Obama calls out 'Woke' culture & Political Purity tests..

[whathehell]

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/barack-obama-twitter-activism_n_5db9292ee4b0bb1ea3716bb7

[redqueen]

1. I agree completely. Yang stepped forward on this issue,

and was pilloried for it.

[peggysue2]

43. It's all about the messenger

Because of President Obama's stature within the Democratic Party and his own activist background before he entered the Oval Office, he is the perfect messenger for today's young activists. And, of course, he's old enough to know that the world and people in it are all flawed in some capacity. But it doesn't mean good works cannot be accomplished.

As the man said, the purity tests are not activism. The overly judgmental criticism of all things will only hamper real progress.

Make you feel good in the moment? Yes. Get anything done in the longterm? No.

[eissa]

45. So was Bill Maher

And they're all correct on this.

[PBC_Democrat]

2. Could Not Agree More!

Regardless of how we feel about it, some parts of the country are going to elect Rs.
We need to work with them where is agreement and work against them when we disagree.

When there is agreement, we need to be willing to compromise and get whatever we can. When half a loaf is all we can get, if the voters like it and more more - we can push for the other half.

I've pretty much stopped watching any of the news channels because they're filled with people declaring how unwilling they are to even consider compromise.

Holding your breath and stomping your feet looks good and is morally satisfying but gets nothing done.

BTW, I completely agree that the other side is worse.

Pres. Obama is totally correct on this.

[dalton99a]

6. +1. The world is not binary

[lunatica]

40. Please tell where you're willing to compromise

Should we compromise on how many children to put in cages? Is half OK? Should we ignore those parts of the Constitution that don’t matter all that much? Should women just give up their reproductive rights and minorities stop voting to hope it will lead to happy compromise? Should we gladly give away our Democracy to Putin for the sake of compromise?

How much and what exactly are you willing to give up for nothing in return?

[treestar]

59. That would not even be in play had Donnie Dotard

not won the election. No one is suggesting that. It is that people go on about some Democrat not being liberal enough for saying or voting for x.

[lunatica]

61. The Republicans have been working for decades to suppress the vote

From redistributing maps to throwing people off the voting rolls to making it as difficult as possible to get to polls. How should we compromise there?

Women’s rights have been systematically eroded for decades also. The LGBT community has been demonized incessantly, used as a favorite wedge issue for generations, and undocumented aliens have too. Is all this OK just so we can compromise on something? What would our side get in return? Really. My question is real. Where are their compromises in this?

Trump didn’t start any of the crap he does. He just took what was already there and threw it over a cliff.

[dalton99a]

3. 'Woke' is lazy simplistic feel-good bullshit

Obama is right.

[maxsolomon]

62. That's pretty binary and dismissive.

Tell me about your contacts or debates with BLM, Gender, or college activists that led to that definitive conclusion.

[brush]

4. Isn't "woke" just the latest term for being politically conscious?

[Hortensis]

8. Old AA term taken over and corrupted into opposite meaning by misuse.

Sadly, for a long time now it's been used way too much by LW political ideologues to encourage people to commit to them alone by rejecting everyone and everything that doesn't fit whatever narrow political dogma those "enlightened ones" are pushing.

Ergo, Obama's warning to those who've become rigidly dysfunctional politically, "woke."

Link to tweet

[Blue_Tires]

5. I love that all the right people are shitting bricks of rage right now

[nolabear]

7. I agree. You can stand up for principles w/o being an uncompromising dick.

I believe people do it out of anger and fear, sometimes for legit reasons, but far more often it concretizes opinions and gives excuses for continued bad behavior. And it’s manipulable. You can say “I won’t do that and I want to know what’s really going on with you.” And yes, there are obviously lines that, once crossed, deserve punishment. And I have nothing against criticizing people who are current, enraging bad actors. But actual consequences, not just endless, constant castigation for something someone might have once done.

We are participating in our own destruction if no one is pure enough.

[Garrett78]

9. Except that this is what compromise with Republicans looks like:

You really can't compromise with liars and cheats.

[Maru Kitteh]

10. I didn't hear shit about "compromise."

The message was - Purity tests and patting yourself on the back for being "woke" is ridiculous and self-defeating bullshit. And it's true.

[Garrett78]

13. Did you read the article? It's in the first sentence.

[StarfishSaver]

17. He didn't say anything about compromising with the Republican Party.

[Garrett78]

22. See reply #20. That short video is only about one aspect of what's in the article.

[StarfishSaver]

25. Why not actually look at the video and read his full quote instead of relying the out-of-context

snippet contained in the article? If you had looked at what he actually said (which is available right in the article) instead of what the story cherry-picked, you would know that he said nothing about "compromising with the Republican Party." In fact, he said nothing about compromising with anyone. He used the word "compromised" as an adjective, stressing that we shouldn't go around expecting everyone to be perfect.

