cancel culture society we are now living in!
‘Picnic season is behind us here in Michigan. The leaves are off the trees, and the snow has already started to fly.
But just for a moment, think back to the joys of a summer cookout—hot dogs and hamburgers on the grill and a table set with various side dishes, like potato chips, pasta salad, and maybe some fresh watermelon.
To top the grilled meats, you’ll always have ketchup and mustard.
Now imagine that one of the guests is a college student—one who only likes mustard.
This fictional student is adamantly opposed to ketchup! And not for reasonable reasons such as health or allergy concerns…no, he labels anyone who likes ketchup as a “mustard hater” who’s oppressing others by using ketchup. But this is just the beginning…like the BBQ grill, his cause catches fire.
He finds others to join his opposition to ketchup. Not long after, you can no longer find ketchup on certain store shelves, in college cafeterias, or at some company picnics. And he’s even secured apologies from ketchup manufacturers for their history of transgressions against mustard.
Anyone who still likes ketchup or tries to defend their right to choose how to top their burger or fries is excluded and silenced. You might say that…
…Ketchup is canceled!
Is this example far-fetched? Maybe it’s a little silly, but it illustrates how this sort of thing works in our “cancel culture” society.’ From an Email.
‘Wokeism is the new Nazism.
Comparing Nazis’ treatment of people in an effort to reach their desired results with modern woke zealots’ behavior will be resented—by modern Nazis. However, my analysis will be accepted by informed people. The historic Nazis made their vile mark upon the world but were stopped and almost eliminated, while modern wokers are dismantling a thriving society with little opposition. America and the world will never be the same because of the virulent, venal, even vicious virus of wokeism.
Think with me along these lines—the Nazis’ dangerous, disastrous, and deadly system as compared with what the wokers are doing.
Would you permit your disabled child to be killed by the state to keep him or her out of pain and make life easier and better for you and your family?
Or to save the government health care system from going belly up!
Where did you or the state get the authority to do the above? Does any state or jurisdiction have the right to mistreat a helpless citizen?
USSANews.com reported a Canadian man was euthanized by health officials after being hospitalized for “hearing loss,” according to reports. He had texted his brother, asking him to “bust him out” of the hospital, but it was too late. He was killed by those allegedly called and trained to save lives and “to do no harm.” In reasonable, humane societies, his euthanasia would be considered murder. However, “authorities” in medicine and politics seem to be all-powerful.
Both medicine and politics need to have their wings clipped. That will keep them closer to earth and common sense.
In 1920, a world-shaking book was published by Germans Karl Binding and Alfred Hoche with the English title, Permission to Destroy Life Devoid of Value or Permitting the Destruction of Life Unworthy of Life. It addressed the legal relationship between suicide and euthanasia and extended it to killing the mentally ill. The book suggested that killing a patient was justifiable when it led to saving other lives, particularly when the patients in question were of no value to themselves or society. The book advocates killing the mentally ill or the intellectually dead, especially since such people were a drain on society—useless eaters.
When Hitler came to power legally, he wanted a pure nation of strong, blond, blue-eyed Germans. Those who could not contribute to that view of National Socialism had to go. Many thousands left the country. Others stayed and were sent to work camps. The Nazis used the legal and medical research of Binding and Hoche to support their culling of the weak, incompetent, demented, etc. And this was supported by the German people. A 1925 poll of German parents of disabled children indicated that 74% favored euthanizing their children! The book helped to make suicide and euthanasia legal.
If you think it couldn’t happen here, you had better think about the above poll—in the land of Martin Luther and thousands of Catholic and Lutheran churches.
Before Hitler’s rise to dictator in 1934, grotesque laws were framed as public health measures with the goal of strengthening society. The German euthanasia program was officially adopted in 1939 and accelerated quickly to bizarre lengths. Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide author Robert Jay Liftin revealed that Nazi policy underwent several modifications.
“Of the five identifiable steps by which the Nazis carried out the principle of ‘life unworthy of life,’ coercive sterilization was the first. There followed the killing of ‘impaired’ children in hospitals. Then the killing of ‘impaired’ adults, mostly collected from mental hospitals, in centers especially equipped with carbon monoxide gas.” This bizarre project was extended to “impaired” inmates in concentration camps.
The Nazis did the above and more based on the best medical science at the time. The diseased and disabled individuals were unproductive members of society and drained out of society much more than they contributed. Plus, they were a lot of trouble to care for!
More than half of all German physicians became early members of the Nazi Party, exceeding the party enrollments of all other professions. That suggests to me that M.D. might refer to morally deficient. National Socialist officials could say, “Hey, we are only doing what the medical experts tell us the science requires.”
Well, we have sure heard that many times recently.
