Rise of the Woke

Hi Everyone,

The terminology ‘woke’ and the ideology with it are gaining a lot of attention in Mainstream Media. The ideology is promoted by “Left” Mainstream Media (Overt Establishment) but “Right” Mainstream Media (Covert Establishment or Controlled Opposition) obsessively use the terminology while criticizing the most extreme examples of its application. Both medias are attempting to inflate woke ideology. This is being done to misled and divide people on inane and radical opinions and ideas that distract from more important events and actions that deserve attention. In this post, I discuss the strange phenomena of ‘wokeism’ as well as ‘anti-wokeism’.

Definitions

First, we need to define the terminology ‘woke’. Below are two definitions from dictionary.com.

Woke:

having or marked by an active awareness of systemic injustices and prejudices, especially those related to civil and human rights

aware of the facts, true situation, etc.
Source: dictionary.com

Another term often used with ‘woke’ or used to describe ‘woke’ ideology by those promoting wokeism is ‘progressive’.

Progressive:

favouring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters:

making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.:

characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.
Source: dictionary.com

To add context, since wokeism is treated by many as ideology, we should also consider the definition of ideology.

Ideology:

the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., that guides an individual, social movement, institution, class, or large group.

such a body of doctrine, myth, etc., with reference to some political and social plan, as that of fascism, along with the devices for putting it into operation.
Source: dictionary.com

Ideologies are not typically described as inherently good or bad but instead state a set of beliefs and values that can be argued for and against. For example, Nationalism can be used to build a strong national culture and promote cohesion in the community; however, it can also lead to distrust or arrogance towards people from other countries and cultures. People are often supportive of an ideology because they believe the positive aspects outweigh the negative.

‘Woke’ ideology is different. It is described using terminology that states that it is good and it is right. It is difficult to argue that is better not to be aware of racial or social injustice, or that we should not strive to make the world a better place for as many people as possible. The ideology by its definition becomes one that cannot be constructively argued against. Therefore, it should not be considered an ideology but a set of desired objectives that could be applied to any reasonable ideology. However, these objectives are stated as an ideology and used to describe its followers. Therefore, claiming to be woke is equivalent to claiming to be virtuous based on its definitions

The terminology woke (stay woke) originated as an African-American expression relating to awareness and alertness to deception. In 2014, it was adopted by Black Lives Matter after Michael Brown was killed by police. It was used in the context of remaining alert to police brutality and unjust tactics. In the years following the murder, the terminology evolved to relate to social justice and became considered to be progressive by the “Left” organisations (Vox).

The choice of terminology is relevant. African-American terminology has been used to increase support for woke agendas from minority groups. It also serves the purpose of demonstrating how suppression can be overcome by society if it works together. This is intended to appeal to people who lean towards collectivism. Hence, it is the perfect terminology to use for “Left” organisations as it already resonates with their existing ideology.

How many people identify as Woke

It is impossible to determine exactly how many people are woke. This is because an alignment with wokeism is highly subjective. A person could identify as woke because they identify with the values outlined in the definitions of woke and progressive rather than follow it as an ideology. According to a survey conducted by The Hill, based on 938 respondents, approximately 1/3 of Americans identify as woke. Over 60% of people between the ages of 18 and 34 identified as woke. If we assume that the people surveyed are a good representation of the American public, there would be over 100 million people in the USA who identify as woke. These numbers are incredibly high. We do not know how many of these people closely follow woke ideology and how many just identify with the values.

Many promoters of woke ideology post on social media such as Twitter, Facebook, and TikTok. The extent of their following, likes, shares, and comments could give us an idea of how many people support woke ideology. For example, US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (arguably a strong promoter of woke ideology in the US) has over 13 million followers on Twitter. Her tweets receive hundreds of thousands of likes, tens of thousands of retweets, and thousands of comments. It is difficult to ascertain her true following as these numbers are distorted by trolls and bots. Even if only half the attention that her content is receiving is genuine, the numbers are still high. It is also worth noting that she has a sufficient level of support to hold a seat in the House of Representatives.