[Garrett78]

28. Do you really think he was only on that stage for a minute and a half?

Do you really think that quote constitutes the entirety of what he said?

It's not at all uncommon for a select quote to be highlighted. That doesn't mean that's the only thing that was said.

[StarfishSaver]

30. Do you really think it's that difficult for you to find proof that he said during that program

anything about compromising with Republicans?

You're so sure that he said it - even though the article you keep referencing doesn't say he said any such thing - why not go do some basic research to prove your point? If you can't do that, your comments are pointless.

[Garrett78]

33. Obama has spoken many times about the need to compromise with Republicans...

...so, the first sentence in the article follows a pattern. I can try to find a transcript of his talk yesterday, but a simple Google search will produce many quotes from Obama about compromising with Republicans.

[StarfishSaver]

34. LOL. Hauling those goalposts around the field must be exhausting.

You've gone from "Obama said we need to compromise with Republicans ... it's in the first sentence in the article" (not true) to "the article doesn't show the entirety of what he said but he mentioned compromise" (not true) to "If you Google it, you can find that sometime somewhere Obama said something about compromising with Republicans" (true, but completely off-topic and beside the point).

Maybe you should just let it go.

[Garrett78]

36. I haven't moved any goalposts.

The first sentence of the article says Obama said compromise shouldn't be frowned upon (which is in line with what he's said many times before). Sure, it's possible that Obama wasn't referring to Republicans when he reportedly said compromise shouldn't be frowned upon. Maybe he was referring to a parent-child relationship, or maybe he was referring to Democrats compromising with other Democrats. But I doubt it. And part of the reason I doubt it is that Obama has spoken many times about compromising with Republicans. Therefore, the first sentence of the article follows a pattern.

You insisted that Obama didn't say that simply because it doesn't show up in the quote that was highlighted in the video, which constituted all of about 90 seconds. As if that one clip makes up the entirety of what he said. You repeatedly referenced the quote, as if that's the part I'm addressing, as if that's the only aspect of the article in question.

Authors of articles do this all the time. They write about several aspects of a speech but, on account of only having a limited amount of space, they will highlight a single quote. That's par for the course with any article about a speech or public forum. To continually point to the highlighted quote as proof that something wasn't said is just silly.

[StarfishSaver]

44. LOL

Ok.

[Hortensis]

12. And this was SNL's take on taking "woke"-ing way too far.

I think you should agree that comparing compromise and cooperation -- and the Democrats who understand that representative government absolutely requires both to function -- to Republican liars and cheats is going way too far.

In fact, all who refuse to understand and accept that all citizens have the right to be represented in and by their government have left reality left far behind and entered the Anti-Democracy Zone.

"Levi's Wokes"

[Garrett78]

14. I'm not talking about wokeness. I'm simply saying you can't compromise with the Republican Party.

You can't compromise with those who aren't acting in good faith. Compromise would be McConnell considering, say, half of the bills sitting on his desk. Not 0 of those bills.

Obama mentioned purity tests and woke culture, but he (like Biden) also mentioned compromise. And that's the part I'm addressing.

[StarfishSaver]

18. He didn't mention compromising with the Republican Party

If you listen to the entire segment, he was actually talking about the way we "woke folk" talk to and about each other.

[Garrett78]

20. The first sentence of the article reads:

"Former President Barack Obama says “compromise” shouldn’t be frowned upon..." The short video clip embedded in the article doesn't cover that portion.

I doubt that's a reference to compromising with fellow Democrats. And I know that's definitely not what Biden means when he talks about compromising with Republicans.

[StarfishSaver]

23. Here is the entire quote, not just what the article said he said. Also here's a clip of his comment

Note that he said nothing about "compromising with the Republican Party."

"This idea of purity, and you're never compromised, and you're always politically 'woke' and all that stuff, you should get over that quickly.

The world is messy. There are ambiguities. People who do really good stuff have flaws. People who you are fighting may love their kids and share certain things with you.

And I think one danger I see among young people, particularly on college campuses... and this is accelerated by social media, there is this sense sometimes of, 'The way of me making change is to be as judgmental as possible about other people, and that's enough.' Like, if I tweet or hashtag about how you didn't do something right, or used the wrong verb... then I can sit back and feel pretty good about myself. 'Cause man, you see how woke I was? I called you out.' That's not activism. That's not bringing about change. If all you're doing is casting stones, you're probably not going to get that far."

