It should not surprise anyone that the government misspends and mismanages our tax dollars. The Democratic Party can scream about the rich paying their 'fair share' all they want, but the mathematical reality is this: the rich do not make or have enough wealth to cover what the government spends.
And when institutions like FEMA take the money meant for natural disaster aid and use it to rehouse and import illegal aliens, it's not just maddening -- it's wrong.
But here's another shining example of a government agency wasting our money on things not related to its intended purpose:
1/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is using tax dollars to investigate Climate Change using an intersectional lens to understand Indigenous Gender Vulnerability.
I am not making this up.
Let's talk about how the USDA may be the most woke government agency.
A Thread/🧵 pic.twitter.com/17UsQN3cu0
What does the USDA have to do with climate change or 'indigenous gender vulnerability'?
Nothing.
2/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
The forward to the paper above was written by Linda Krueger, who is works for the United States Forest Service in the USDA.
In that paper she bemoans the lack of discussion about gender in climate science. pic.twitter.com/hTjd7JgNuN
'Lack of discussion' on two things that have no relation whatsoever.
3/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
Gabriele Roesch-McNally is a Northwest Climate Hub fellow, who also wrote a paper for the American Farmland Trust about the state of gender equity in American agriculture. pic.twitter.com/StFTOHSGXa
Who cares about 'gender equity' in American agriculture?
These people are insufferable.
4/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
In that paper they talk about "women lead farms" but when they talk about women they include "gendered women, transfeminine women, and femme-presenting non-binary people who are marginalized by misogyny or impacted by women-related issues." pic.twitter.com/obeLv6WsB1
So not women.
5/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
The paper goes on to claim that one of the major barriers that women face in farming is "internalized sexism."
They think there are fewer successful women farmers because women have internalized "negative stereotypes and expectations held by the culture at large." pic.twitter.com/DEhzQMfz6R
Yeah, that's not it.
'Internalized sexism' is not a thing.
6/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
This is an idea that comes out of the academic literature associated with Critical Social Justice. The term appears to originate with Suzanne Lipsky, and she traces the idea back to the Brazillion Neo-Marxist Paulo Freire. pic.twitter.com/jb41Sg7LtU
Always, invariably, boils down to communism.
7/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
That same article also discusses "implicit discrimination" which is related to the concept of "implicit bias" that is found in the literature from Critical Race Theory pic.twitter.com/BMUpmyz0P6
Ah. Critical Race Theory. We were wondering when that was going to show up.
8/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
What I want you to see here is that the USDA is being staffed by a number of people who are using the resources of the USDA to do what amounts to Critical Social Justice scholarship. They are using government money to research their ideological pet projects.
It's like one big, giant piggy bank they smash and steal from.
9/
— Wokal Distance (@wokal_distance) October 2, 2024
The federal government is not a slush fund for leftist activists to use for their own purposes. We need to stop them from using federal resources and government money to fund the research of their pet projects.
/fin
We absolutely do.
This is ridiculous, and expensive and -- as we're learning in North Carolina -- dangerously deadly.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member