Author name: Josh Slocum

Scottish Government Tells High Court Men Can Too Get Pregnant
News

Scottish Government Tells High Court Men Can Too Get Pregnant

/

Oh, Scotland. You were once a kingdom celebrated in legend and song for your marauding men and bonnie lasses scrapping it out on the border with England as you fought to maintain your culture. Your border reivers were the forerunners of the outlaws and cowboys in the American West. You gave the world James I (of England), who gave the world the most revered translation of the Bible. 

Now, you’re in court making asses out of yourselves. And for what? “Pregnant men” and “male lesbians.” 

That’s right. There is a case before the Scottish Supreme Court right now to settle the issue of whether men and women actually exist, or whether bureaucrats with tick-boxes decide the biological reality of humans. Ministers from the Scottish National Party are donning their wigs to argue that there is such a thing as a male lesbian, and a pregnant man. 

The dispute stems from a 2018 decision by the Scots government to define “woman” as “anyone living as a woman.” Astute readers will instantly see that this is a circular definition, therefore it is no definition at all. The feminist group For Women Scotland challenged this definition, sensibly arguing that it was irrational. The observe that the government cannot achieve its goal of equal participation by women in government if it cannot define what a woman is, and if it includes men in the category “women.”

Lawyers for the group are in the unenviable—and deeply stupid—position of explaining to judges that it is not “transphobic” to state “biological sex is real.”

Yes, Wokespy reader, it’s confusing even for this writer as I try to explain it to you. 

The question before the high court now is whether to leave standing a government definition that says anyone, including men, who has a “gender recognition certificate” qualifies as a “woman” under the law. A GRC is sort of like a driver’s license for gender, except it doesn’t indicate anything real. Any man can rock up to the government and do some pro-forma blathering about how he “lives as a woman” and get a GRC. 

The government’s witnesses will be there in court to argue that men can be women, and that men can be pregnant, and that women can be men. It is not clear whether they also believe the moon can be made of green cheese if it so identifies, but we will keep you updated. 

Let’s see what X/Twitter users think of this farce. 

New Texas College Ditches DEI for “MEI”
National Affairs

New Texas College Ditches DEI for “MEI”

/

The Supreme Court Struck down so-called “affirmative action” in 2023. The policy was a mainstay of U.S. colleges and universities. The idea was created in the 1960s when President John F. Kennedy, in response to growing positive sentiment toward civil rights for blacks, decided to create the Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity in 1961. In an accompanying executive order, Kennedy used the phrase “affirmative action” to describe the actions he thought American institutions should take to actively correct perceived or real racial imbalances and discrimination. 

It took off like wildfire in the liberal university world. In practice, affirmative action meant that schools were admitting black and other minority students at higher rates than before, even though many or most could not meet the same standards as other students who were admitted. Yes, meaning white students. Affirmative action became so entrenched in American culture that questioning whether it was right or fair to let academically sub-par students into schools (thereby depriving more capable applicants because they were white) would get a person accused of racism. But then again, what common sense statement doesn’t provoke accusations of racism anymore? 

American colleges were doing the Ibram X. Kendi program long before Ibram Henry Rogers (his real name) came along with his racist agenda that he called “anti-racist.” Kendi famously wrote that “the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.” Yes, that’s right. He really did write that. More surprising is how many millions of allegedly sensible Americans went right along with it, agreeing that it was a moral good to discriminate against white people in order to preferentially advance black people. 

The name for this practice is “racism.”

It will take years before colleges truly end race-based admissions, if they ever really do, which seems doubtful. It’s stupidly easy to get around the ban on affirmative action by relabeling the practice and playing dumb. Robert VerBruggen, writing in City Journal, discusses how universities can easily continue to favor minority-ethnic applicants by using different language, and by tweaking recruiting methods. For example:

 At a minimum, top colleges responding to an affirmative-action ban could be expected to expand recruiting efforts and expand preferences for low-income applicants. More aggressively, they might extensively calibrate their socioeconomic preferences to target blacks and Hispanics—such as giving a boost to kids who come from single-parent families or who speak a language other than English at home.

But at least one new college is taking meritocracy seriously; the University of Austin. Over the weekend on 60 Minutes, they profiled that school, which admits on MEI: Merit, Excellence, and Intelligence. 