The world had embraced the “science” of eugenics. The Germans, yes, even the Nazis, thought they were good people acting on sound evidence and a solid ethical basis. These defendants engaged in genocide, but they did so under the protective cover of medical authority and official legitimacy. Almost anything can be justified if based on “following the science.”
We sure know about that, don’t we?
Our government has permitted electric shock; lobotomies (Rosemary Kennedy, sister to the late president John F. Kennedy the most famous victim); cocaine sold like candy in drug stores and used in the first Coca-Cola in the late 1880s; Bayer began advertising a heroin-laced aspirin in 1898 until 1913; forced sterilization; forced inoculations; etc., that compare with Nazi policies.
However, no government has the authority to slaughter innocent unborn babies; permit, even encourage, assisted suicide; sterilize people against their will; authorize immorality (heterosexual or homosexual) of any kind; legalize unwanted medical treatment; permit children to have their sexual organs chopped off or be mutilated; encourage and sponsor changing genders—which can’t be done; and on and on.
While we question the morality and the competence of Hitler’s experts, we must also question modern health officials as well as politicians who think they can make a pretend boy become a real boy.
No, government officials in Germany and the U.S. don’t have the authority, but they have the power since they carry the guns.
The expression “life unworthy of life,” which appeared first in Binding and Hoche’s book, was essential to Nazi ideology. The two authors, a lawyer and a physician, were not political and for sure were not National Socialists. They were academics dealing with a very delicate subject: Does the state have the right to kill some people for the good of many? Does the state have a right to decide when a life is unproductive?
Between 1934 and 1939, the number of people sterilized ranged from 200,000 to 400,000 Germans to keep a clean or pure race. Between 1933 and 1945, roughly 15,000 deaf people were forcibly sterilized. In Canada, they kill them as the news revealed.
According to Hoche, “some living people who were brain damaged, intellectually disabled, autistic (though not recognized as such at the time), and mentally ill were ‘mentally dead,’ ‘human ballast’ and ‘empty shells of human beings.’” Hoche believed that killing such people was helpful since they made no contribution to society and were considered disposable.
They were useless eaters.
New Nazis are walking among us today and are considered intellectuals teaching at major American universities, receiving generous salaries and perks. The wokest among them tell us a child can decide what gender he/she/it wants to be. Moreover, such confused children have a right to receive hormone blockers and even have their tell-tell organs chopped off to give credibility to their insane fantasies.
To hide a male’s sexual organ before surgery (mutilation), the Boston Children’s Hospital advises transgender teenagers as young as 13 to implement “safer tucking” to make their penis look like a vagina. Taping with medical tape is recommended using tape for that purpose; however, if boys use duct tape, the hospital (that used to have a sterling reputation) added, “if you do use duct tape, remember to shave (although not right before, as that can cause irritation) so that the tape does not pull hair. Soak in a warm bath before removal to make the tape less sticky.”
Those hospital officials are not only woke but weird, even wacky. But double board certified.
Furthermore, childbirth, monthly periods, and menopause are no longer strictly the bailiwick of females, and such events can now be experienced by any male who desires them according to the wokest of the woke. But then, why would any sane man want those experiences?
American philosopher Peter Singer Professor of Bioethics at Princeton University, and others have made similar arguments for any time abortion to weeks following birth and any time euthanasia. Singer declares, “It would be morally wrong to choose to have a child with disability.” He and other fuzzy, foolish, and fatal ethicists believe permitting a disabled child to live is wrong. Therefore, if killing a hemophiliac infant has no adverse effect on others, it would, in their view, be right to kill him.
Singer—not only woke but wicked—has no problem with sex with the dead (necrophilia) as long as consent was given to the person while alive. Of course, sex with animals is acceptable. Not sure about needing consent. Maybe the wag of a dog’s tale is sufficient. But it gets worse—it always does. Singer told ABC, “A woman has oral sex performed by her dog. I know women who have said this is something that pleases them. The dog is free to do it or walk away. There is no dominance over the dog. That seems to me harmless.”
Notice that having personal supremacy over the dog would be wrong but perverted sex is acceptable.
To be clear, I have more respect for the dog than I do for the woman or Singer, and under normal circumstances, such disgusting subjects should not be discussed by normal people; however, we are living in very unusual times.
Humans are responsible for living as humans and will give a personal account to a just and holy God one day.
University of California professor Kenneth Watt opined, “Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
Watt, Singer, and Company are far from harmless. As in Germany, freakish, foolish, and fraudulent scientists declared war on the culture to replace it. Tenured professors’ positions are secure no matter how unbiblical, un-American, unqualified, or stupid they are. Moreover, they are generally safe from being fired unless caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.
