Jump to content

The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)


tac airlifter

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Yeah, that doesn't look good 🤣 .  Sadly however, I think those "helper' folks are there for everyone who stops by to get photographed - so they all got the masked help treatment.  Don't ask me how I know this sort of shit.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2022 at 2:33 PM, bfargin said:

They were very much socialist until they got into power...just like all of the other socialist countries' leadership has done. I'd argue the political spectrum can't be viewed as a tape-measure/line but rather as a loop/circle and the far left and far right meet on the backside at fascism. Small sample but look at the antifa/BLM movements and see how they are fascists in their own right but claim to be on the leftist end of things. Both extremes end with absolute control and tyranny.

Yep, you have to be pants-on-head retarded to think that conservatism or liberalism are somehow inversely connected to fascism.

 

There are no shortage of both liberal and conservative authoritarian regimes. 

 

"Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from one another, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation."

It takes no effort whatsoever to find the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in that definition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
9 minutes ago, Biff_T said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/08/30/air-force-leaders-set-new-goals-to-diversify-officer-corps/

The Air Force won't be happy until all CC's are neutered minorities with tits.   

Original equipment or after market add ons?  If you say you have said equipment, is a physical exam actually required or is your internal emotions, i.e. your feelings, telling you that you have said equipment good enough?  Just trying to plot out my next career move. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Biff_T said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/08/30/air-force-leaders-set-new-goals-to-diversify-officer-corps/

The Air Force won't be happy until all CC's are neutered minorities with tits.   

According to the memo, the Department of the Air Force wants an officer corps that is:

  • 67.5% white
  • 13% Black/African American
  • 10% Asian
  • 7% multiracial
  • 1.5% American Indian/Native Alaskan
  • 1% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

 

 

“These goals are aspirational … and will not be used in any manner that undermines our merit-based processes,” the memo said.  HA! sureeeeeeeeeeeeeee

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

According to the memo, the Department of the Air Force wants an officer corps that is:

  • 67.5% white
  • 13% Black/African American
  • 10% Asian
  • 7% multiracial
  • 1.5% American Indian/Native Alaskan
  • 1% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

 

 

“These goals are aspirational … and will not be used in any manner that undermines our merit-based processes,” the memo said.  HA! sureeeeeeeeeeeeeee

These numbers..... Are not in line with the US census numbers at all..... I can understand wanting a racial makeup similar to the US population but these specifically have inflated numbers for some minority demographics.... Specifically Asians (6.1 to 10%), Pacific Islander (.3 to 1.0%), and multiracial (2.9 to 7%). 

Whites under represented by ~10% (75.8 to 67.5%). 

WTF are they aiming to do with this? 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeA10 said:

Original equipment or after market add ons?  If you say you have said equipment, is a physical exam actually required or is your internal emotions, i.e. your feelings, telling you that you have said equipment good enough?  Just trying to plot out my next career move. 

Exactly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites



These numbers..... Are not in line with the US census numbers at all..... I can understand wanting a racial makeup similar to the US population but these specifically have inflated numbers for some minority demographics.... Specifically Asians (6.1 to 10%), Pacific Islander (.3 to 1.0%), and multiracial (2.9 to 7%). 
Whites under represented by ~10% (75.8 to 67.5%). 
WTF are they aiming to do with this? 
 


How does this compare with the demographic makeup of our enlisted force?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/08/30/air-force-leaders-set-new-goals-to-diversify-officer-corps/


We don’t want racism. But we will push policies that push one race over another if we aren’t meeting an arbitrary percentage number. (Isn’t this institutional racism that we hear people talking about?) The traits we are looking for is genitalia and skin color. As long as we give the appearance of a skin color and genitalia diverse military, everything else will be good.

Think about it. What person, regardless of skin color and genitalia, wants to join an organization that isn’t primarily focused on training and fighting. Winning our countries wars. But we are more focused on ridiculous societal norms of the day. Who wants to join a military (or go to college via affirmative action) knowing that they got hired not because of their ability and hard work but primarily because of skin color and/or genitalia? What about if you didn’t really know after you got hired or picked up if you never found out. If there was always a doubt above your head that you are there because of skin or genitalia and not because of how effective or capable you are. One has to imagine that isn’t a great feeling.

Work hard. Dream big. Never give up. Fly. Fight. Win.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Guardian said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/08/30/air-force-leaders-set-new-goals-to-diversify-officer-corps/


We don’t want racism. But we will push policies that push one race over another if we aren’t meeting an arbitrary percentage number. (Isn’t this institutional racism that we hear people talking about?) The traits we are looking for is genitalia and skin color. As long as we give the appearance of a skin color and genitalia diverse military, everything else will be good.

Think about it. What person, regardless of skin color and genitalia, wants to join an organization that isn’t primarily focused on training and fighting. Winning our countries wars. But we are more focused on ridiculous societal norms of the day. Who wants to join a military (or go to college via affirmative action) knowing that they got hired not because of their ability and hard work but primarily because of skin color and/or genitalia? What about if you didn’t really know after you got hired or picked up if you never found out. If there was always a doubt above your head that you are there because of skin or genitalia and not because of how effective or capable you are. One has to imagine that isn’t a great feeling.

Work hard. Dream big. Never give up. Fly. Fight. Win.

Summary: What rational person wants to go into combat and depend on leadership or fellow airmen, soldiers, sailors, or marines selected for non-warrior criteria that could get you killed. 

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Guardian said:

The traits we are looking for is genitalia and skin color.

