What is "woke" in 2024

[Debater Slayer]

1 - Free speech is less important than protecting people from being offended.
2 - Protecting personal liberties is less important than protecting people from being offended.
3 - The world’s people and societies should be viewed from an “oppressed vs. oppressor” perspective.
4 - White people have privilege, and are racist by default.
5 - White cultures are more colonist and imperialist than non-white cultures.
6 - An individual’s “lived experience” should have as much or more weight in public policy than broad statistical facts.
7 - There is an intersectional or oppression hierarchy and any criticism of the “most oppressed” people’s ideas or activism are by default “phobic” or “racist” in some way.
8 - Objectivity, critical thinking, and logic are tools of the oppressors.
9 - The DEI perspective and DEI initiatives must not be criticized.
10 - Diversity (in DEI), is based on race, gender, and sexuality more than on diversity of ideas.
11 - Inclusion (in DEI), is based on race, gender, sexuality, and conformity to woke beliefs, non-conformists are excluded.
12 - Equality (in DEI) means equality of outcomes, not equality of opportunities.
13 - The concerns of the most oppressed are more important than the concerns of the less oppressed.
14 - Cultural appropriation is a significant problem in society.
15- People’s immutable identity characteristics are more important than their behaviors.
16 - The only cultures that can be criticized are western cultures.

I was asking about what you mentioned your son experiencing while in the military. Do you mean that he has experienced the above things, or were there specific things you had in mind?

 

[Nakosis]

First off, I think it’s important to understand that almost all categorization schemes are imperfect. I’m not a fan of identity politics (IP), but IP all too prevalent in society these days, and I admit that when I call someone “woke”, I’m guilty of using IP. So all of the following ideas are approximations and I’m sure imperfect. But I think demanding perfection in this context falls into the trap of making the perfect the enemy of the good.

==

There is at least one political spectrum that runs from the far left, to the moderate left, to the centrists, to the moderate right, to the far right. I would say that there are sets of ideas or beliefs commonly associated with each of these positions on the spectrum. For the sake of discussion, let’s say that for each stop on the spectrum we could enumerate 20 beliefs, most commonly associated with that stop.

Most people will not fall cleanly into a single stop on the spectrum. An individual might align with 15 of the 20 moderate left beliefs, but also believe a few far left ideas and a few conservative ideas. The same can be said of other domains. For example, we know that there is at least one religious spectrum that ranges from hard atheist to religious fundamentalism, with many stops in between.

In other words labels such as “far right” or “woke” or “hard atheist” or “religious fundamentalist” are almost always approximations of an individual, and every individual will believe some things that are inconsistent with whatever label we ascribe to them.

==



With all those caveats and disclaimers in place, below is a list of beliefs ascribed to the far-left / woke, in 2024. The more of them you agree with, the more “woke” you are. And again, no one is perfectly woke or perfectly far right or moderate. These are all rough approximations.

Far-left / woke beliefs:

1 - Free speech is less important than protecting people from being offended.
2 - Protecting personal liberties is less important than protecting people from being offended.
3 - The world’s people and societies should be viewed from an “oppressed vs. oppressor” perspective.
4 - White people have privilege, and are racist by default.
5 - White cultures are more colonist and imperialist than non-white cultures.
6 - An individual’s “lived experience” should have as much or more weight in public policy than broad statistical facts.
7 - There is an intersectional or oppression hierarchy and any criticism of the “most oppressed” people’s ideas or activism are by default “phobic” or “racist” in some way.
8 - Objectivity, critical thinking, and logic are tools of the oppressors.
9 - The DEI perspective and DEI initiatives must not be criticized.
10 - Diversity (in DEI), is based on race, gender, and sexuality more than on diversity of ideas.
11 - Inclusion (in DEI), is based on race, gender, sexuality, and conformity to woke beliefs, non-conformists are excluded.
12 - Equality (in DEI) means equality of outcomes, not equality of opportunities.
13 - The concerns of the most oppressed are more important than the concerns of the less oppressed.
14 - Cultural appropriation is a significant problem in society.
15- People’s immutable identity characteristics are more important than their behaviors.
16 - The only cultures that can be criticized are western cultures.

I don't use the word myself but I've only see it use in the context of being anti-White, anti-(traditional family), anti European culture. Lately it has been a derogatory term used by the "Right".

Briefly it was used having a similar meaning for the Left as the Right use the term "red pilled". Basically becoming aware of the inherent bias in the world. It is not biased however if it happens to be your type of bias.

 

[ChristineM]

I'm asking for clarification, thanks.

There was clarification in my post, you chose ti dismiss it. Not my problem but yours.

 

[Argentbear]

Glad to hear it. But there are millions of people who identify as woke who do believe what I said in the OP.

Evidence?