Woke ideology is not exclusive to the USA. The UK has a number of prominent advocates of wokeism. For example, woke advocate Femi Oluwole has a strong following of over 370 thousand people and his claim to fame is his woke activism. It is likely these numbers could be distorted upwards.

"Right" media exaggerate the extent of wokeism by promoting the most extreme woke related topics and stories. These stories often relate to actions of “Left” media, celebrities, businesses, schools, and Governments. I believe the nature of exposure is designed to mislead people into believing that the most extreme woke ideology is rampant. These stories represent extreme behaviour and actions but they do not represent the extent of support of these actions from the public. However, it is very easy to garner support against such extreme behaviour and actions. Thereby, creating stronger support for the “Right” media and its political affiliation and greater resistance to “Left” leaning institutions, organisations, and political parties. This causes further division between the people. Exposing of the most radical woke behaviour appears to be doing very little to prevent it. Instead, it is radicalising it even further as the most woke supporters pursue their ideology even further.

Why is Woke Ideology being pushed by the Establishment?

Woke ideology is being led by the Establishment. For them it serves three main purposes. The first purpose is to divide the people so that they fight amongst themselves rather than challenge the Establishment and its agenda. The woke ideology is effective as it stimulates conflict around areas that are sensitive and personal to many people. These areas include racism, the family, homosexuality, abortion, immigration, freedom of speech, politics, and religion.

The second purpose is to enable Governments to gain more power and control without them having to force it on the people. Instead, they let the people demand the Government take more action and obtain more power. Governments can become totalitarian while claiming they are democratic as they are responding to the people and not initiating it themselves. However, the people are only demanding these actions from the Government because they have been manipulated to do so by other branches of the Establishment such as mainstream media, global organisations, and political opposition.

The third purpose is to benefit the wealthy. It aims to benefit the wealthy by targeting the working and middle classes. Woke ideology transfers blame to the people and to conservative ideology. People are blamed for polluting the planet with their cars and heating. They are blamed for not being inclusive for not accepting gender identity over sex. They are blamed for earning more money than people with skills that create less value. They are accused of sexism for not supporting women’s right to kill their unborn children. They are accused of selfishness for questioning restrictions on freedom that are claimed to protect other people. The solution is nearly always more Government invention and the transfer of wealth to businesses that are willing and able to support the woke proposed solutions.

Theoretically good but twisted in delivery

If we consider wokeism as sets of objectives and values, they are arguably mostly desirable. These values and objectives often include equality, respect and kindness to others, truth and honesty, protecting the environment, social justice for all, and inclusivity. However, to be woke, a person would consider themselves to have the answer or to be the answer to the above. This is entirely different from seeking approaches to achieve objectives. Woke ideology creates inflexibility whereas woke objectives could have flexible responses. The inflexibility of wokeism makes it dangerous as it bypasses logical thought process and arrives directly at prescribed solutions.

The prescribed application of the tenets of wokeism are twisted so as to reach outcomes that are not congruent with the values preached. Instead, they align more closely with obtaining compliance with authority. In the following sections, the application of the values and objectives described in the previous paragraph are explained in context with the more extreme approaches to woke ideology. This is the version of wokeism that the Establishment desire a significant proportion of the population to adopt.

Equality

Let us begin with equality. What could we mean by equality? People are not equal. People are completely different. They have different personalities, attitudes, and physical and mental abilities. Some of these differences are genetic and some are through upbringing and culture (nature vs. nurture). A meaningful approach to equality would be to strive for equal opportunity. Doing so will create more freedom for more people to pursue the life they desire.

The woke approach to equality is that people are all equal even if they appear to be different. People of all races, genders, religions, and sexual orientation should be represented in all aspects of life. This is being done through quotas for the number of various groups that should be employed in particular positions. For example, there needs to be X% of women, Y% percentage of Muslims, and Z% of ethnic minorities. This approach creates the opposite to equality. More talented people are being restricted because the quota they have been placed under has been reached. When quotas have not been met, standards are forced to be lowered; thus reducing the quality of any output. To create the impression of equality, equal opportunity is reduced.

