How is woke a religion?

"Woke" started out as a simple acknowledgment that a person is conscious of the systemic oppression of various groups. Now the right wing has got its claws into the term it's been effectively neutered. Now all it means is, "stuff that right wingers don't like"

It's like "defund the police" which quickly became "abolish all policing".

It's a useful strategy for them and it works to prevent honest discussion on how to solve societal problems by preventing people from having a shared understanding of the language needed for such discussion.

Atheism is refusal of forced ideas upon someone. Which means one has to use critical thinking to determine their path in life. The problem is that it’s much harder to control the masses if that population thinks for themselves.

I honestly can't believe that using this word unironically has caught on. Everything I think is just a stupid joke on the internet turns out to be the internet reflecting just how idiotic humanity really is.

Either that, or just an unpleasant shock at just how 'mask-off' some people have become.

Hey! It's "being a decent person in a way not sanctioned by their local culture". If you're decent to the correct people with enough pandering imagery that's fine.

Kinda like being against anti-fascists... aka fascists.

Lots of 'woke' people are shitty people. I've had way too many experiences in the past few years with 'woke' people screaming at me about how I need to read more women authors or I'm a shitty awful human being. Or other equally absurd things, like I'm a bigot if I don't ask you what your pronoun is. If you have a pronoun preference, how about you tell me? Just like you tell someone how to pronounce your name if it's non-standard.

I know lots of progressive people, and I am progressive. But I would never say I am 'woke'. People who self-identify 'woke' tend to be mentally ill crazy people in my encounters, and use their politics as an excuse for abusive and hostile behavior just the way right-wing nazi nutbags do.

Hell I even had a transwoman assault me verbally one day while I was just reading a book in a cafe. Comes up to me and demands that I give her my table because I'm a white cis guy and I should give up my 'privileged' to her. I told her to f off. My small business has been harassed by 'woke' activists who demand we give them money or they will say we are anti-black/lgbt+, etc. That's not woke, that's blackmail.

Most 'woke' people I meet are basically 20 sometime trust-fund types who need a cause to give her their miserable lives purpose, because god knows they can't get their shit together and do something positive with their lives. If they did maybe they'd stop being such awful abusive people who threaten and harass others.

Except woke people aren't decent. Some woke people have good intentions, sure, but they aren't decent. Being woke means being evil.

That was the most infuriating thing about this whole post to me. Elon's braindead take is on brand and expected at this point, but that chart (or worse, the reaserch behind it) is the true crime here.

Nazi: "white power!" Normal people: "hey, stfu!" Cristian Conservatives: "hey I don't agree with it but let's hear him out. Some people might agree, his ideas deserve to be discussed and given a platform"

They have unmatched methods. Is there any other place on the internet with 2024 college free speech rankings?

Let's go a step further and analyze exactly what this graph is saying:

There's only about a 20% distribution difference in the "never" sections between Christians and atheists. So on average, 4/5 atheists would answer the exact same as Christians. All this graph says is that Christians are barely more tolerant than people who identify as atheist. Barely is the key word. If anything, this graph proves that tolerance levels don't fluctuate that much for the individual between differing religions.

But Bible thumpers need any win they can get, so they don't read the data for what it is, they just see one bar longer than the other and declare victory.

I made a comment below, this is from a conservative research group funded by the remaining Koch brother, among other conservatives.

When the hate preachers show up on campus with a bullhorn and try to tell everyone that they deserve to burn in hell, they don't want the reat of the world to tell them to STFU.

These open questions are always kinda crap to draw conclusions from because we don't know how the question was interpreted by the people answering. In this case we also don't know the sample size of the groups. Could also be a multitude of other variables at play like location because there are few places where you can find all these religions while getting a good sample size and controlling for other variables like income, education, age etc.

And does it apply only to verbal, podium speech, or also to written books and speech by people in [drag] costume.

They go to the lecture and just scream so that that person can't present. They don't allow the person to make their case or offer them any respect.

I think the biggest issue is religious people that can only view things through the lense of their own perspective equate any belief system with religion. And since we, as humans, categorize everything, everyone has a "belief system," even if you believe in absolutely nothing (nihilism).

So "atheism" is considered a religion, believing in the scientific method is a religion, and believing in the inherent and equal rights of people is a religion.

I make my own up. There's a giant space crab coming to devour us all WORSHIP THEM

Thats just what people say when people want to categorize some idea as a religion. "wokeness" or even atheism itself is called a "religion" because it makes the religious feel better about believing in their own beliefs for which there is no basis.

