How do I start being a woke radical centrist? Being racist gets you nowhere socially. It isn't acceptable or attractive

An extremists is someone or someones who are counter to western values

I’m gonna assume you love freedom

ignoring the reality of race isn't cool or sexy.

Attached: 1478490230641.gif (2406x1936, 861K)

>How do I start being a woke radical centrist? Being racist gets you nowhere socially.
The same way you get into any ideology. Start reading anti-racist literature I guess.

If all you care about is the 'social impact' of professing the truth about the world, then 1. you're too much of a pussy to make a difference, and 2. you wouldn't be any help to the cause anyway, Judas

Traps are not gay.
Join us.
youtu.be/9LXMx4ZiNEM

Attached: 1523229842863.jpg (568x550, 90K)

If you pick and choose your beliefs based on their acceptability and social attractiveness you are in a deep sleep and will never be woke.

Attached: 1519966246583.jpg (800x670, 94K)

>radical centrist

Try sucking as much dick as possible. Make sure that nobody ever gets off and nobody is ever satisfied.

Sage

Attached: 1520503487843.gif (480x360, 1.84M)

Move to a black neighborhood. You'll get to experience all the benefits of multicultur....OH WAIT! You just mugged and attacked.
Kek

Just play devil's advocate anytime someone makes a point, whether they are left or right. Never take a stance on anything unless it personally affects your life. And remember, ALWAYS smoke weed and masturbate.

Found the white woman.

> woke radical centrist
There's no such thing as a moderate or centrist. There are just people who avoid conflict and adopt a position that minimizes political friction in their lives. No one sits down and confronts the whole of human political philosophy and says, "Well, it looks as though a middle-of-the-road approach is the One True Path, where the road is the early 21st century Overton window." They sit down and say, "Some of my friends want guns banned, others want access to automatics, all of them are loud and annoying; I'll just say I support gun rights but with some unspecified restrictions and call it a day."

You're the same people who would have stood around in the 1850's patting yourselves on the back because you supported the right of southern landowners to have slaves, but not the right of slave traders to import new slaves. Or you would have been here in the 1770's saying that the revolutionaries have legitimate grievances but should not actually do anything violent about it.

Nothing wrong with that, not everyone can or should be all politics all the time. But don't pretend yours is a principled position.

Chicks dig bad boys. Go bad boy racist and your life will be pussy galore.

You're taking for granted that the ideas that you foist onto this hypothetical timeless centrist are incorrect.

Not only are you assigning ideas onto a strawman, you don't even bother to talk about those ideas themselves
is there any attention given to the nuance of the slave trade in the 1850s? or the situation of American colonists in the 1770s?

No, it's taken for granted that the thing that did happen was the correct thing, and all those who would've stood against it are incorrect

You also pretend that these positions have any sort of internal dissonance. Owning slaves and importing slaves are, obviously, two different things. They are two separate cogs in a single machine, but if you are to remove a cog from a machine you will find the machine changed, so in that sense it is possible to oppose one part of a system and not another with no hypocrisy

Furthermore, "no one sits down and confronts the whole of human political philosophy" could be an entire sentence.

When one continues that sentence and presumes that this hypothetical centrist is capable of seeing the whole of human political philosophy (side note: "the whole of human political philosophy" is a hilarious concept considering that the modern meaning of both of those words is a relatively recent construction), one is presuming that this is a body of knowledge that is readily available and is the same body of knowledge being accessed by everyone with a political opinion. What follows from that is that it is impossible to disagree and coexist, because if everyone has access to the same body of knowledge (that is; everything), and everyone has taken the time to "sit down and confront" it, then there's only room for one paradigm to exist, since any paradigms which conflicted with the true one would have come to a different conclusion from the same information.

i think it's funny you use the term "21st century Overton window" derisively, since it seems entirely obvious that anyone talking about anything in the early 21st century would be basing it on their respective Overton window, since the entire DEFINITION of the Overton window is that is the thing that people are allowed to talk about.

It seems pretty fucking stupid to imply that those who talk within the Overton window of their respective time and place are to be derided considering those are the people doing the job of fitting into a society the best, and it is their ideas that are going to have the most staying power and resonance.

fag

Just hide your power level. Don't Discuss Politics/Social Issues if it could get you in trouble and just keep you're bolder thoughts to yourself.

Until being a race realist becomes socially acceptable, it's not worth endangering your career.

Every Issue isn't A or B. I don't like the centrist label but different ways of thinking(with merit) should be encouraged.

Identity Politics is cancer