Respect and Kindness to others

Respect and kindness to others appears to be part of human nature. People learn that if they treat other people well, they are more likely to be treated better in return. People are social by nature. They live in families and are part of broader communities. For these groups to function, they require people to show each other respect and kindness. People are also very diverse. They have different ideas and perspectives. Sometimes these differences create conflict and disagreement. These conflicts can be resolved if all parties involved are willing to listen and desire to gain an understanding from another viewpoint. This is beneficial to all parties involved as more knowledge and experiences are shared. This can create empathy and encourage kindness.

The woke approach to respect and kindness is to not offend other people. However, causing offence to other people is unavoidable. Different people are offended by different behaviour and actions. The woke response is to halt behaviour and actions that have caused offence or have the potential to cause offence. If people follow this approach, it may create the impression of respect and kindness. However, it is likely to be doing the opposite. The reasons for conflicts and disagreements still exist but they are no longer aired or discussed. Therefore, people become more entrenched in their opposition to each other. This creates distrust and fuels future aggression when emotions can no longer be easily contained.

Many people do not agree with constraints on offensive or potentially offensive behaviour and actions. When this occurs, there is conflict between these people and the supporters of woke ideology. The woke approach appears to involve banning or censoring the behaviour or the person deemed to be causing the potential offence. Supporting respect and kindness turns into restrictions on free speech. In some extreme cases, people have lost their jobs because they did not conform with woke restrictions on speech.

Truth and Honesty

Truth and honesty is something we should strive for and strive to see in see society. This can be achieved through transparency and accountability. Transparency enables us to access a wide variety of information from many different sources. With this information we can determine what is truthful and what is not. Accountability enables us to hold people to account for their actions. Honest behaviour can be rewarded and dishonest behaviour can be punished.

The woke approach to truth and honesty is that any information deemed untruthful should be banned. People who spread misinformation should be censored. People deemed to be repeat offenders should have their livelihood destroyed. There is a lack of process to determine what is truthful and honest. Truth and honesty is based on a limited perspective and not through investigation of facts. This leads to two dangerous outcomes. The dishonest information that is being blocked does not become exposed or openly disproven through investigation, it instead radicalises the people that have been ostracised from society. Without proper investigation, truthful and accurate information could be blocked and dishonest and inaccurate information could be treated as the truth because it was not adequately contested.

Protecting the Environment

People are responsible for much of the damage caused to the environment. The damage is mostly done directly by Big Business and Government and indirectly by the people who support these organisations. To protect the environment, we need to make choices that limit the harm we cause. People can do this by not supporting the businesses that heavily pollute and by standing up to Governments who pollute.

The woke approach is almost entirely focused on climate change and the emission of carbon dioxide. All other forms of pollution are mostly ignored. Every negative change in weather (e.g. droughts, floods, and heatwaves) is blamed on climate change by the “Left” media. Therefore, the woke approach is to stop climate change. They believe this can be done by reducing human carbon dioxide emissions to zero. These ideas are false and the approaches are unrealistic. Climate change cannot be stopped. Carbon dioxide emissions will never reach zero. Even if carbon dioxide emissions could be reduced to zero, climate change would continue because carbon dioxide emissions are not the sole cause or even the main cause for changes in climate.

The pointless goal of preventing climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions is distracting from action against the more serious and immediate damage being caused to the environment. These include continuous damage to the ozone layer, poisoning of water supply, contaminating the air with toxic fumes (i.e. not carbon dioxide), destroying wild and natural habitats, overfishing, over-farming, and over-cultivating. The war on carbon dioxide is helping transfer wealth from the public to the Government, which eventually reaches the wealthiest while contributing to the destruction of smaller businesses.

Social Justice for All

A key aspect of social justice is discrimination based on prejudice. People should be treated fairly regardless of sex, race, ethnicity, culture, religion, sexuality, age, nationality, wealth, disability, and any other distinguishing characteristic of any group of people. Prejudice is often the root cause of social injustice. People develop certain beliefs about another group of people. This could be based on personal experience, stereotypes, or the influence of others. They apply these beliefs to an entire group of people. These beliefs become actions, which often leads to discrimination. Discrimination based on prejudice leads to social injustice.