Link to tweet

[Garrett78]

26. That short clip apparently doesn't cover the entirety of what Obama said, according to the article.

I'm sure Obama was on that stage for more than a minute and a half. And, according to the author of the article, he said more than just what's in that quote.

[StarfishSaver]

27. Then why don't you go do some research about "the entirety of what Obama said" before claiming he

said something you have no proof that he said - and that the article you're relying on doesn't even claim he said. All you're doing is spreading misinformation without any basis. In the time it took to post several comments in this thread, you could easily have looked up his full remarks.

[Hortensis]

21. :) Doo-doo-DOO-doo, Doo-doo-DOO-doo?

Seriously, is "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" so intrinsically evil in execution that it must be rejected?

Obama is talking about making democracy of, by and for the people work. No to deflecting his message to pretend he's talking about McConnell or Hitler, or whomever. No "all Republicans are evil" and "the Democrats are just as bad" excuses for denying the rights to decide of all but oneself by refusing to cooperate and compromise.

[Garrett78]

24. You're not addressing the point I'm making.

You're making points that I don't take much issue with but they don't address my point. The very short video clip of Obama only addresses one aspect of what's in the article.

Obama says compromise shouldn't be frowned upon. Biden says there are "many great Republicans" or something to that effect. There aren't. That party is ethically bankrupt. The least bad Republicans (such as Romney and his binder full of women) are still liars and cheats who exploit racism and sexism for all it's worth. You can't compromise with people like that. They aren't acting in good faith.

The woke culture and purity test stuff is separate from that.

[Hortensis]

41. Garrett, we're discussing Obama's sincere advice.

You may not realize it, but seems to me you're claiming that pursuing democracy itself is currently immoral. Now me, I think making our democracy work, with top priority protecting it from the Republicans determined to destroy it, and also from those who're willing to have it collapse and fail rather than accept compromise, is the highest moral duty of all our politicians. And of us.

And President Obama agrees.

We have no choice but to try to work with those elected by the people to serve the people. Yes, McConnell, because he's the conservatives' top leader. That does not make us corrupt. It makes us noble.

I hope you come to see that. There will never be a time, and this is not one, when doing our best to work with the Republican Party for the wellbeing of our nation will be immoral and impossible. Including through willingness to accept compromises as necessary between over 200 million members of our electorate to achieve solutions that broad majorities want and/or can accept. That is representative government.

[Garrett78]

42. I'm not suggesting that pursuing democracy is immoral.

I'm saying you can't compromise with those not acting in good faith. The Republican Party isn't merely ethically deficient. They are ethically bankrupt. The likes of Biden, who say there are many really good Republicans, are living in a different era. In Oregon, where I used to live, there are fond memories of Mark Hatfield. Those Republicans are extinct, at least at the federal level.

The real elephant in the room is a broken system. A tyranny of the minority political system that is in need of major structural reform that can't be brought about for the very reasons why reform is so desperately needed. This is an epic problem. For instance, by 2040, nearly 70% of the population will be represented by 30% of the US Senate. This is an anti-democracy.

[Hortensis]

46. Actually, congress has all along been passing bills with

bipartisan cooperation. Ones that fly under the "controversial" radar and don't need to have a big noisy stand made over them. It's keeping some things moving, if not well. All bill are on line a few keystrokes away.

I notice you, strikingly, don't differentiate between the parties or give the slightest mention of the Democrats' democracy reform bills waiting for power in 2021 to make the major repairs and changes. How can that be when the differences between the parties are enormous? Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Lincoln, FDR, Obama and Biden would all be on the same side, ranged agains the Republicans and all others who sought to overset our "broken" systems.

Speaking of, destabilizing and dismantling our current "tyranny of the minority" via "major structural reform" -- which no doubt would be supposed to get rid of most Democratic senators -- is exactly what the Republican leadership is up to. They just use different terms for machinations to put people in power who can't win honest elections by appealing to a majority of the electorate.

[Garrett78]

49. FFS. Of course the difference between the parties is enormous. That's the point.

The Republican leadership is most certainly not trying to do away with our tyranny of the minority system (electoral college, 2 Senators from every state, filibusters, etc.). Quite the opposite. They depend on it. It's why they don't feel any need to compromise in good faith.