For whom?

Generally the uneducated or low-iq who simply can't be educated. They don't understand science so to them it might as well be another religion. In that case why not pick the religion that gives them a nice afterlife? Something they can fall back on and blame when they make poor decision after poor decision.

On the most fundamental level: For everyone. That's because every world-view bogs down to a logical system and all logical systems are grounded in circular reasoning, paradox, or assumptions not provable in that system.

People believe in all kinds of things, e.g. that the judge who's sentencing you to prison is more than a human in fancy clothes. Or that the social reality that gives them that power doesn't exist. Both stances are, ultimately, insane, and so are we all.

EDIT: ITT: Cargo cultists not understanding what science is (a process) and isn't (proof of anything).

You freedome ends where someone elses starts, otherwhise noone except you will be free, I don't get why Americans often have such a hard time with that!

The Holocaust and the Rwandan genocide didn't happen because of absolute free speech. Quite on the contrary: freedom of speech was heavily suppressed

Yeah this is an example of "lying with graphs 101".

The data probably didn't fit the narrative when they separate "always" and "sometimes"

Also unfair in the questioning. From my own experience im going to assume the person speaking at the campus is someone yelling how all are damned and calling women removed. Sadly, very few people other than atheists speak up.

Also why is there a generic Christian but then also Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox? But then they just Muslim and not it’s different denominations? Why even have different denominations when you have the generic catch all and the Other category?

There are kinds of Christian that don't fall under Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox by their own measure (which doesn't care how the Big Three want to categorize them). Perhaps this was why? (Probably not.) Graph should have just lumped them all together as "Christian".

Atheism are people who are activly against religion. Nothing are Irreligious people I assume. No Response are those who's religious identity are unknown. Could be any of the others or none of them.

Or, another way of looking at it is, they're embrace of deceit and delusion means they periodically have to fabricate new imaginary dragons to slay. The problem with turning victimhood and grievance into a cult is that you need persecution for it to work. Hence, fabricating opposition. Wokeness is just a way for the elder elite to heap hate on the youth that will inevitably replace them. Constantly reminding everyone that you are a patriotic Christian is just a means to try to seize the higher ground for cultural warfare.

even if it is a religion. So what? does that degrades it's value? what happened to them preaching about christian's tollerence?

if it was ever there.

I think that is most people, I just asked why is everyone automatically accepting this as true. But there are two groups of religious people that I understand moreso: people who feel they witnessed or directly saw a miracle and people who like the experience of a religious group and being around the people in it.

Me too, such as: why is there a separate category for "nothing", that is literally athiesm...

Not believing in it without any evidence? Wow, I bet youre one of the atheist the graph is talking about.

I love that he did a 100% 180 on everything he "believed in", from being pro science, atheist, and left leaning to anti science, christian, and conservative troll and none of his followers batted an eye. He does what he thinks is popular, what will keep him talked about. Nuts to that.

The topic here is censoriousness. The relationship between a speaker and religion here is via censoriousness, and the reason for that is listed in the first sentence.

To be fair this is fake af, agnostics might question the person, but shouting out of stage without making questions first seems very odd for that specific category.

Cuz when you got to the point in life where you know you don't really know shit nothing you kinda are more tolerant to new ideas and new concepts I would guess

Oh yeah we’ve never had any problems with large atheist-run organized mass shootings 🙄

It literally says 2024 ranking. That should be red flag #1.

Atheist are not the same thing as agnostics...

It's a tale as old as time, just like the Judean People's Front. Fucking splitters.

We have a very large christian population, and they all don't behave in a monolithic manner. For surveys it makes sense to ask which denomination or type of christian they are. Some will response Catholic, Baptist, Protestant. Some will respond christian, sometimes non-denominational christian. It improves the survey results. For example, you might find differences between Catholics and Baptists that wouldn't show up if you grouped them all together under a christian category.

Because it's not enough to argue with Muslims and atheists, they need to be more right than other people who believe in the same God in different ways.

It's a horrible graph. Likely they meant 'evangelical protestant' to differentiate that group from protestants like Lutherans Methodists Anglicans etc.

Oh American christianity is something different as a whole.

I'll give my best summary in as few words as I can during my lunch.

Christianity is an Abrahamic faith with its roots in catholicism. When Martin Luther, a catholic from Germany, wrote a large 95 point thesis detailing his problems with catholicism and how the church had been warped from its intention, this lead to whay most modern Americans would call Lutheranism.

