Patrick Murtha
Reader
What does "anti-woke" mean?
Now THAT is a trolling / baiting comment, and I won’t respond to such.
Last edited:
What does "anti-woke" mean?
Well, honestly, it’s not just the “right” that’s annoyed by or tired of whatever it is that “woke” claims or is claimed to be… But then again, it’s a political language that I personally do not respond to."Woke" by now pretty much means "something the right is mad about", and its gallic deformation into "le wokisme" is even less coherent — but funnily enough, Ernaux describes her development into writing (and writing politically) precisely with its original sense: awakening to the mechanisms of systemic oppression.
Now THAT is a trolling / baiting comment, and I won’t respond to such.
I appreciate it sounds like it.
Well, honestly, it’s not just the “right” that’s annoyed by or tired of whatever it is that “woke” claims or is claimed to be…
I know how you operate. ?
I find that quite a lot of political labels, as they are used today, are oversimplified and dehumanizing. I guess that’s the point. It’s easier to cultivate polarization and divide people and let people divide themselves voluntarily in order to ultimately manipulate them, whether it’s done through the promise of their votes, their money, the fortification of their tribal allegiances, the practice of ostracism, in order to maintain these structures of power that never really went away. Structures of power that simply reorganized themselves and made themselves more palatable to either the “left” or the “right,” whatever audience they’ve chosen to pander to.In fact, woke grenades are more often launched at those on the left or in the center who haven’t “gotten with the program”, than they are at the worst of the right. Nikole Hannah Jones is more down on other black people than she is on Trumpists, for instance.
And that might be because we live under very different political systems, because this nebulous “they” clearly exists here: the entire system of government itself, the elite and wealthy class in charge of banks, corporations, public institutions, the cult of celebrity and the media powered by them. And “bad things” are done by everyone, either deliberately or inadvertently, regardless of political affiliation. That wasn’t even what I was talking about. Did I dismiss the whole process of politics? Or make some kind of equivalence between the “woke” and “anti-woke”? People are free to identify however they want to. You do you. I think it’s obvious in my posts that what I am firmly against are the cliches of political language and political labels, not politics itself. Man or woman is automatically a political animal the moment his or her birth and name are registered by the state.I find that dismissing the complex and messy process of politics, presenting "woke" and "anti-woke" politics as mirror equivalents, or darkly alluding that a nebulous "they" is responsible for polarization and division and all the bad things, is an oversimplification. But that's just me I guess.
Not so sure if it means the same as alienated!What does "anti-woke" mean?
Different political systems? Sorry, do they not have an "entire system of government itself, the elite and wealthy class in charge of banks, corporations, public institutions, the cult of celebrity and the media powered by them" in countries you don't inhabit?And that might be because we live under very different political systems, because this nebulous “they” clearly exists here: the entire system of government itself, the elite and wealthy class in charge of banks, corporations, public institutions, the cult of celebrity and the media powered by them. And “bad things” are done by everyone, either deliberately or inadvertently, regardless of political affiliation. That wasn’t even what I was talking about. Did I dismiss the whole process of politics? I think it’s obvious in my posts that what I am firmly against are the cliches of political language and political labels, not politics itself. Man or woman is automatically a political animal the moment his or her birth and name are registered by the state.
You tell me. When I was referring to structures of power, that’s what I meant. I even clearly said “might be.”I don’t inhabit those other countries. I can’t claim to speak for them.Different political systems? Sorry, do they not have an "entire system of government itself, the elite and wealthy class in charge of banks, corporations, public institutions, the cult of celebrity and the media powered by them" in countries you don't inhabit?
You say you are against political clichés, yet your previous post seems to be a bog-standard castigation of the evils of politics. That's what I was pointing out.
And yes: this is a bog-standard castigation of the process of politics. With which I don't fundamentally disagree! But yes, in my opinion, it is overly simplistic.I find that quite a lot of political labels, as they are used today, are oversimplified and dehumanizing. I guess that’s the point. It’s easier to cultivate polarization and divide people and let people divide themselves voluntarily in order to ultimately manipulate them, whether it’s done through the promise of their votes, their money, the fortification of their tribal allegiances, the practice of ostracism, in order to maintain these structures of power that never really went away. Structures of power that simply reorganized themselves and made themselves more palatable to either the “left” or the “right,” whatever audience they’ve chosen to pander to.
It’s a criticism of a particular area of politics, not the entire process. Politics isn’t only polarization, division, tribalism, left vs right, woke vs anti-woke. Now that’s overly simplistic. But yes, let’s transfer the political discussion elsewhere.And yes: this is a bog-standard castigation of the process of politics. With which I don't fundamentally disagree! But yes, in my opinion, it is overly simplistic.