I recently came across this argument about woke kids T.V. shows indoctrinating kids about political/social issues. I think it's invalid, as bringing your children to religion is different from entertainment taking a side in current divisive political topics. But what do you think?
Comments (21)
sorted by:
that is the direction it is going. Soon they will ban homeschooling and restrict what you are allowed to tell your kids at home. Even doing homework with them will be prohibited as being racist or something. Part of the marxist movement is to destroy the family unit so there is no doubt that that is going to be attempted maybe even succeed.
Pretty sure women beat them to it.
I expect a lot of feminists are also marxists to a degree. As you have noticed women are spearheading and / or enabling all this SJW movements.
Women? More like reptile people, who are used to seeing their offspring raised in a public creche or something.
My opinion is that indoctrination is bad in general. My kids are growing Christian, I am agnostic but my wife is religious, when they grow a bit I will have a talk about making their own decisions on the matter and that we are going to support them. I do not hold the absolute truth and I do not claim to.
What I hate about indoctrination in TV shows or school is that is not designed to be beneficial to the kid but get future allies in a movement while Christians are doing it because it is believed to be in the best interest of the child, even if it is wrong the decision is under the belief of helping the child.
The TV indoctrination is in no way beneficial, in fact it can be the opposite most of the time - white guilt, unhealthy focus on sexuality, anti capitalism, boys described as dumb or showing boys being boys as bad while a girl playing like a boy is good. All of this create confusion at the very least and makes my job as a parent to grow kids that do not hate themselves harder.
No child who is born Christian grows up without intensely questioning their faith. It's been the most religious people around me who have given the most thought into their own choices and philosophy.
I do wonder though how the children of Atheists grow up. My parents have not been very religious but they were Christians and for some reason I was heavy in to Bible reading for a while and even seriously checked out the LDS church and turned out agnostic in the end :))
Progressivism is an enforced religion. They are calvinists. The woke are the elect and NYC is their city on hill. Bill de Blasio has had the most success recreating the Munster commune. The enforced polygamy will be fun to watch on rioters' livestreams.
An ideology doesn't have to be religious to be dogmatic. You don't need gods for the dogma dance. And religion includes social and cultural issues in and of itself, it isn't just - or even primarily - about the just-so stories and never, ever was.
There has been systematic agitprop since Twilight Zone and Bewitched came on their air, not to mention what came in the 1970s - and most of it in the form of comedy. Very stealthy, very clever. Way to play a long game.
Notice how they'll say "freedom of religion also means freedom from religion", which is true, but now replace "religion" with "association" and try to tell them that mass immigration from countries with alien asian and african cultures violates that "freedom from" part ..
As far as I can see it, religion at its core is more about a shared history than it is about belief in a higher power. A religion can only exist if a group of people share a history together, then their core beliefs are formed into a doctrine, only after that can you think about a higher power. In history this has usually taken the form of smaller cults in cities or villages, which if they grow in size enough become a religion or part of a region's religious beliefs.
A parent bringing their child into their religion is bringing them into their own shared history. Saying "this is your part in the world and how you should best try to align yourself with nature" and some such codes of conduct. This is especially important if the people of their city or country around them share the same religion, this helps them fit into their society.
A person promoting religion to others they do not know through entertainment or education can cause damage if they're trying to convert people. What you are doing then is trying to encompass your shared history over theirs. In a homogeneous society where everybody has the same shared history this isn't much of a problem. Between different groups of people though, this is a culture war.
Of course if you're merely trying to celebrate your own history and have others partake in it then I would say it's positive. For example the game Sekiro has many Shinto and Buddhist elements in it, which feels natural and not like it wants you to believe in what its creators believe.
its retarded, just like almost every other leftist attempt at "reason"
teaching YOUR children YOUR values is your job as a parent
attempting to teach OTHER PEOPLE'S children values contrary that of their parents is narcissistic assholery
don't argue with commies, it is a waste of time
Religion doesn't force overly complex issues on kids too young to understand them.
I’ll care about the argument when it’s equally applied.
For one thing, it's clearly labeled. With the exception of a very few holiday specials, I don't think I've seen anything on TV that teaches religion that wasn't on a channel dedicated to religion. If they want to create the Woke TV Network for their content, go right ahead so people can choose not to watch it.
We had Davey and Goliath and Big Blue Marble when I was a kid, but those were the kind of shows your parents sort of "encouraged" you to watch on a Saturday or Sunday morning. But then, so was Fat Albert.
It was a lie told to attempt to prevent a child's parents instilling in their children their own personal value system, so that the "progressives" who runs the schools and popular media would have free reign over the minds of their children.
If they believed it schools wouldn't try to "force" parents to sign a contract saying they won't listen in on their child's online education.
Wow, what happened to parents being an active part of a child's education, and being there when they need help with their homework, and all that? Christ, I remember seeing PSAs that pretty much preached this ... years and years ago ...
Yeah, when they DON'T want parents as part of the education process, that's definitely when something is up.
I can only imagine just how bad PTAs must be nowadays. They were always full of "karen" types ... (see: "Harper Valley PTA".)
I don't like political indoctrination and I don't like religious indoctrination.
Bible study/sunday school/jesus camp is as creepy to me as filling kids head's with fascism or communism.
I hate that religious schools for kids are even allowed to exist in my country. They always produce inordinate amounts of fucking weirdos.
I think the argument is often used in bad faith, but like many attack vectors, has a kernel of truth somewhere. Here's an easy example: genital mutilation - traditionally enforced through religion, but unfortunately accepted by many people who have little association with such religion.
But the intention of the argument is to bring up non-physical abuse. I wasn't a happy child, I know abuse can be non-physical. So what's a religious philosophy that could be considered abuse? There's at least a couple that promote victimhood and "us versus them", which also seem closely tied to an encouragement to hinder outsiders via discouraging traits like empathy (to outsiders) and generally dehumanizing outsiders. I'll even give a portion of that a pass because I think it's natural to care less for outsiders than insiders, but not to the extent that I understand those religions. Just the victimhood thing is really wicked and most of the users here should understand how so.
And look how much text I generated trying to respond to propaganda. That's part of the point, is not to make a real argument, but to make statements that people are reluctant to address fully due to time/effort compared to instigators dropping one-liners. I'll share a hint and a theory: these modern propagandists (some call them "leftists") are suffering from a mental condition I've started calling Mirror Syndrome. A person with Mirror Syndrome must, as a prerequisite, have lost or severely deteriorated their ability to self-reflect and look within themselves willingly (this shouldn't be a common thing and it is alarming to see it widespread). The person with Mirror Syndrome actually is in a constant state of accidental introspection..by looking at others. You know how male feminist allies often end up being rapists? They have no idea that they're acknowledging their own problems - they seriously think the qualities of a rapist are present in all other men because it's how they interpret their observations. Simply, a person with Mirror Syndrome is only capable of seeing themselves by looking at the mirror of others - and be sure, they must look at others, because it is very uncomfortable to look down and not see a body or any evidence of a self.
The hint is to consider the possibility that any person making cheap, prodding arguments has Mirror Syndrome. Oversimply, ask yourself if the retort "no u" might explain why they might really believe the accusations they make of others. Personally, I've been pursuing the idea seriously because I want to come up with a method to redeem the lost...it just remains out of my reach.