To quote from 60 Minutes:

In a former Texas department store, the University of Austin, known as UATX, started classes this fall with a say-anything, shout-nothing philosophy. UATX’s motto is “the pursuit of truth.”

The school swaps DEI — diversity, equity and inclusion — for what some call MEI: merit, excellence and intelligence. UATX, co-founded by historian Niall Ferguson, launched with a focus on encouraging free speech and open debate. 

“University forms the way you think about the world for the rest of your life,” Ferguson said. “If our universities are screwed up, and I believe they are, then that will screw up America as a whole quite quickly.”

Faculty members and advisers to the school are an ideological mix including Larry Summers, Steven Pinker, Deirdre McCloskey, Leon Kass, Jonathan Haidt, Glenn Loury, Joshua Katz, Tyler Tyler, Richard Dawkins, among many others.

Give the segment a watch for yourself – it’s something you won’t see at any other colleges in America, with few exceptions.

X users were quick to point out that it should not be controversial to have an admissions policy that prioritizes competence and intelligence. 

Most reactions were positive:

New York School Teaches 5-Year-Olds About Transsexualism
News

New York School Teaches 5-Year-Olds About Transsexualism

/

Remember the song?

“School days, school days
Dear old Golden Rule days
‘Reading and ‘riting and ‘rithmetic
Taught to the tune of the hick’ry stick”

The 1907 ditty is probably not allowed to be played in any American school, or even referred to historically, since the modern consensus is that hitting children with a stick is abusive. And we don’t abuse children in our public schools, do we? 

That’s one of the “fascinating” bits of double-think in modern life: the notion that only physical hitting is abusive, and that it’s the only kind of mistreatment society should take seriously. Warping the minds of children is just fine though. No, it’s more than fine. It’s loving and beautiful, and so very necessary. That’s what adherents of “gender ideology” tell us when they justify their strange desire to tell children that they are “born in the wrong body,” and to instruct public school children on the right way to enjoy masturbation. 

From experience, this writer knows that what schools are pushing on kids is so dire, and so bizarre, that many adults simply will not believe it, even when the evidence is put in front of them. They remember bells between class periods, orderly lines at the cafeteria, and history classes that taught history instead of hard-left ideology. 

But adults need to get an emotional grip and accept the truth: pornography and perversion is standard academic fare in American public schools. And parents who object are treated as if they were, somehow, the perverts and deviants for wanting to keep smut out of their children’s schools. 

Take the book “Genderqueer” by Maia Kobabe, who wants you to believe that she is a genderless “non-binary” being. The book, a graphic novel (in every sense of the term), depicts drawings of masturbation, fellatio, and more, between minors. Would you be shocked to know that it’s available in public school libraries around the country? Would you be shocked to know that most school boards defend the book even when they shut down parents for reading from it at meetings because the contents are too obscene?

It’s true. 

Trump may have won the election, but the left will not easily give up the mind control it has been allowed to have over our children for at least a decade. Take this kindergarten curriculum from New York State’s Hillside School. Again, this is a curriculum for kindergarteners. For five-year-olds. LibsofTikTok brings the news:

Do you want your 5-year-old learning about transsexualism so that he may one day discover his true womanly self? 

X/Twitter users don’t. 

AOC Glitches Out: Keeping Men Out of Women’s Bathrooms is “Endangering Women”
Left-wing extremism

AOC Glitches Out: Keeping Men Out of Women’s Bathrooms is “Endangering Women”

/

It’s going to take some time for the liberal tears to dry up after the resounding victory of conservative politics on November 5. Not only did Donald Trump win the presidency, but Republicans kept the Senate, took the House, and the Supreme Court has a conservative majority. 

As the kids say (are they still saying this?), the situation has left Democrats with “big feels.” Not used to being told no, they’re throwing tantrums on MSNBC where the hosts can’t seem to control their emotions long enough to deliver a newscast without twitching. Some of the staff there are telling themselves fibs to get through it, like Chris Hayes. Hayes is very unhappy that the majority of Americans went for MAGA, so he’s written an article about how reality never happened. 

Yes, Chris, voters do want a MAGA makeover, and they’re going to get one. “Narrow win?” What’s next-accusations that Republicans have small genitalia? 

That MAGA makeover is starting up in the Capitol Building itself. The most recent dustup is over men using women’s bathrooms. Enter “Sarah” (formerly Tim) McBride, an oily gay man who put on a dress and calls himself a woman. McBride was just elected to the House of Representatives from Delaware, leading to a gush of articles about the “first transgender representative!” With any luck, we’ll soon be hearing about the last of that. 

