Since this seems to be all the rage – I hereby offer my definition of “woke”
I define “woke” as a belief that society is by default divided into two groups – the oppressors and the oppressed. All social interactions are a zero sum conflict between those two groups. All of history is merely a record of this conflict and nothing else. By default neither group can see this model of reality. However, it is possible for people to see the world accurately for one reason or another. (the process of this realization varies and is not essential to the worldview). This worldview is largely an extreme version of a class based view of the world, however instead of dividing the world up into “workers” and “capitalists”‘ there are many, many more subgroups who make up the oppressed class, and many more subgroups that make up the oppressor class.
By virtue of having this knowledge one can see the hidden threads throughout history and choose to exercise virtue, which is by advocacy for particular groups in the oppressed class. This is largely expressed as secular evangelism for those groups, and active efforts to reduce the social status of the oppressor class groups.
The pose is that of evangelism, i.e. convincing people to see the world their way, but the tactics are all destructive, in terms of social media and social status. The focus is entirely on raising and lowering the social status of different groups.
This worldview is notable for being younger, more tied to social media, fashionable consensus, signaling and being disproportionately female. I suppose a common sense of alienation from society is a necessary part of the definition as well.
- Living in three centuries – amazing photography
- Public defender suspended for using n-word – while quoting someone no less! Inoffensive language has become the new way to show social piety.
- A profile of David Simon, author of two of my favorite books, and creator of one of my favorite television shows. The Wire starts tonight.
- The evolution debate is strange. Ron Paul says he doesn’t believe in some version of it, and an army of commenters jumps in to criticize. For something as trivial as the evolution-Creationism debate (trivial in the sense that being wrong does not affect the outcome) the level of vigor and venom is surprising. It would be interesting to know if belief in evolution was proportional in someway to having children.