 

[PureX]

1 - Free speech is less important than protecting people from being offended.

No one thinks this.​

2 - Protecting personal liberties is less important than protecting people from being offended.

No one thinks this.​

3 - The world’s people and societies should be viewed from an “oppressed vs. oppressor” perspective.

Human nature and politics do bear out the validity of this observation. though there are many different criteria that can be used to view human inter-relations.​

4 - White people have privilege, and are racist by default.

Pretty hard to deny.​

5 - White cultures are more colonist and imperialist than non-white cultures.

That is itself a racist accusation.​

6 - An individual’s “lived experience” should have as much or more weight in public policy than broad statistical facts.

This is a nonsensical observation.​

7 - There is an intersectional or oppression hierarchy and any criticism of the “most oppressed” people’s ideas or activism are by default “phobic” or “racist” in some way.

That was poorly stated. Bigots almost never see themselves as being bigots because they believe their bigoted view of reality IS REALITY. So they think they are just "realists", not bigots. And any accusations or implications to the contrary will be viewed as false or dishonest as a result. It makes it very difficult to combat the bigotry.​

8 - Objectivity, critical thinking, and logic are tools of the oppressors.

More nonsensical gibberish. Everyone thinks they're being objective, critically thoughtful, and logical. Almost no one ever is.​

9 - The DEI perspective and DEI initiatives must not be criticized.

No one even knows or cares what these mean except the idiots that think it's a big cultural boogeyman.​

10 - Diversity (in DEI), is based on race, gender, and sexuality more than on diversity of ideas.

Race and sexual identity each embody a whole plethora of ideas.​

11 - Inclusion (in DEI), is based on race, gender, sexuality, and conformity to woke beliefs, non-conformists are excluded.

There is no "woke belief". There is only the cultural boogeyman that some fools have labelled "woke belief".​

12 - Equality (in DEI) means equality of outcomes, not equality of opportunities.

It means both.​

13 - The concerns of the most oppressed are more important than the concerns of the less oppressed.

This is logical from a social triage perspective. And given the state of our society these days, I'd say some emergency measures are called for.​

14 - Cultural appropriation is a significant problem in society.

No one thinks this but those who base their personal identity on their cultural heritage.​

15- People’s immutable identity characteristics are more important than their behaviors.

No one thinks this.​

16 - The only cultures that can be criticized are western cultures.

No one thinks this.​

 

[icehorse]

Evidence?

Again, for perhaps the sixth time this thread, are you aware of the messages detailed by the best selling authors Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo?

 

[icehorse]

Hey @PureX -

To be clear, I think the ideas on that list are for the most part rubbish.

But if you've been glancing at the conversations in this thread you might have seen that I've repeatedly mentioned two best selling authors who champion these ideas: Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo. There are other popular people who also champion these ideas, but I think the two I've listed are more than sufficient to demonstrate that - in fact - millions of people believe these ideas.

So your repeated claims of "no one thinks this" seem contrary to really solid evidence to the contrary.

 

[Argentbear]

The woke believe that their individual "lived experience" should weight heavily in the creation or modification of public policies. They somehow think that as an individual, they should be more than one data point in the population.

Evidence?

 

[Argentbear]

As I've mentioned several times in this thread, even if you only consider the two authors Kendi and DiAngelo, their sales numbers support the conclusion that hundreds of thousands, probably millions of people believe the things in the OP's list. To be clear, those two authors are not the only indicators we have, but I think they represent an easy, clean way to demonstrate the spread of these ideas.

A doesn't follow from B. Sales number doesn't translate into belief or acceptance of the nonsense list you put up in the OP. Should we take the number of copies supermarket tabloids sell every week to claim that all the people reading them believe that little gray aliens are backing Putin in his war against the Ukraine?

 

[icehorse]

A doesn't follow from B. Sales number doesn't translate into belief or acceptance of the nonsense list you put up in the OP. Should we take the number of copies supermarket tabloids sell every week to claim that all the people reading them believe that little gray aliens are backing Putin in his war against the Ukraine?

Sorry, you're going to have to do better than that ham-handed apples and oranges comparison.

 

[Argentbear]

Sorry, you're going to have to do better than that ham-handed apples and oranges comparison.

you have continually claimed that the sales of your two authors shows that "millions" of people think your list of woke beliefs is true. Supermarket tabloids sell millions of copies every week, by your standard millions of readers of tabloids must believe the tabloids claims.

 

[PureX]

Hey @PureX -

To be clear, I think the ideas on that list are for the most part rubbish.

But if you've been glancing at the conversations in this thread you might have seen that I've repeatedly mentioned two best selling authors who champion these ideas: Ibram X Kendi and Robin DiAngelo. There are other popular people who also champion these ideas, but I think the two I've listed are more than sufficient to demonstrate that - in fact - millions of people believe these ideas.