Republican Rep. Nancy Mace isn’t having any of it. As any person of common sense would have said a mere 10 years ago, Mace stated that men have no place in women’s bathrooms, and she expects Congress to make sure that transvestites like McBride go to the men’s room where they belong. They are, after all, men. 

Liberal media are calling Mace’s statement a “cynical transphobic attack,” of course. 

Too bad. The lunatic fringe lost this one. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, after initially wimping out when questioned about whether he’d keep men out of the ladies’ room, announced that bathrooms in the Capitol are to be sorted by biological sex. You know, like always was until the West lost its everloving mind in the 20-teens and decided that sex was something you could put on like lipstick. 

Our Lady of Histrionics, NY Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, got out her big doe eyes and went full hysterical. She called Mace dangerous, and said this:

“They’re endangering women. They’re endangering girls of all kinds. And everybody should reject it. It’s gross.”

That’s right. Republicans are “endangering women” by protecting them from men in their bathrooms. Oh also, AOC? There is only one kind of girl—the female kind. And Tim McBride is not female. 

She also went on to complain that “They’re doing this so that Nancy Mace can make a buck and send a text and fundraise off an email. They’re not doing this to protect people,” as if this hasn’t been a stance taken by most Republicans since the trans issue became an issue.

AOC also claimed that Republicans want a world where every woman’s genitals are inspected upon entering the bathroom, despite this never having happened anywhere that trans bathroom “bans” exist.

Let’s see what X users had to say. 

Democrats Rush to Self-Sterilize After Trump’s Election (Yes, Really)
Left-wing extremism

Democrats Rush to Self-Sterilize After Trump’s Election (Yes, Really)

/

It seems clear that leftists really are afraid of children, while at the same time acting like kids who got plonked into grown-up bodies. The histrionic wailing of leftist women nationwide about the alleged danger of Donald Trump to women’s “reproductive rights” has carried through post-election. Of course, “reproductive rights” anymore simply means “I want an abortion any time, any place, and I take zero responsibility for my sexual choices that might get me pregnant in the first place.”

Prominent screecher Mike Brezinski, co-host along with her husband Joe Scarborough of the MSNBC show “Morning Joe,” has gone farther than most. She straight up said that Donald Trump is “killing us,” and “killing women.” How these murders are taking place is not specified. And why the two of them then met with Trump after those comments remains a mystery – it’s almost as if they don’t believe their own hysterical rhetoric.

The Democrats blanketed the airwaves (OK, it’s 2024: “the internet”) with ham-handed political ads depicting a real-life Handmaid’s Tale if Trump were to be elected. One of the funniest was this ad showing two young women trying to “make it to the state line” to get out of their oppressive state for an abortion. A cop with an accent straight out of the 1970s movie Deliverance ends up cuffing the female driver and bending her over the hood of the car (yes, that implication seems to have been deliberate). Movie-psychopath look-alike Gavin Newsom, governor of California, still features the ad on his TikTok feed. 

Well, Trump has been elected, and the fever has not broken. According to CBS, the company that makes the “Plan B” abortion pill said sales went up 1,000 percent right after Trump’s election. Abortion and trans-hormones-to-harm-your-kids dealer Planned Parenthood is saying their requests for the implantation of intra-uterine devices (IUD), a form of contraception, are up almost 800 percent since November 5. 

It’s not just women. According to PP, men are asking for vasectomies in droves, with requests up 1,200 percent.

It really does appear that, to young liberals, the prospect of having children frightens them even more than “climate change,” or whatever “genocide” they fantasize is going on in Gaza. When and how did we become a society for whom the prospect of having kids is seen as a punishment and an infringement on a happy life? 

Let’s see what X/Twitter has to say about it. 

The reaction has not been kind. 

Libs Eat Each Other Alive on Piers Morgan Cat Fight
Election

Libs Eat Each Other Alive on Piers Morgan Cat Fight

/

How much faith do you put in political polling? How closely do the results of important political elections match the predictions put out by pollsters and pundits? That’s what’s on a lot of voters’ minds as, once again, Donald Trump beat expectations and predictions, winning the presidency by a wider margin than polls predicted. 

