Wokeness & Constructivism: INTRO, HOMELESSNESS, & STUPID DECISION-MAKING [PART 1]
From Education and Ego to Stupidity and Social Decline, it’s time to dispel the myths of human behavior, and start solving for societal catastrophe
Over the course of the last year, I’ve been conducting a plethora of research into the social issues like the Homeless Industrial Complex, a complicated conglomerate of private sector stakeholders and nation-wide leadership making millions, if not billions of dollars off the steady, westward-moving genocide against Black and other minority citizens, lower-socioeconomic groups, transients, vagrants, violent and petty criminals, drug addicts and mentally unstable demographics, and Millennials alike. If you’re living in a hub of this crisis, like Los Angeles, Seattle, or San Francisco, you’re already aware of what this abusive system is doing to tax-paying, functioning citizens and societal drop-outs alike; you can’t miss this vivid new lived experience. This article dives further into the crisis by looking at how the Millennial educational approach has fostered a mindset of stupidity, not “wokeness” toward this, and other macro-social issues.
Last week [at time of writing] I had the pleasure of being interviewed with Dr Drew Pinsky and Leeann Tweeden regarding the current state of the Homeless Industrial Complex of California. During our discussion, the topic of common sense reared its dwindling head. I realized that I couldn’t quite determine why so few intellectual people in my social circle were blind to the realities of the crisis. I was further horrified to discover that groups like the ACLU have openly supported the policies designed to perpetuate this genocide - a blatant display of zero-common sense toward the reality of human behavior.
I could see the surface-level logic of rulings like Martin vs. Boise, which made it legal for people to sleep in public. However, there was little long-term consideration taken when Boise passed, and now Los Angeles is dealing with the obvious decline in living standards for those living on our streets. Of course, rulings like Boise also benefit other stakeholders in the HIC thanks to the accompanying mandates for funding to support the knock-on effects of legalizing homelessness.
Herein lies the perfect qualitative equation for disaster: when coupled with the naivety and lack of long-term consideration taken by groups like the ACLU, corrupt government officials are able to manipulate social strata and line their pockets with things liiiikeeeeee.... more than 40% of Prop HHHs soft costs, hypothetically, which pitting tax-payers and vagrants/homeless/transient communities against each other.
This is why the first factor of the Homeless Industrial Equation is Money. Fuckin’ duh.
Local leaders like Mike Bonin, Eric Garcetti, Gavin Newsom, Katie Hill, and so on, could end the Homeless Industrial Complex overnight from what they earn in a year, but they have zero motivation to do so because of how much money they earn from the people they fail to help. This simple fact alone is lost into the void of Los Angeles, as I’m sure it is to the public in other cities undergoing the crisis. Solving for homelessness is not a complex issue, but it’s also not a housing issue. It’s a control issue.
The people in control of California are profiting from the homeless who remain on the streets. It’s as simple as that. This is why California has so many homeless people, and why the Liberal masses seem to think it’s a good idea. They’ve been manipulated by the fraudulent propaganda of the mainstream media into thinking the homeless crisis is a housing problem. In reality, it’s a money, corruption, disenfranchisement, and stupidity problem, and the Democrats currently in control are laughing about it all the way to the bank.
The reason these “Democrats” have been so successful at manipulating all of you Liberal/progressive/socialists is the second factor in the Homeless Industrial Equation: Constructivism Learning Theory.
Most people haven’t heard of constructivism learning theory, but this approach to education has has given a lot of stupid people the mindset that their opinion is the same as a fact… and it’s killing us at a rate of three people a day and leading to the rapes, violent crimes, human trafficking, drug trafficking, child abuse, disease, and decay called the Homeless Industrial Complex. I’ve mentioned it a few times now.
The Google-able definition of constructivism is: [Constructivism learning] theory suggests that humans construct knowledge and meaning from their experiences.
In essence, the constructivist approach to teaching/learning leaves the responsibility of garnering knowledge to the individual student. In this way, everyone is thought to learn to the best of their abilities, using previously acquired information to build a knowledge base. This approach is why everyone gets a participation trophy, and we’re all the best at being who we are as individuals.
(Did you just throw up a little bit? I know I did).
Constructivism is a learning theory applied to almost all educational output (ie: all schools, at all levels of education use constructivism). It is one of the most widely used practices for passing knowledge and information on to young people… and it’s the reason your children are closed minded fucking assholes who think they know everything.
To put into context the subtle nature of constructivism: I have been ghostwriting and researching for PhD dissertations for four years; in that time, I have worked on thousands of different papers. I don’t have the exact number of studies I’ve written on researched on Constructivism Learning Theory, but I estimate its well above five hundred. Part of my work often includes writing literature reviews, which demands I read more than 80 papers on constructivism per review. Two weeks ago, I had my first macro-demographic study on how constructivism has impacted an entire continent - the candidate identified empirical data that irrefutably found that constructivism has destroyed the ability for government leaders to deal with macro-societal issues that harm different demographics. Why? They literally do not possess the intellectual capital to do so… kinda like you.
This study will hopefully prompt future researchers to continue investigating the detrimental impact of constructivism. For those of you who still don’t understand what the fuck I’m talking about, here is a super simple way to explain how and why constructivism is the educational equivalent of a broken-glass handjob:
Imagine being five years old and instead of being taught facts, data, and information to help you survive, you’re just taught how to acquire that information yourself. Would you trust a five year old to educate themselves? No. This is why the constructivist approach used to be relegated for use by university students: the only demographic of learners who need a constructivist approach in order to be successful.