There is also the problem of determining fairness. What is fairness? It will mean something different to different people. I would argue that fairness relates to opportunity. Opportunities should be enabled rather than hindered. People should have as much freedom as possible to pursue their goals. The success in reaching these goals should depend on their actions and not reliant on discrimination based on prejudice.

The woke approach to social justice appears to focus on discrimination and inequality. Discrimination is not necessarily bad. It is a fundamental input to decision-making. Inequality is inevitable because people are not equal. People are all different. These differences lead to different levels of success in different ventures. There are many reasons for these differences. Woke ideology ignores these facts. It aims to eliminate discrimination regardless of its basis. It attempts to manipulate equality when it does not exist.

The woke attempt to eliminate discrimination causes damage to meaning and value as well as opportunity. Discrimination is not always a product of prejudice. It is often a product of assessment of value. People who offer more value are selected over people who offer less value. This occurs in many aspects of life such as selecting to hire someone, promoting an employee, wage rate, accepting a student into university, voting on a position of office, and determining a winner in a contest. In the absence of discrimination, opportunity is lost as talent and effort is not rewarded. These aspects of woke ideology are compatible with the application of Marxism.

Inclusivity

As mentioned several times in this post, everyone is different. Some people standout as more noticeably different from others. This could relate to differences in appearance or differences in mannerism and behaviour. For these people, it is often difficult to integrate into society as other people might be less accepting or they are afraid that other people will be less accepting. These differences often become less relevant when people make the effort to understand each other.

The woke approach to inclusivity is that everyone must accept everyone else for who they are or who they want to be. The process of reaching understanding and acceptance is bypassed. This increases the chances of miscommunication and misunderstandings. To make circumstances worse, radical differences between people are being overrepresented and treated as if they are common place. For example, transgender (noting or relating to a person whose gender identity does not correspond to that person’s sex assigned at birth (dictionary.com)) stories, issues, rights, etc. appear in the mainstream media almost every week. The frequency of reporting would give the impression that a very large percentage of the population were transgender. This impression is being used to entice more people into supporting legislation and policy related transgenderism even if comes at the expense of much larger groups of people. According to World Population Review, in 2022, less than 1% of the US population identify as transgender. If transgenderism was not being promoted so heavily by the Establishment, the numbers of people who identify as transgender would be even lower.

Even the definitions given in dictionaries are aligning with woke ideology. For example, the definition provided by dictionary.com states “sex assigned at birth”, instead of “sex identified at birth” or just “sex”. This appears to indicate that there is some subjectivity regarding sex when it is defined clearly based on chromosomes, which can be confirmed through tests.

Woke ideology destroys what it claims to support

As described in the previous paragraphs. The woke approach to equality prevents equal opportunity. The woke approach to respect and kindness stirs anger and resentment. The woke approach to truth and honest protects lies and blocks the truth. The work approach to the protecting the environment distracts from real environmental damage. The woke approach to social justice traps people into poverty. The woke approach to inclusivity disenfranchises minorities by hindering the development of tolerance. Below is a brief description of many of the other areas the most extreme woke ideology is harming in the name of promoting something good.