Al Jazeera notes that it appears that pollsters undercounted and under-weighted Trump support just as they seemed to have done in the 2016 presidential election. “Yet eventually, Trump cruised to a comfortable victory, defying most polls,” wrote Shola Lawal. One wonders if the personal liberal  bias found in academia is also present among professional pollsters. 

That leftist tilt in media is beyond dispute. And in the more leftist outlets such as National Public Radio, the bias is so stark as to be laughable. At the cost of his job, NPR veteran editor Uri Berliner found that there was not a single registered Republican of the 87 reporters and editors in NPR’s D.C. offices. 

Election prognosticator Allan Lichtman, a historian, got a lot of media attention this presidential cycle as he usually does. Lichtman, a liberal, has a system for predicting the results of elections based on what he calls 13 “keys” to the White House. While he has correctly predicted nine of the last 10 presidential elections, his record took a hit in 2024 when he confidently predicted a Kamala Harris victory.

Leftist podcaster Cenk Uygur of the show The Young Turks castigated Lichtman during an appearance both of them made on Piers Morgan’s show “Uncensored.” During the heated exchange, Uygur told Lichtman his “keys were absurd,” and that he got it all wrong. Lichtmann reacted immediately, yelling that he was “not wrong!” and that he, Lichttman, had more support than Uygur from online fans. 

From there, it devolved into a teen-girl cat fight, complete with pointing fingers and huffing and puffing. Collin Rugg has some fun with it on X/Twitter:

So did Rugg’s followers:

Yes, yes, Liberacrat, I do enjoy it. 

https://x.com/Wall_St_Custo/status/1859019608835187084

Roommate of Laken Riley’s Accused Killer Says Government Paid for Alleged Killer’s Plane Fare to Georgia
Border

Roommate of Laken Riley’s Accused Killer Says Government Paid for Alleged Killer’s Plane Fare to Georgia

/

The political and cultural atmosphere in the United States—what’s considered “normal”—has changed so drastically, so quickly, that it is often surreal to write news articles about current events. A writer asks himself, “Can this really be the case?” While Donald Trump’s presidential victory (along with Republicans keeping the Senate and taking the House) has turned a page, the story Americans have been living under for years is going to take years to be rewritten.

Just 10 years ago, any normal, sane adult would have reacted with horror and outrage if anyone suggested chemically and permanently sterilizing children, or cutting off the breasts of teenage girls. And then, somehow, in just five years, it became forbidden to express horror at the mutilation of children. All of a sudden, overnight, this Mengele-level nightmare became called “gender affirming care.” All of a sudden, overnight, parents could have their children taken away by the state for trying to protect their children from this abuse. 

We can call it a moral reversal, a fever dream, an inversion of morality—no words seem strong enough to convey the bizarre depravity that has somehow become the real world we live in. 

It’s with that in mind that we bring you sickening news about another shibboleth we’re not supposed to cross: illegal aliens in the U.S. who rape and murder us and our children. You probably know of the killing of 22-year-old Georgia college student Laken Riley. She went for a jog on February 22, 2024, and never came home. Her body was later found. She had been raped and bludgeoned over the head with a rock such that her face was unrecognizable. 

Illegal alien José Ibarra is on trial right now for her rape and murder. The Venezuelan man first jumped the border into the U.S. in 2022. But like most criminal aliens who broke into the country under the Biden administration, Ibarra was released by Border Patrol to just go free. So he went to New York City.

And then he went to Georgia, setting the stage for Laken Riley’s killing. 

All of this is outrageous enough on its own, but unbelievably, it gets worse. Well-known X (Twitter) account LibsofTikTok brings us this:

Ibarra’s roommate, also an illegal alien, told the Georgia court trying José Ibarra that the two of them made their way to Georgia on the taxpayer’s dime. She, the roommate,  claims she and Ibarra just walked over to the Roosevelt Hotel in Manhattan (now a flophouse for hundreds of illegal aliens mooching off your tax dollars) and asked for a plane ticket to Georgia, and they got it. 

Here we are in 2024. It’s now “normal” for foreign nationals to break into the country and be immediately released by “Border Patrol.” Then, the scofflaws get to live off welfare benefits we pay for. Then, the scofflaws get taxpayer-funded moving costs to fly anywhere in the country they please. And now, one of them is on trial (again, at our expense) for raping and murdering an American woman.

This writer has run out of words. Let’s see what social media users have to say about it. 