You are assuming that people only buy books that they "believe in". This is quite false. In fact, I'd bet that many of those sales were to people that think 'woke-ism' is the big bad boogerman, and they're reading them to wallow in their outrage and indignation. But mostly I suspect people are buying them because they are just curious since the 'right' is making such a big stink about it. That may well be why they were written to begin with. The money motive generally trumps all the others.

So your repeated claims of "no one thinks this" seem contrary to really solid evidence to the contrary.

People buying a few books is not "really solid evidence to the contrary".

 

[PureX]

Hey @PureX -

To be clear, I think the ideas on that list are for the most part rubbish.

Then why are you so intent on defending it?

What parts DON'T you think are rubbish?

I don't think the observation about white privilege is rubbish, for example.

Nor the observation about cultural misappropriation.

 

[Viker]

The woke believe that their individual "lived experience" should weight heavily in the creation or modification of public policies. They somehow think that as an individual, they should be more than one data point in the population.

So injustice towards them should be ignored for some greater good. Society shouldn't identify and attempt to rectify the circumstances that lead to that injustice?

So, **** justice, especially if it's inconvenient or insignificant?

Just trying to figure out what's bouncing around up there in your head.

BTW. I don't believe in what you wrongfully claim is woke. None of it. My belief is only that there has been injustice, it must be acknowledged, it must be addressed and justice must be served.

 

[Augustus]

With all those caveats and disclaimers in place, below is a list of beliefs ascribed to the far-left / woke, in 2024. The more of them you agree with, the more “woke” you are. And again, no one is perfectly woke or perfectly far right or moderate. These are all rough approximations.

“Woke is simply awareness of injustice “

“Woke is simply anything the far right hates”

“MAGA is being proud of our country and thinking the government should put the American people first”

“MAGA is racism, jingoism, ignorance and worship of Trump.”

The problem is people aren’t going to self identify with those statements, they are framed from an oppositional perspective.

1 - Free speech is less important than protecting people from being offended.
.
3 - The world’s people and societies should be viewed from an “oppressed vs. oppressor” perspective.

So folk would think

1 “we need to find a balance between freedom of speech and hate speech”

3. “We need to protect those without power from those with power who seek to oppress them”

Etc.

The way you present them is as critical observations of the impact of certain ideological beliefs.

At least most of them do relate to things that are implicit in the actions and beliefs of many “progressive activist” types.

As to how common they are in society as a whole I’ve no idea, but it’s non-negligible.

It’s also perfectly obvious that many criticisms of “wokery” are not simply the bad faith bigotry of the far right, yet the fact that much of the criticism is the bad faith bigotry of the far right means, for many, that the rest can be dismissed as such.

Threads like this are just too general and have too many points relating to emotive partisan subjectivities to lead to particularly productive discussions.

 

[crossfire]

As I've mentioned several times in this thread, even if you only consider the two authors Kendi and DiAngelo, their sales numbers support the conclusion that hundreds of thousands, probably millions of people believe the things in the OP's list. To be clear, those two authors are not the only indicators we have, but I think they represent an easy, clean way to demonstrate the spread of these ideas.

Millions of people have also read Mein Kampf, but that doesn't mean they believe in it

 

[amorphous_constellation]

I wouldn't say "oppress themselves" per se, since autocratic governments tend to be the class imposing the oppression on the rest of the population. The rest of society would not be oppressing themselves, as they would have little to no control over the country's systems and institutions.

I think that in many cases, it would be accurate to say a country was "oppressing its own society," as you described it—with "country" primarily referring to those in power.

Not to be pedantic , but perhaps just for the sake of conversation, I might add that perhaps an autocratic government can oppress itself. This would happen both to the various people in that government, who cannot fully express what they think to a leader, and it might actually happen within the very minds of the leaders themselves. Because I would assume that it is a tortured mind, or a mind that tortures or corrupts conscious, that would keep following such a style.

The above is more tied to nationality than skin color, so I don't think "white privilege" is a particularly accurate term to describe it. However, for many people in some countries (including some outside the West), being white is also tied to positive perceptions or sometimes, I would say, stereotypes—such as being affluent, beautiful, educated, etc. Here's an article I read a while back concerning this topic as it supposedly relates to South Korea,

Alright, I read that. I reminded of a term I heard of a little while ago, and I wonder it's relevant here. The term is called 'colorism,' and if I am perceiving the term correctly, it can refer to a sort of self-criticism, or even self-hate. I guess my initial reaction to learning of this term, is to say that one should probably like or love oneself, as opposed to doing thinking through the lens of colorism. There are surely always positive things to like about yourself, your culture.. but not in a way to where it turns into a comparison game, I think