Gender equality is discriminatory against women (e.g. men who identify as women in women’s spaces).
Transgender activism is an attack on acceptance of sexual orientation (e.g. gender identity and sexual orientation placed under the broad banner of LGBTQ+ when the two are distinct groups).
Freedom for abortion is an attack on unborn children’s lives (e.g. favours mother’s freedom of choice over an unborn child’s life).
Gender identity and sexual orientation “education” involves sexualising of children (e.g. exposing children to sexual acts).
Climate change advocacy is an attack on environmental protection (e.g. focusing on carbon dioxide above more damaging emissions).
Pursuing political correctness is an attack on free speech (e.g. banning opinions because they might be offensive to someone).
Pursuing political correctness is an attack on humour and comedy (e.g. banning comedy and jokes because they are potentially offensive).
Blocking misinformation blocks the truth (e.g. characterising any information that opposes woke ideology as misinformation).
Coercing social action for the greater good attacks freedom (e.g. forcing people to behave in a manner for the proclaimed benefit of others).
Coercing medical procedures (e.g. Covid-19 jab) attacks individual freedoms and health (e.g. freedom to make your own medical decisions).
Anti-racism causes more racism (e.g. accusing another race of racism).
Creation of push migration prevents pull migration (e.g. enticing refugees while discouraging skilled migrants).
Support of Marxist ideas is an attack on the wealth and freedom of all (includes the poor) (e.g. removing opportunities to be rewarded for success above other people who have achieved less).
Global centralisation of decision-making is an attack on national and indigenous freedom and cultures (e.g. global organisations attempting to make sweeping decisions for all countries).
Body positivity is an attack on health (e.g. celebrating unhealthy living and obesity).

Some of above examples may require elaboration but the purpose of this section is to demonstrate the contradiction between the claimed desired outcomes of woke ideology and the outcomes most often achieved in its application. The above list could arguably be far longer.

My Opinions

Wokeism at its most extreme is very dangerous. If fully implemented, it would lead to the complete destruction of life as we know it. The world would become a totalitarian dystopia. I do not believe the most extreme forms of wokeism has a huge following. However, the most extreme wokeism is being practiced and promoted by many of the most powerful and influential people in the world. Political parties and mainstream media are split between wokeism and anti-wokeism. Both sides are working hard to create as much tension around it as possible. The entertainment industry are consistently slipping woke ideology into television programs and films. Businesses are inserting woke ideology into commercials. Sports teams and players make woke gestures such as kneeling before sporting competitions. Celebrities are openly supporting woke ideology through social media.

I believe many people, young in particular, are not attracted to wokeism for any potential good it may offer. I believe they are drawn to woke ideology because it is an avenue to live a life with very little effort or consequences of actions.

They are attracted to socialism because socialism is often promoted as the distribution of wealth from the richest to everyone else. It offers a comfortable lifestyle without the need of effort and ability.
They blame inequality on various forms of discrimination (e.g. racism and sexism) as an excuse for not making the effort to pursue opportunities in their life.
They support refugee migrants over skilled migrants because they believe the refugee migrants are more likely to support free handouts.
They support political correctness because it does not require them to justify their actions and opinions.
They support abortion because it enables them to enjoy reckless promiscuity without being burdened with a child.
They support the LGBTQ+ movement because it enables them to experiment with any form of fornication without being considered taboo.
They support body positivity as an excuse to not live a healthy lifestyle.

Many young people in western countries feel entitled to a comfortable life. They believe society owes them this life. They are ignorant of the long-run cost of their inability and lack of desire to create value for others. They cannot be entirely blamed for their degenerate attitudes and behaviours. Media, entertainment, education institutions, are feeding these ideas to them from a very young age.

The Urban dictionary’s top ranked definition of woke appears to be referring to the above described type of followers of woke ideology.

Being "woke" means to "be paying the fuck attention to what's going on, because if you don't, you'll get fucked over and left behind". Also, "get your fucking head out of the fucking sand, you fucking lame idiot. Life isn't all about getting high and getting laid. WAKE THE FUCK UP!!!"

Not everything woke is bad. The woke values could be identified as positive objectives. I believe these positive objectives are one of the main reasons why wokeism is attractive. However, wokeism needs to allow for processes to enable these objectives to be met; there are no instant solutions. These process could vary considerably depending on the objective, current circumstances, the environment in which changes needs to take place, and the people involved in the process. I would also argue that the objectives also need a degree of flexibility. Not everyone wants the same outcomes to the same extent. Prioritization of objectives should vary. I would argue that woke objectives can be incorporated into other ideologies and blend with their existing objectives. People also need to detach themselves from the extreme measures and arguments being pushed by mainstream media.

If you want to read any of my other posts, you can click on the links below. These links will lead you to posts containing my collection of works. These 'Collection of Works' posts have been updated to contain links to the Hive versions of my posts.