As a result of the constructivist approach to education, billions of Millennials have been raised with the notion that their opinion constitutes a form of knowledge capital, and can therefore be communicated as a fact. Some of you may know this process as “mansplaining” or being “talked down to,” something that women and minorities have to face on a daily basis, but that White American people from all age groups cannot seem to mitigate for the life of them. We’ve all been exposed to this closed-minded form of conversation, teamwork, and leadership in our adult lives, but now this lived experience of constructivism has evolved into a social notion that is about as real as digital money: wokeness.
The action of wokeness is why demographic segregation will persist, is why most of you progressives and Liberals are perpetuating the homeless fraud and genocide, and it is definitely why Millennials are so fucking angry. It is also why I feel totally isolated as massively pro-liberal young woman living in a world where the people who wear Blue are technically worse than the people in Red. Everyone “like me” calls me a dickhead fascist when I say that Democrats are hideous fascists, but I don’t blame them for their limited intellect as a result of their constructivist upbringing.
However, someone with my social and political leanings shouldn’t feel more at home with Tomi Lahren and Tucker Carlson’s viewpoint on the homeless than David Muir and ABC… and I certainly shouldn’t favor the Libertarian party’s approach to policy in the US… but here’s a deeper dive the fucking stupidity of democratic group-think, and why all of my “democratic” and “progressive” readers need to check their wokeness ASAP…
Wokeness Manifested: The Lack of Common Sense Decision-Making
To be “woke” is to be politically correct or “progressive” by Millennial standards, which means not using words like “stupid” despite the fact that there definitely is such a thing as a stupid question.
Under a constructivist mindset for information gathering, your unique lived experience informs much of what you discern to be fact from fiction - even though you’re just forming an opinion. As a result, unconscious biases form to accompany your opinion*, further perpetuating whatever notion you’ve decided to create in your head as reality. This means that it is technically “politically correct” to be okay with things like Martin vs. Boise, even though it contributes to a humanitarian crisis and the premature death of millions. On a very surface level, this ruling is great - you can sleep on the streets at night, hooray, but as Part 3 will discuss, this is simply not the case.
A more “young people” example of how wokeness can totally eradicate the common sense from decision-making is in the creation of groups like White People For Black Lives. Though I fully support the WP4BL platform, this should theoretically be a totally unnecessary organization as the Black Lives Matter organization should already incorporate white people as a part of their platform (along with every other racial and cultural group wanting to end the trend of police killing unarmed Black men and women, which should be fucking everyone, including the police).
As a Caucasian woman, I don’t need to join a group of people who look like me in order to help people who don’t look like me. I need to be led by the people who know this problem best: Black thought leaders, educators, policy-makers, game changers, the men, women, children and people who have to deal with unconscious racial biases on a daily basis. That’s who I want informing my knowledge capital on this crisis.
I know it’s a crazy notion, but seriously, when I tackle a major social issue, I like to be led by the contextually-smartest people in the room. I can totally see what WP4BL were trying to do, but it just shows the rest of the world how dated and misunderstood the nature of racial inequality is to the progressive American public who do not reside in these demographic groups. Further more, we’re all humans trying to tackle the same issue, so uniting under one organization will help achieve the goals of both organizations in a far more streamlined manner, while also reducing racial segregation through cross-cultural bridging in action. Though I appreciate the sentiment, you can see where the common sense was lost in this decision-making process, as perpetuated by the in-group out-group biases that separate most Americans down racial lines.
The greatest part of using this example to force my point is that I know a hefty number of people will assume I am shitting on the work conducted by BLM and WP4BL. In actuality, I think these groups are excellent. All I am trying to point out is that self-segregation is not “woke”; it makes these problems harder to tackle, and often so much worse - trust me, I spend all day writing and researching other people’s PhD dissertations about how most racial issues are worse in the US than they were ten years ago, and how the rest of the world really looks down on the way that liberal Americans discuss race. The irony that wokeness perpetuates our segregation in this way makes my skin crawl, but all of this has stemmed from the constructivist approach to information gathering.
Some of you may know the impacts of constructivism from terms like “virtue signaling,” and you are considered “progressive” if you agree with affiliated concepts on a surface level, attend a rally, perhaps post a bit on social media. The modern world does not ask you to think too critically about these issues, which is why wokeness is successfully ruining your life. We have become lazy in our investigation of social phenomena, and are no longer intellectual enough to work together as a team to mitigate them. Don’t even get me started on this theme of “having no leadership” by social groups and organizations… it’s like they want to fail in everything their attempting.
The key to mitigating the impacts of constructivism and faux-wokeness is to start with understanding the very nature of human behavior: most of us are awful, we were never meant to live in large societies, and if we can get away with horrible shit, we will, every single time. In ignorance of this, we have instituted policies that, only on this very surface level, are good for society, but actually play into the social decline you’re living through.
Of the many, many ways in which wokeness ruins most of my days, the next discussion is one of the few I am extremely qualified to discuss, debate, and scream about… you’re going to hate me for it, but only because I haven’t broken your unconscious biases yet: drug decriminalization is bad (under the current social systems of the United States).
*A huge number of wannabe thought leaders in Unconscious Bias will tell you that having unconscious biases is perfectly acceptable, which it simply is not: you all need to work harder to be better people, and the “unconscious” nature of these biases just makes you an ignorant person.