The hundreds of bills languishing on McConnell's desk shouldn't be seen as "controversial." Again, that's the whole point. What passes for "controversial" is ridiculous. The Overton Window has been shifted so dramatically to the right that what should be common sense and common decency is "radical" or "controversial." Meanwhile, the media and others are fond of saying the Democratic Party has gone "too far left," while saying virtually nothing about how batshit crazy the GOP has become.

If there wasn't such an enormous difference between the parties, compromise would be reasonable and feasible.

[cwydro]

11. Rec.

He’s right.

I see a lot of it here quite frequently.

[GusBob]

53. Crickets to that huh?

The truth hurts

[cwydro]

54. Lol.

The silence is deafening.

[Sapient Donkey]

56. I get the impression that DU is pretty tame compared to some of the more wild parts of the web

There are some parts of Twitter in which you'll be called a nazi fascist if you say you like Obama.

[RandiFan1290]

58. Like being called a communist

for supporting Bernie?

[LAS14]

15. Enthusiastic K & R!!! He's SO GREAT!!! nt

[Johnny2X2X]

16. We attack our allies too much

I see it all the time, Liberals catching heat from other liberals because they dared not pass the test on 1 particular issue.

If you follow Bernie on Facebook, you'll see that some on his staff and many of his followers have been targeting Elizabeth Warren in the last few weeks. Yes, Bernie followers think Elizabeth Warren deserves to be torn down. WTF? You couldn't fit a piece of paper between Bernie and Warren on 99.9% of the issues. Some of it is definitely trolls stirring the pot.

Our side has to be united in 2020 for American Democracy to survive. that's what's at stake here.

[JCMach1]

19. Obama's impulse to 'triangulate' never served him well... ever

[Baitball Blogger]

29. I disagree, to a point.

First you have to establish a position and gather a following before you can become politically effective. No one will pay attention to you until you define your beliefs, and show you can bring numbers to the table.

[malaise]

31. I now realize I am ancient

I had to look that up

[ritapria]

35. Me Too

[TheRealNorth]

32. I thought the term "woke" was used by the alt-right & incel crowd

Because in their heads, the world is dominated by feminists/leftists holding them back. Hence the "red pill" nonsense that alludes to the Matrix movies where Neo chooses the red pill and awakens to the truth of the Matrix

[Yavin4]

37. And that's why the Dems lost control and power on state and fed levels while he was president

https://www.quorum.us/data-driven-insights/under-obama-democrats-suffer-largest-loss-in-power-since-eisenhower/291/

There's no compromise with this current group of Republicans. No common ground. No sense of honor. Not even real patriotism.

[BeyondGeography]

51. Now he's doubling down and the crowd still goes wild

Wake me up when it’s over.

[grumpyduck]

38. I agree with the message.

Hiding behind a smart phone keyboard and spouting a few words doesn't add up to shit.

[superpatriotman]

39. The truly pragamatic hear you loud and clear, Mr. President

And thank you for your wise words.

[Bettie]

47. I get that there are areas where compromise is theoretically possible

but there are also hard principles that we need to hold to.

So many tell me that there isn't a "line", that we should compromise anywhere we can.

So, who is OK to throw under the bus in the name of appeasement?

There is also this: the biggest issue I had with President Obama was his idealism.

He truly believed that at some point they would work with him. They never, ever did.

He seems to still believe that there are good people among the right wing. I don't.

They are not negotiating anything in good faith.

Look at Mitch McConnell. Does anyone truly believe that there is any way to work with him? That any amount our side gives in on, other than total capitulation to their agenda will help?

Does anyone believe that any of them will give even an inch even if our side entirely abandons each and every principle that we should stand on and burns the entire Democratic platform to the ground in the name of proving that there is no ideology on our side worth defending?

I don't. Not with the current crop of Republicans.

[Luciferous]

48. Agreed! My biggest issue with Obama was that he was always trying to

compromise with the Republicans, even when it was clear they were never going to work with him.

[Yavin4]

50. Question: How do you compromise with Mitch McConnell?

Someone please explain that to me.

[Sapient Donkey]

57. I hear/read his comments as suggesting we need to compromise among ourselves

As in between liberals/progressives/left-of-center folks. If we can compromise on solutions that we can all live with, then we'll stand a better chance of making changes despite the uncompromising right trying to block all progress. I see this more as Obama calling out the "#MyCandidateOrBust" type of attitudes.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

60. This🔝🔝🔝🔝🔝🔝🔝🔝🔝🔝

[BlueWI]

52. This is like the free speech issue for certain conservatives.

A hobby horse among political moderates to show how darn reasonable they are.

[Sapient Donkey]

55. If I recall correctly, his farewell speech touched on this subject a little too

in which he expressed similar sentiments.