1. notleia says:

    Someone said “woke” and I am summoned.

    Awww, unwoke wypipo and their attempts to explain “woke.” I’m totes stealing this from a meme, but here’s a more cromulent explanation of “woke:”

    You know how when you’re a kid and your parents are driving and you’re all unworried about tailgaters and road ragers and drunk drivers, or just people who never learned how to use a turn signal? You might hear your parents talk about them, but generally you jump right in the car without any anxiety about what might happen.
    And then you learn to drive, and then you have some bad experiences with crappy drivers, and then you start to understand about people who camp in the left lane or people who cut you off and why they make people upset. You may prefer to avoid the interstate because high speeds and lots of cars make it all worse.

    In contrast, people like Rebecca (bless their hearts) are like people who’ve mostly driven on dirt roads all their lives. They’ve heard about traffic accidents and such, but in the circle of their acquaintance it’s mostly because someone hit a deer or because they drifted off the road and into a culvert. They don’t even really get why people who don’t use turn signals are bad because they don’t really have to use turn signals to be safe. Therefore when they get on more populated roads, they’re a frickin disaster. They encounter a roundabout and cut everyone off. They’re crap at four-way stops. They think it’s completely avoidable to get hit by another car if you drive defensively enough and don’t get that you have much less room to maneuver on city streets.

    Y’all, I get you’re trying, but you’ve never seen a roundabout, have you?

    • notleia says:

      Obligatory Lee Atwater quote:
      “You start out in 1954 by saying, “N–r, n–r, n–r”. By 1968 you can’t say “n–r”—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, “We want to cut this”, is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “N–r, n–r”. So, any way you look at it, race is coming on the back-burner.”

      TL;DR: All this nattering about colorblindness hasn’t worked to solve anything. The most it’s done is give people a fig leaf about their unconscious or implicit biases.

      That’s basically what critical race theory is about: the collective weight of society’s unconscious or implicit biases about race and how that interacts with who is considered trustworthy, who is allowed to criticize institutions, etc. But that explanation may still not help anyone who doesn’t grok what “systemic” means.

      • Bill Nigh says:

        Thank God Critical Race Theory has finally solved racism.

        It really just comes down to what philosophy you buy into. That’s why there’s plenty blacks who don’t buy it. Though it’s quite popular with white people who go to universities… which is evidence of systemic racism contaminating critical race theory. Believe it to salve your white guilt. Rage against those racist conservatives till you feel anti-racist enough to walk with a skip.

        • notleia says:

          It’s pretty popular with Black people who went to university, too.

          If self-awareness is “guilt,” how nice that you’ve solved racism by absolving yourself from the start.

  2. Leanna says:

    A black character being “moral” and “not unintelligent” is complex? Now if Jim had been just plain intelligent that would been too unbelievable, right? /sarcasm

    Disclaimer: I own this book and will let my kids read it when they’re older but I definitely support its removal from school curriculum, there are much better books to use instead.

    • The complexity the quote is talking bout is not in the book itself but in people’s reactions. Some see Jim for what he is: intelligent and moral, while a number of the white people they encounter are neither. Other readers, however, claim it is racist because it used the language of the day, including the racial slur we have identified today as offensive, and because of what some consider stereotypical (to the point of comical) treatment of Jim’s superstitions and lack of education. I don’t even remember what those “comical” elements are. The clear point of the novel is to question the accepted ideas of society, including those that Huck faced as a neglected child taken into a foster home where he was expected to be “civilized.” In other words, Twain was pushing against the conventions of the day, including attitudes about race. I personally think the book gives a great background a) to understand slavery by putting a face to it and b) to discuss racism. But no one wants to discuss any more. The going idea is just push the accepted narrative and comply!


  3. notleia says:

    No seriously, who wants me to start Notleia’s Happy Pinko Meme Time so we can have more interaction on here? I’m even willing to allow off-topic rambling in the comments (truly, the comments and community would be more the point than anything edifying).

What do you think?