Chicago Boyz

What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?

  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Worthwhile Watching

    Posted by David Foster on October 14th, 2020 (All posts by )

    A thoughtful video in which a young woman (who first worked as a teacher and later as a nurse) explains her reasons for walking away from the Democratic Party. Long, but interesting.

    1.4 million views and 32,000 subscribers so far.


    4 Responses to “Worthwhile Watching”

    1. Jay Guevara Says:

      ” … I know how people feel about conservatives …”

      “… I didn’t want to think that they would be feeling that way about me.”

      Therein lies the motivation and the point of leftists vilifying conservatives: to keep their sheeple in line, for fear of being ostracized.

      It also makes clear why a lot of white women subscribe to leftist thinking. It takes nerve to buck social pressure, and white women are generally very social creatures.

    2. Jay Guevara Says:

      OK, I just got back and finished watching this whole cri de coeur.

      This gal is very impressive; she’s clearly very bright and exceptionally articulate. It’s disturbing that someone this bright could be buffaloed so thoroughly for so long.

      I remember with stark clarity my own “road to Damascus” moment. I’d just arrived in Berkeley to begin grad school as a young “right on” fashionably left college student. For the first three months I felt increasing philosophical tension, owing to the dissonance between the paradise the left had promised if they ran things, and the train wreck that was Berkeley, where they did run things. I was walking across Sproul Plaza, past all of the various leftist tables and signs, when it hit me with almost physical force: all this leftist stuff was rubbish. An enormous weight fell from my shoulders as the philosophical tension was instantly resolved.

      Returning to the video, I’m not sure that she’s through with her evolution, because she doesn’t give any indication that she’s figured out that the purpose of the SJW/ BLM/ woke garbage is to destroy our society as a prerequisite to replacing it with a Marxist one. In the years I spent at Berkeley I became only too familiar with the thought patterns and speech of the hard left, which made it easy to see the purpose of the woke nonsense.

    3. Ginny Says:

      This is a lovely and thoughtful “walk away.” She fuses what she thought with what she felt and describes them so we understand how difficult it is to move out of that leftist tribe.

      In the end, the thing that really convinced her was the experiential – this works, this doesn’t, this is empathic, this isn’t; this has positive consequences, this doesn’t. That’s a rigorous thinker – that’s what critical thinking should be. That’s what Krauthammer said – he’d been writing speeches for Mondale, but he saw that Reagan’s policies worked. I wonder how many people saw that Trump’s policies pulled more people into the middle class than had Obama, indeed, did much more for blacks than Obama. It is interesting that it was teaching in impoverished (mostly by administrative money grabs) schools and then working as a nurse that brought her there. He said he had been trained by medicine – it was the scientific method which always requires consequences to “prove” it works and couldn’t ignore the consequences of each set of policies – Reagan’s and Mondale’s.

      It takes a clear, objective, willingness to turn on one’s self and re-examine what works, it takes a certain submission of ego to the test of what works. It embodies the “disinterestedness” that Matthew Arnold praised. She has a mind, she has character, and she has a large and loving heart. She blends these as we have seen Barrett do in the last few days. She also has remarkable bones and real beauty.

      It does not surprise me that part of her “coming to consciousness” arose from her response to a miscarriage. I thought a year ago that Planned Parenthood and Ralph Northam had managed to push abortion to the place it might have significance in this campaign – those of us who don’t want it outlawed have been forced by them to face the consequences of the positions these politicians have taken and to rethink how far we want it to go. While it still seems to me a necessary option, the thought of celebrating with pink lights on the Trade Center is chilling. And I certainly understand the consistency and value of the Pro-Life movement. The policies in the schools and in the hospitals, the overburden of administration – these, too, are anti-life in the more mundane, daily way but are just as destructive.

    4. Anonymous Says:

      In order to get millions of self proclaimed “woke” progressives, it has to be sold as a crusade for “social justice” aimed at human perfection. The specifics and transistion are kept intensionally vague and moralistic with a big bad strawman to hate. “We the people” will replace the corrupt and greedy power brokers, yada, yada, yada. Until real world experience “beats the stupid out of you” (Bill Whittle), a youngster is much more likely to buy into the cause without any thought to what is actually going to happen, because the cultural icons will lead us onward, just stay in step. The inability to think critically and a distorted historical narrative offer no basis for going against the “woke” paradigm. Social cohesion keeps it going. There is a lot of stupid living the dream.

      The ideological leadership is small, but well placed and adequately funded. What’s to fear from a government funded professional army of community organizers?

      This young woman is a critical thinker. A bunch of youngsters and middle aged tools need to hear her life story.


    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.