Whoopi Goldberg Promises to Withhold Relations; American Men Rejoice
Whoopi Goldberg speaks about her bookk, "Bits and Pieces," with Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden during a special presentation, May 10, 2024. Photo by Shawn Miller/Library of Congress. Note: Privacy and publicity rights for individuals depicted may apply.
News

Whoopi Goldberg Promises to Withhold Relations; American Men Rejoice

/

Remember the dock workers’ strike from earlier this year? The International Longshoreman’s Association (the union of dock workers) demanded a huge increase in wages along with other benefits, and they got most of what they wanted pretty quickly. In the end, the union ended up with a 62 percent pay raise over the next several years. 

Why did it work? Because the east coast and gulf ports involved in the strike handled about half the goods imported into the U.S. The strike threatened to slow down business to a crawl and to put prices through the roof in the middle of some of the worst inflation in U.S. history. 

It worked because the dock workers provided something Americans valued: abundant goods at affordable prices. No person in the United States would have been unaffected by a long-term strike. 

In plain terms, strikes work when they withhold something that other people want. 

Given that, one wonders what comedian and co-host of ABC’s The View, Whoopi Goldberg, may be thinking. See, she’s going on a sex strike. Why? On account of a vulgar comment by Jew-hating weirdo Nick Fuentes.

Fuentes stirred up female anger during his election-night livestream by mocking the feminist pro-abortion slogan, “My body, my choice.” Fuentes turned it around, stating, “Your body, my choice.” It’s understandable that women would find this objectionable, but feminists have a difficult time keeping things in perspective. Fuentes cannot, of course, control anyone’s body but his own, and the comment was clearly trolling to get a rise out of them.

But whenever there’s an opportunity for hysterical shrieking, feminists take it and run for the end zone. It wasn’t just online screeching; one pissed-off woman insanely showed up at Fuentes’ door and rang the bell only to be pepper-sprayed.

What does any of this have to do with Whoopi Goldberg?

It was Fuentes’ crass remark that prompted her announcement of support for a “sex strike.” Goldberg said, “If we don’t let you, you don’t get any.”

Who is she talking to? Who, specifically, will now be prevented from “getting” “any?” So far as is ascertainable, Goldberg does not normally provide marital relations to the general public. It is unclear why she believes she is withholding something that no one has been asking for.

Making matters even more bizarre is the fact that Goldberg is not capable of getting pregnant.

Do admit:

Wokespy did not find any evidence online of dispirited men who might be moved by Goldberg’s strike, but we did find these reactions:

Canadian Trans Activists Want to Scuttle Name-Change Law That Outs Criminals
News

Canadian Trans Activists Want to Scuttle Name-Change Law That Outs Criminals

/

Consider the alias. Writers throughout history have used aliases that we call “pen names.” Stephen King wrote books under the name “Richard Bachman.” Joanne Rowling, author of the Harry Potter series, has launched a successful string of novels for adults under the name Robert Galbraith. 

On the everyday level, normal people frequently use pseudonyms to post their thoughts online. Some just want privacy, some want to avoid being publicly chastised for thinking politically incorrect things. 

But what of the other reasons to use an assumed name? What other category of people do we think of when we imagine someone going through life under a series of different names? Criminals, naturally. If you want to avoid detection for your crimes, changing your name is one way to throw a roadblock between you and the cops pursuing you. In the modern digital age, it’s harder to change your identity and stay hidden, of course. But a disguise does not have to be perfect. Like a lock on a door, it only needs to slow down your pursuers enough to give you time to escape. 

In all these cases  the motivation to use a pseudonym is the need or desire to hide something. And few classes of people want to hide something more than the so-called “transgendered.” Oh, sure, they claim that it’s “harmful” to their mental health to be called by their “dead name” (the name they were given at birth that corresponds to their actual sex), but this is a feint. If it does indeed “hurt” to hear your real name, that’s a personal problem, not a responsibility of others in society. 

Why, then, are transgender activists in Canada demanding that the province of British Columbia reverse a law that bans dangerous criminals from changing their name? Independent outlet Reduxx:

Social justice legal group West Coast LEAF issued a press release, signed by numerous trans activist groups and organizations, demanding the change on November 7. In their letter, the groups claim that the province’s legislation ‘harms those most in need of legal name changes, including transgender people, Indigenous people, and survivors of gender-based violence.’