By genitalia of course you mean the gender by which one identifies as today, right?  Wouldn't want you to be labeled as transphobic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Guardian said:

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2022/08/30/air-force-leaders-set-new-goals-to-diversify-officer-corps/


We don’t want racism. But we will push policies that push one race over another if we aren’t meeting an arbitrary percentage number. (Isn’t this institutional racism that we hear people talking about?) The traits we are looking for is genitalia and skin color. As long as we give the appearance of a skin color and genitalia diverse military, everything else will be good.

Think about it. What person, regardless of skin color and genitalia, wants to join an organization that isn’t primarily focused on training and fighting. Winning our countries wars. But we are more focused on ridiculous societal norms of the day. Who wants to join a military (or go to college via affirmative action) knowing that they got hired not because of their ability and hard work but primarily because of skin color and/or genitalia? What about if you didn’t really know after you got hired or picked up if you never found out. If there was always a doubt above your head that you are there because of skin or genitalia and not because of how effective or capable you are. One has to imagine that isn’t a great feeling.

Work hard. Dream big. Never give up. Fly. Fight. Win.

Affirmative action is back! Don’t worry guys it will work this time!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/31/2022 at 11:55 AM, FLEA said:

These numbers..... Are not in line with the US census numbers at all.....

When I looked at these targets vs the 2020 US Census they looked pretty close; not sure what data you looked at for the country at large. Using the "race alone" numbers from the 2020 census (i.e. you identify as this race exclusively), here's what it looks like:

  • Target White: 67.5%
    • Census White: 61.6%
  • Target Black: 13%
    • Census Black: 12.4%
  • Target Asian: 10%
    • Census Asian: 6%
  • Target Native American: 1.5%
    • Census Native American: 1.1%
  • Target Hawaiian/Pacific Islander: 1%
    • Census Hawaiian/Pacific Islander: 0.2%
  • Target Hispanic/Latino (although not strictly a "race"): 15%
    • Census Hispanic/Latino (of all races): 32.7%

Multiracial is harder because the census used "some other race" as an option, which 8.4% of respondents chose, but also uses "race together" for people who want to choose multiple races from the above list, and then also tracks "multiracial" as a combined category, which 10.2% of the population falls into. Either way, both 8.4% and 10.2% are higher than the Air Force target of 7% for multiracial.

The target for gender split is also 64% men to 36% women, which obviously significantly over-targets men given that the broader population is much more balanced with women being the slight majority.

It's also worth considering that based on age, the younger age cohorts that would be being targeted by recruiters for military service are also significantly less "white alone" and more racially diverse than the number for the population at large.

So if you wanted an officer corps that was broadly representative of the US population, a worthy goal IMHO depending on how you hope to achieve it, the biggest miss both by percentage as well as in absolute numbers is a significant over-targeting of men vs women, and of white people being disproportionately overrepresented in this hypothetical "target" future officer force makeup.

TheMoreYouKnow.gif

Edited by nsplayr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, nsplayr said:

 

So if you wanted an officer corps that was broadly representative of the US population, a worthy goal IMHO….

Let’s just make sure we have an equivalent officer core of fatties and handicapped, we wouldn’t want to be fat phobic or ablest. Let’s ensure we retain those with severe psychological problems as well because #Fairness

or we could focus on attracting people who value victory and know how to fight.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

When I looked at these targets vs the 2020 US Census they looked pretty close; not sure what data you looked at for the country at large. Using the "race alone" numbers from the 2020 census (i.e. you identify as this race exclusively), here's what it looks like:

  • Target White: 67.5%
    • Census White: 61.6%
  • Target Black: 13%
    • Census Black: 12.4%
  • Target Asian: 10%
    • Census Asian: 6%
  • Target Native American: 1.5%
    • Census Native American: 1.1%
  • Target Hawaiian/Pacific Islander: 1%
    • Census Hawaiian/Pacific Islander: 0.2%
  • Target Hispanic/Latino (although not strictly a "race"): 15%
    • Census Hispanic/Latino (of all races): 32.7%

Multiracial is harder because the census used "some other race" as an option, which 8.4% of respondents chose, but also uses "race together" for people who want to choose multiple races from the above list, and then also tracks "multiracial" as a combined category, which 10.2% of the population falls into. Either way, both 8.4% and 10.2% are higher than the Air Force target of 7% for multiracial.

The target for gender split is also 64% men to 36% women, which obviously significantly over-targets men given that the broader population is much more balanced with women being the slight majority.

It's also worth considering that based on age, the younger age cohorts that would be being targeted by recruiters for military service are also significantly less "white alone" and more racially diverse than the number for the population at large.

So if you wanted an officer corps that was broadly representative of the US population, a worthy goal IMHO depending on how you hope to achieve it, the biggest miss both by percentage as well as in absolute numbers is a significant over-targeting of men vs women, and of white people being disproportionately overrepresented in this hypothetical "target" future officer force makeup.

TheMoreYouKnow.gif

Came straight off the US census website fact sheet, which is odd now because now I want to know where the data discrepancy is since this fact sheet was updated for 2020 census. 

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Came straight off the US census website fact sheet, which is odd now because now I want to know where the data discrepancy is since this fact sheet was updated for 2020 census. 

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221

Yea that’s weird…because the numbers on the fact sheet don’t match the 2010 data not the 2020 data so who knows 🤷‍♂️

Edited by nsplayr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is what you are saying we are trying to hit a random moving target with our ambiguous selection criteria because the composition of the US is changing?

Nsplayer. Please explain why the military needs to match the skin color and genitalia percentages of our country? Why it matters more than combat effectiveness or capability? Also how is preferring one demographic of skin color over another or gender not racist or sexist?

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...