Woke fanaticism is obvious, as supported by watching almost any television show. Radicals have put the cult in culture and removed the civil from civilization. It almost makes me want to resign from the human race.
And it has lost its humanity.’https://donboys.cstnews.com/nazis-based-their-radical-treatment-of-disabled-deficient-diseased-deaf-and-dumb-people-on-flawed-science-progressives-policies-are-based-on-wokeism
‘A chaplain who lost his job at a Church of England school has given evidence to a tribunal that “truth, Christian faith, freedom of faith and speech” were “ridden roughshod over” as the school disciplined him and eventually made him redundant.
Today, Rev. Dr Bernard Randall told East Midlands Employment Tribunal that Trent College, where he worked as a chaplain, that the school had shown “absolutely no regard for the concern [he] had for those upset or confused by the implementation of Educate and Celebrate” – a charity that provides training “to embed gender, gender identity and sexual orientation into the fabric” of their organisations.
Staff training from Educate and Celebrate
In the summer of 2018, Dr Randall became aware that Educate and Celebrate was due to lead a staff training session at the Church of England school. When he visited the charity’s website to understand what the session would involve, he saw that it “went beyond a neutral stance of inclusivity, into active promotion of ideas”. Alarmed by the group’s intention to “smash heteronormativity,” its promotion of identity politics and ‘misleading’ claims, Dr Randall considered writing to the Head, suggesting that the invitation be delayed until there was time to address his concerns.
However, Dr Randall decided instead to attend the Educate & Celebrate training when it took place in September. Although he had no objection to some of what was taught by Ms Elly Barnes, the charity’s founder, he “considered some areas impossible to reconcile with Christian principles, and therefore with the stated objects of the school”.
This included “the notion that ‘love is love’, without further definition” and “having the staff chanting about the need to ‘smash heteronormativity’”.
Dr Randall challenged Ms Barnes over “selective” use of statistics about intersex/Differences in Sexual Development. “I pointed out that, contrary to the list produced by E&C, gender identity is not a protected characteristic, to which Ms Barnes smiled and responded, ‘Well, it should be’”.
Implementing Educate and Celebrate
After the training session, Dr Randall spoke to his line manager and the Head to explain his concerns. They gave assurances that they had not known the full content of the session and were also concerned by the chanting. They said that they “would not simply implement the entire Educate and Celebrate programme as presented, but would make selective use of whatever fitted with the Trent ethos.”
Dr Randall was told that he would be part of a group looking at what aspects of Educate and Celebrate’s programme the school would use. However, in November, after mentioning the lack of meetings he was told he had “not been invited to discussions because [he] ‘might disagree with it.’” He later discovered that the school had since committed to pursuing the charity’s gold award by implementing their entire programme.
Sermon
Dr Randall picked up on concerns among the school community about aspects of the programme. “Some objected to elements on religious grounds; others found the aggressively political approach concerning, feeling that beliefs were being forced on them; others were simply confused about what they could, or could not, believe.”
When one child asked if he could use a sermon to address the question “How come we are told we have to accept all this LGBT stuff in a Christian school”, he carefully wrote an explanatory, moderate sermon emphasising the importance of “respecting those with whom we disagree”.
He gave the sermon twice in chapel, once with minor alterations, and spoke to various members of staff and pupils. Dr Randall recalled, “They broadly said the message was interesting, enjoyable, and thought-provoking. None seemed to have been upset.”
He even spoke to a pupil who was public about his homosexuality, who also spoke positively. “At no stage did any member of staff or pupil give me any indication of wanting to express negative views, or ask to meet with me to discuss what I had said.”
Safeguarding meeting
Nevertheless, within a week, Dr Randall had been asked to attend a meeting with the school’s Designated Safeguarding Lead. He was given a glancing look at concerns which Dr Randall says “were from people who simply disagreed with Church teaching, or disagreed with it being taught.” He explained that there were factual errors in the complaints about what he had said, but this was brushed aside and Dr Randall was questioned about Church of England doctrine.
Asking what they considered was wrong with his presentation, Dr Randall said that two issues were raised: first, they incorrectly contended that gender identity was a protected characteristic; second, they claimed that psychology textbooks say there are three genders. But the real problem, according to the school was not what Dr Randall had said but how the sermon made people feel.
Dr Randall felt ambushed. While being accused of lacking empathy, he says he “was shown absolutely no empathy during the course of the meeting … There was absolutely no regard for the concern I had expressed for those upset or confused by the implementation of Educate and Celebrate”.
Suspended
Dr Randall soon found himself suspended.’https://christianconcern.com/news/school-rode-roughshod-over-christian-chaplain-after-sermon-on-identity/
whatyareckon 