My culture does have some hierarchical problems, although parts of it are maybe hard for me to see, I'll put that on the table, and it's frustrating to see that maybe certain things about it might be imitated, that aren't the greatest things to imitate. But at the same time, I have to wonder if that's the whole story.. Western culture, from what I can tell, has undergone some really radical changes from even 100 years ago. That might make an interesting thread to think about.. Comparing point for point, what things were like 100 years to now

And also, yeah I mean there was a time surely, when there wasn't nearly as much influence crosscurrent. So one wonders what was going on in many different places when things were more isolated, and that's a reason for reading history, and old philosophy

 

[amorphous_constellation]

So folk would think

1 “we need to find a balance between freedom of speech and hate speech”

3. “We need to protect those without power from those with power who seek to oppress them”

I guess you can think of that as like a primary belief barrier, that all sides could actually use, in defending anything. Maybe.. hopefully that isn't biting off more than I can chew. Really what you are expressing there is sort of a cover letter of self-concern, that all, or most views could potentially preface themselves with. It's saying that yes, the person expressing the view probably does believe in it

 

[Viker]

1 - Free speech is less important than protecting people from being offended.

Slander, verbal abuse, violent rhetoric, hate are designed to offend. And in many cases shouldn't be considered "Free speech". Genuine free speech must be vigilantly protected.


2 - Protecting personal liberties is less important than protecting people from being offended.

Nonsense, for the longest time no one gave a damn about certain other Americans personal liberties. For me, personal liberties, civil or constitutional rights are the very center of the fight ahead.


3 - The world’s people and societies should be viewed from an “oppressed vs. oppressor” perspective.

Unfortunately, there are oppressors and oppressed. To suggest otherwise is suggesting there's no such thing as oppression. Just like not everyone has or is being oppressed, not everyone are oppressors either.


4 - White people have privilege, and are racist by default.

You'd have to be living under a rock in an isolated forest to not notice that in a place like America that whites have been given advantage over others. And no, whites aren't racist by default. No one is ever racist by default.


5 - White cultures are more colonist and imperialist than non-white cultures.

No one believes this. The Mongol empire, the empire of Japan, colonial Britain. All the same things with different names.


6 - An individual’s “lived experience” should have as much or more weight in public policy than broad statistical facts.

You're probably suggesting that people redressing grievances should consider not doing so, to , yanno, help perpetuate to conditions that have lead to those grievances.


7 - There is an intersectional or oppression hierarchy and any criticism of the “most oppressed” people’s ideas or activism are by default “phobic” or “racist” in some way.

I missed this one originally. It's just been distorted by putting a sarcastic "most oppressed" in it. There's no such thing as "most oppressed". There are oppressed people and then there's not oppressed people. Why shouldn't the oppressed have ideas and activism. And how can anyone disagree with something like civil rights activism unless they are racist? Don't make sense.


8 - Objectivity, critical thinking, and logic are tools of the oppressors.

No they're not. Oppressors use the distortion of truths and facts to they're advantage. They still don't use objectivity, critical thinking or logic as tools.


9 - The DEI perspective and DEI initiatives must not be criticized.

Yes they should. They have potential for overstepping which can't be allowed either. Neither should we throw the baby out with the bath water.

10 - Diversity (in DEI), is based on race, gender, and sexuality more than on diversity of ideas.

Okay this is sort of correct. But it's operated as a "half-truth". Because those other things mentioned could philosophically be considered ideas or abstracts anyway.

11 - Inclusion (in DEI), is based on race, gender, sexuality, and conformity to woke beliefs, non-conformists are excluded.

What's a non-conformist, in this context?


12 - Equality (in DEI) means equality of outcomes, not equality of opportunities.

It means leveling the playing field. So it does mean equal opportunities.


13 - The concerns of the most oppressed are more important than the concerns of the less oppressed.

There are only the oppressed. No more, no less. This statement is designed to shut up or ignore the concerns of the oppressed.


14 - Cultural appropriation is a significant problem in society.

It's a symptom of a larger issue. It isn't that it's not significant. Vomit is usually an indication of something bigger going on inside.


15- People’s immutable identity characteristics are more important than their behaviors.

No. Behavior is highly important. There is likely a strong connection between the two.


16 - The only cultures that can be criticized are western cultures.

Nope. See my response to #5. Any culture seeking to exploit, subject or eradicate any other for it's own gain must be criticized and held accountable for it's actions.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Slander, verbal abuse, violent rhetoric, hate are designed to offend. And in many cases shouldn't be considered "Free speech". Genuine free speech must be vigilantly protected.

I think Social Science should instead teach people to be polite. Perhaps it was failing at that. Other poor kinds of speech often meet with poor consequences, which educated people should be able to learn from. I'd respond to some other of your points, but I have to leave