News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by enaaem on Monday April 14, 2025 @03:39PM (#43685363)
I have never been a "woke" person, but Trump really makes me doubt the meritocracy argument. If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now.
Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by baked_beanz on Monday April 14, 2025 @04:09PM (#43685758)
You have come to the realization that systemic racism exists, and it grants privileges to the dominant socioeconomic groups. Congratulations, you are now "woke"!

That's what the term originally meant, before it was turned into a strawman for "anything I don't like" by the conservative media machine and weaponized to divide people.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by overfeed on Monday April 14, 2025 @04:03PM (#43685697)
> If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now.

It sounds like you're aware of the present reality of race and how it impacts how one is treated in America just for being who they are.

> I have never been a "woke" person

I have news for you...

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by insane_dreamer on Monday April 14, 2025 @04:55PM (#43686217)
> If Trump was a black woman he would never get away with half the things he is doing now

If Trump were a black woman (or man), he would have never survived the release of the Hollywood Access tape and therefore would have never gotten elected.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by koolba on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @07:31AM (#43691337)
Yes a black man can only (politically) get away with something less risque like smoking crack cocaine on video during an FBI sting:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/local/fbi-video-of-unde...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marion_Barry

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by insane_dreamer on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @12:04PM (#43694808)
Pretty bad false equivalency. Barry was barred from running and went to federal prison. Yes, he was eligible to run (and was re-elected) but only _after_ he served his sentence. Did I miss the part where Trump went to jail?

You also can't compare a mayoral election with a presidential one.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by koolba on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @01:32PM (#43695978)
> Pretty bad false equivalency. Barry was barred from running and went to federal prison. Yes, he was eligible to run (and was re-elected) but only _after_ he served his sentence. Did I miss the part where Trump went to jail?

Nope. Though you also missed the part where the manufacturing of "felony" charges was so novel they had never been attempted before. The closest parallel is probably the case of John Edwards who was acquitted: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/us/edwards-jury-returns-n... But you probably think it's because he was also a white man and not because there was no criminal act.

I'm curious if you can even sum up what exactly was the felony that Trump was convicted, or even better, who's the victim? Because all I saw was an overzealous DA in NY with utter disregard for the actual law.

> You also can't compare a mayoral election with a presidential one.

Yes. And clearly people of DC would rather elect a Democrat crackhead over any Republican.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by insane_dreamer on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @02:14PM (#43696504)
You're on to a different argument now.

My point was about surviving scandals as a candidate. Trump survived the Hollywood Access tape, where it would have buried most candidates. Your example was "whatabout Barry" -- but they're not comparable (and Barry did not survive his scandal, but went to jail).

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by koolba on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @02:31PM (#43696709)
Why would you expect Trump to go to jail for a manufactured felony charge? Even if it was a legitimate case, the sentencing guidelines would not have recommended jail time.
Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by johnnyanmac on Wednesday April 16, 2025 @03:19AM (#43702451)
>manufactured felony charge?

Pretty sure sedition was around since Shay's rebellion.

And yes, welcome to privileged. They made up new laws to arrest black men without saying it's targeting black men. Hence the metaphor in this chain.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by mtalantikite on Monday April 14, 2025 @05:25PM (#43686486)
As others have pointed out to you, "woke" is just from AAVE, meaning to be awake to the racial prejudices and social injustices of the world. Leadbelly used it at the end of his "Scottsboro Boys" [1] in 1938, and it likely was in use many years before that. Erykah Badu's "Master Teacher" also uses it prominently, which probably helped bring it out of AAVE into more mainstream use [2].

Anyway, that's all to say I find it sad and funny that people are all up in arms about being "woke" these days. It's like stating "I'd prefer to be ignorant".

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrXfkPViFIE&t=249s

[2] whole song is great, but I forgot about this second section of the song: https://youtu.be/Dieo6bp4zQw?si=fCPJpWIbQV_g5yx3&t=203

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by nailer on Monday April 14, 2025 @09:10PM (#43688036)
> "woke" is just from AAVE, meaning to be awake to the racial prejudices and social injustices of the world.

Yes, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a democracy that serves the people of Korea.

Sometimes expressions have meaning beyond what advocates for the related concepts claim. For example, as I’m sure you are aware, ‘woke’ viewpoints repeatedly advocate for racial discrimination in American universities.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by kelnos on Monday April 14, 2025 @09:59PM (#43688289)
Lately it feels like "woke" in political discourse just means "anything Republicans don't like".

What a waste of an otherwise useful term.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by nsingh2 on Monday April 14, 2025 @10:05PM (#43688332)
I don't recall the term "woke" being all that useful. I really only started noticing it as a right-wing pejorative, often times being used by straight up racists, and to lesser extent by people pointing out performative solidarity, and this is not a recent thing either.

The meaning of "woke" changes depending on the person saying it, and the one listening, which makes it hard to tell what the person is _really_ trying to say.

Edit: Apparently it was recently popularized by BLM activists, but then took on a different meaning [1]. So it seems ambiguous, which to me makes it not that useful.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by c-linkage on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @08:04AM (#43691540)
Just as black people have claimed the "n" word, white racists have now claimed the "w" word.

Still not sure it was a fair trade though.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by nailer on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @09:53AM (#43692706)
People of all backgrounds, which hate Asians, Jewish people and white Americans use the term. Including some members of those groups.
Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by johnnyanmac on Wednesday April 16, 2025 @03:16AM (#43702430)
>Still not sure it was a fair trade though.

It's never a fair trade. But at least one is a singular word you never have to use in a discussion. The other was a term that de-humanized people.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by presentation on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @06:35AM (#43691033)
I’m liberal and I also find wokeness to be irritating, so it’s not just things Republicans don’t like. Like the above person says, it’s not just awareness of structural discrimination and the like, which I believe are real and ought to be addressed, but also a sort of rhetoric and militant attitude about it that honestly I find grating.
Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by mtalantikite on Tuesday April 15, 2025 @11:31AM (#43694255)
I think the thing to consider is that the right-wing is focusing on the things that are the most likely to produce outrage amongst a certain part of the population when they talk about being woke. They'll hyper focus on one protest gone violent rather than thousands of peaceful gatherings in town squares, for example. They've always been very successful at creating this division through their rhetoric and selective focus.

If you're aware that structural discrimination and social injustice exists, then you already are woke. The expression of it might be different for you -- more MLK than Malcolm X, say -- but that doesn't mean you're not woke. We shouldn't let them muddy things when the goal is helping all beings be awake to reality.

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by johnnyanmac on Wednesday April 16, 2025 @03:13AM (#43702412)
>I also find wokeness to be irritating

This is a useless term if we can't agree on what "woke" is to begin with. Hence, the GP comment. If we can't agree on meanings of words, we talk past each other instead of to each other.

You see your two meanings and you realize how arguing about the term without aligning isn't a discussion, right?

----

as an aside:

>a sort of rhetoric and militant attitude about it that honestly I find grating.

I'll be "woke" here and note the discminination in when a demanding male tends to be thought of as "leadership material", whereas a demanding female in the same role is called "bossy". These kinds of internal disciminations is exactly what "woke" people try to address (and ironically enough, are dismissed as "militant" over. Because it talks about topics people want to shut down).

Re:Harvard's response to federal government letter demanding... by InsideOutSanta on Wednesday April 16, 2025 @12:33PM (#43707409)
>This is a useless term if we can't agree on what "woke" is to begin with.

It is worth noting that it is a right-wing tactic to capture the meaning of words. "Woke" used to mean "being aware of social and political issues and injustices," but right-wing usage of the term has diluted it to the point where it can't be used for its original meaning anymore.