This reformation of the church that started with Martin Luther is known as the Protestant Reformation, protestants being anyone who believed in Christ but not in the orthodox or catholic belief set and rites.

The separation of that faith and the pursuit to practice it openly (sometimes even if it was MORE restrictive than the existing systems) led to the exodus of religious groups to America. This is where some Americans get the idea that "america was founded on Christianity and religious freedom", as these were protestants who were escaping religious persecution for rejecting mainline catholicism.

Some time down the line, I don't know the history of this part, the general term for anyone believing in christ but not catholicism (some going as far as saying lutheranism is catholic-lite as they still practiced communion and most protestants don't recognize communion or any of the 'rites' as those are things they see as placed on top of religion by man and not by God) was just left at Christians.

For all intents and purposes, in the US, Christian mostly means Protestant, methodist, Lutheran, Baptist, Southern Baptist (they're separate, I was raised Southern Baptist, they get pissy about being lumped in), calvinist, and non-denominational (people who don't claim a 'branch' but worship christ in a way not easily or intentionally not tied to a singular rhetoric.

Please ask more questions and I'll try my best. Having been born to a Southern Baptist family, it's a topic I love to discuss and learn more on. I'm not religious though, so hopefully none of my stuff comes off disrespectful, just happens to be a family trade I can't quite put down.

Don't forget adventist, pentecostalism, lutheranism, etc. There's dozens of christians religions in the USA that may hate each others. This doesn’t make much sense.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3fAcxcxoZ8

Because they all seem to think their beliefs are the true beliefs of what the Bible teaches. They will always be at war with one another.

The “teachings” of the Bible are all based on how one person interprets it compared to another, the individual churches all believe the same version as they were taught by their religious leaders, who in turn believe their ultimate religious leader, for example the Catholic Church (all variations) follow the pope and his interpretation.

By lumping them all into the same category, it gives credibility to "religion".

When you have a panel where "A priest, a rabbi, and a mullah discus spirituality", it's a level playing field, everyone is just there to compare notes on their LARPing rules.

If an atheist or a scientist join the panel, you now have an emperors new clothes situation, "Yeah, I don't have all the answers, but more importantly, neither do they, and I'm not claiming to. Here are the facts and evidence as it is currently understood, and what that might mean".

When you call atheism or science or woke a religion, they are trying to trap you by saying "ha! Your belief is just as meaningless as I mine is! We're all equal and subjective rules apply".

I try to refer to things as simply dogmatic. Some people have replaced religion with other things, but that doesn't make them a religion. People beg for authority.

New Atheism is insanely dogmatic, but it's not the same as Atheism, and has been criticized by Atheists who classify "New Atheism" as being akin to a hate-group

and Scientism is a school of philosophy, albeit one that's mocked relentlessly (Basically, the philosophy that everything that is real can be measured, and if it can't be measured it isn't real)

But... that's as close as I'd get to describing Science or Atheism as religions....

I say this as an agnostic person for the record.

As a 'no response'r, I'm not going to answer you

This also ignores that shouting at someone in no way infringes on their ability to speak. It's just something they don't like to happen. Ironically, much like women going to abortion clinics and getting shouted down and harassed, simply based on their religious belief that abortion is wrong. But whew, let's not apply logic to their beliefs...

Certain people can not imagine multiperspectivity, let alone understand or try it.

This comment needs more attention. Sometimes I wash Lemmy had awards like Reddit to make important things visible.

Never would be allowing someone to scream racial slurs and ignoring it. Rarely and sometimes should be replaced with "it depends". Always probably means the same thing as sometimes since you aren't going to shout down a good speaker that you agree with. The whole survey doesn't make sense when you stop to think about it.

My guess is that it was two answers, but few answered always, so they combined the two in the chart to make the point they wanted to make.

Religious people really don't understand atheism or agnosticism. It's not like we just have a coming out ceremony where we take a bible and burn it, it's just "You know, I don't know if I believe that god is real...". They make it out to be that we all gather in groups every sunday to talk about it... but we just sleep in. We don't usually even label ourselves because the label is itself irrelevant. We don't have a religion, that's it. You all believe in something, that's great, we don't. That's literally all there is to it.

Agreed. Where he is wrong is in equating “having a world-view” with “having a religion”. The two are not the same and it’s foolish in the extreme to suggest that they are.