The activists claim, contrary to reality, that “transgender” people are at constant risk of being murdered for “being trans.” But in all of 2023, only 35 “trans” people were murdered  in the U.S. by the official count, and mostly because they were working as prostitutes and/or associating with a criminal element. Thirty-five homicides annually is so small as to be a lower rate of homicide than the general population – but don’t expect to hear that from a trans activist anytime soon.

Here are the other possible motivations the activists don’t want you to contemplate:

  • Escaping the criminal record earned under the correctly sexed birth name
  • Using a different name so that a potential employer who screens candidates against the sex offender registry cannot detect a sex offender

It should be very easy to see why a person with nefarious motivations, say, a pedophile who wants a job as a preschool teacher, would want to claim it’s a human rights violation to be prevented from changing his name. 

The Reduxx article above cites the horrific case of Alan Schoenborn in BC that led to the law banning violent criminals from changing their names. Schoenborn killed his three young children in 2008, and then campaigned to be allowed to keep his new legal pseudonym secret from the public. 

Will British Columbia cave to these demands and put the public in danger once again by scuttling the law? It’s impossible to say, but the public is getting fed up to the back teeth with these demands from mentally unstable perverts, and the social media response shows it. Here’s a sampling. 

This is hardly the first story of this genre. As we reported earlier this year at Wokespy, a Tennessee bill to allow for the death penalty for child rapists was also excoriated by the LGBTQ+ “community.”

This kind of depraved thinking isn’t just relegated to the left’s alphabet faction either. Just last September, most Democrats in the House voted against a bill to deport illegal aliens who rape women, and to refuse any convicted sex offenders into the country. 

It should serve as just the latest reminder to never give the left the benefit of the doubt.

They really just are depraved.

Far-Left Race Baiting Publication Thinks Trump Is Bringing Slavery Back
News

Far-Left Race Baiting Publication Thinks Trump Is Bringing Slavery Back

/

You knew it was coming. 

“The Root” is a radical leftist magazine by and for blacks. But it’s not like black magazines from the mainstream, like Jet or Ebony. It’s as woke as woke can get. For the staff of The Root, there is no such thing as a morally honorable white person, and there is no such thing as a white person who is not racist. 

You are already picture the exact kind of ideological drivel they peddle.

Though they would never say it candidly and would scream and protest if someone pushed them on it, the magazine thinks white people are born devils. Call it WDS-”White Derangement Syndrome.” They especially hate competent conservative white women such as former Fox News journalist-turned-podcaster Megyn Kelly: 

“Karen,” when used by radical black activists, means “white woman we don’t like.” Why don’t they like Megyn Kelly? Because Kelly recognizes that nightly MSNBC ranter in chief Joy Reid is a narcissistic, dishonest blowhard who can’t seem to figure out who she is judging by the parade of wigs featured weekly on her show. Just take a look at one of them….

That’s enough. 

So, what’s The Root on about today? The return of slavery under Donald Trump!

Yes. Really.

They write:

“It’s a question Black Americans have been asking for a while, and now that former President Donald Trump has won back the Oval Office, it’s on everyone’s mind: Can slavery make an official comeback?”

Notice carefully: official comeback. This is an actual “dog whistle,” a coded bit of language that signals to radical black readers, “Slavery is still happening in America, we just don’t call it slavery for some reason.”

Here’s more:

“Reflexively, the answer to this seemingly crazy question should be “hell no,” but if you take just five minutes to Google it, you’d be surprised to know we’re not too far from that reality. In 2022, slavery was on the ballot in five states, according to AP News. Talk show host and author Tavis Smiley expressed growing fears of slavery right before the 2016 election. Going back to the 13th Amendment, legal loopholes still allow for slavery today.”

Wow. The Associated Press? It must be true. But is it? When you click on the link, you find out otherwise (emphasis added):

“More than 150 years after slaves were freed in the U.S., voters in five states will soon decide whether to close loopholes that led to the proliferation of a different form of slavery — forced labor by people convicted of certain crimes.”

That’s right. The practice of forcing convicted criminals to do hard labor is now “slavery.” And what’s more, Donald Trump is gonna bring it back. Therefore, Trump is bringing back slavery in the minds of The Root.

I’d say this kind of reasoning is “unbelievable,” but really, is anything unbelievable from the radical identity politics left? 

Let’s see what X/Twitter users had to say on The Root’s thread about the article. 


Scroll to Top