I find your idea that neither liberalism nor 'wokeness' can be defined by specific content. but rather reflect questions of epistemology (and thus one's stance towards the Enlightenment) fascinating and very convincing. Thank you.
You importantly point out that it is not enough to criticize the other side but to recognize, apologize and make amends for your own side's harm and complicity in outcomes. Otherwise, the seeds of ideology may lay dormant but will surely grow again given the environment. A scaled down example is when a husband and wife have an argument. Until each person owns up to their part in the fight, they may call a truce but inwardly resent and mistrust the other. In that environment, you can bet they will carry that resentment and mistrust over into the next fight.
My thought: No, wokeness is not dead. As you say, it still reigns supreme in the institutions of knowledge production, and for that alone it is still a major problem. Also, we can see the signs practically everywhere, including the judicial branch, all throughout the government, NGO's, all levels of politics where ideology becomes more important than supporting your country and voter base.
You are right that it would have made a big difference if liberals had put up some fight against wokeism (the opportunities presented themselves for 6 decades). And similarly conservatives should resist against identity based post-modern ideology on the right. My worry is that ultimately politics is about power (elite theory), and that classic liberalism just masks and obfuscates this fundamental. If so, it's not clear to me how the 'liberal' approach you are championing will be successful - though it's a nice vision (dream?).
For me, I can't think purely about wokeism anymore without also contemplating globalism. They are different ideologies, but imo they share common origins. They both are founded on anti-western philosophy. The 'post war consensus' and 'open society' were results of the devastating effects of the 20th century world wars, as was the development of critical theory and post-modernism.
And when you add to the mix the monetary globalist system the world has been operating in for quite a while, which extracts wealth from the common people of nation states to the global financial elites. This generates inequality which then feeds into the frenzy, since egalitarian desires will also push people away from 'the west' (it feeds into the ever present socialistic, Marxist utopian worldview).
So you currently have wokeism and globalism working hand in hand to destroy western civilization. So what's the solution?
It seems like the solution, which could be favored by everyone except the true globalists, is to go with economic nationalism. This promotes the working class, getting industry and manufacturing jobs back to countries of the west. I don't see why woke activists (leftists or far-right folks) would be against this. It seems like the best way forward for peace, prosperity, and sovereignty. And this approach can work for all nations. Obviously, much more can be said about this ...
By the way, thanks for the thoughtful post on wokeness!
I’m afraid that woke, which essentially was intersectional feminism (a rather dishonest way to keep a middle class movement relevant in a complex world), now that it turned out even more repulsive to the average American (or European for that matter) than rightist populism, has fallen back to its core business, in a more venomous form than ever: radical feminism and essentially misandry. Where for years the woke on social media never stopped virtue signalling about POC and trans people (pushing women and gays rather to the background) now they’re ranting about men all the time, especially about male (domestic and sexual) violence.
Suggesting that forms of violence which actually concern a minuscule percentage of the population are omnipresent, and denying the same violence about women against men, even using ‘it’s not always men but it’s always men’ as a slogan, they try and too often manage to make misandry an almost a-political issue for women of all denominations. Sometimes I yearn back to the vague, rather meaningless wokeism of around 2020, harmful though that already was.(So maybe my view of how wokeism changed is connected to the umpteenth opinion of where it essentially came from.)
Dead? I've never even learned what it was. the people who rail against it get all Pikachu-eyed when your follow-up starts with the word "what" and ends with a question mark.
Excellent piece.
I find your idea that neither liberalism nor 'wokeness' can be defined by specific content. but rather reflect questions of epistemology (and thus one's stance towards the Enlightenment) fascinating and very convincing. Thank you.
You importantly point out that it is not enough to criticize the other side but to recognize, apologize and make amends for your own side's harm and complicity in outcomes. Otherwise, the seeds of ideology may lay dormant but will surely grow again given the environment. A scaled down example is when a husband and wife have an argument. Until each person owns up to their part in the fight, they may call a truce but inwardly resent and mistrust the other. In that environment, you can bet they will carry that resentment and mistrust over into the next fight.
In my experience, CSJ is alive and well in the arts. I wrote an essay about it that was published last February—I quoted your definition of CSJ in it. https://whiterosemagazine.com/the-inflating-cost-of-artistic-freedom/
My thought: No, wokeness is not dead. As you say, it still reigns supreme in the institutions of knowledge production, and for that alone it is still a major problem. Also, we can see the signs practically everywhere, including the judicial branch, all throughout the government, NGO's, all levels of politics where ideology becomes more important than supporting your country and voter base.
You are right that it would have made a big difference if liberals had put up some fight against wokeism (the opportunities presented themselves for 6 decades). And similarly conservatives should resist against identity based post-modern ideology on the right. My worry is that ultimately politics is about power (elite theory), and that classic liberalism just masks and obfuscates this fundamental. If so, it's not clear to me how the 'liberal' approach you are championing will be successful - though it's a nice vision (dream?).
For me, I can't think purely about wokeism anymore without also contemplating globalism. They are different ideologies, but imo they share common origins. They both are founded on anti-western philosophy. The 'post war consensus' and 'open society' were results of the devastating effects of the 20th century world wars, as was the development of critical theory and post-modernism.
And when you add to the mix the monetary globalist system the world has been operating in for quite a while, which extracts wealth from the common people of nation states to the global financial elites. This generates inequality which then feeds into the frenzy, since egalitarian desires will also push people away from 'the west' (it feeds into the ever present socialistic, Marxist utopian worldview).
So you currently have wokeism and globalism working hand in hand to destroy western civilization. So what's the solution?
It seems like the solution, which could be favored by everyone except the true globalists, is to go with economic nationalism. This promotes the working class, getting industry and manufacturing jobs back to countries of the west. I don't see why woke activists (leftists or far-right folks) would be against this. It seems like the best way forward for peace, prosperity, and sovereignty. And this approach can work for all nations. Obviously, much more can be said about this ...
By the way, thanks for the thoughtful post on wokeness!
I’m afraid that woke, which essentially was intersectional feminism (a rather dishonest way to keep a middle class movement relevant in a complex world), now that it turned out even more repulsive to the average American (or European for that matter) than rightist populism, has fallen back to its core business, in a more venomous form than ever: radical feminism and essentially misandry. Where for years the woke on social media never stopped virtue signalling about POC and trans people (pushing women and gays rather to the background) now they’re ranting about men all the time, especially about male (domestic and sexual) violence.
Suggesting that forms of violence which actually concern a minuscule percentage of the population are omnipresent, and denying the same violence about women against men, even using ‘it’s not always men but it’s always men’ as a slogan, they try and too often manage to make misandry an almost a-political issue for women of all denominations. Sometimes I yearn back to the vague, rather meaningless wokeism of around 2020, harmful though that already was.(So maybe my view of how wokeism changed is connected to the umpteenth opinion of where it essentially came from.)
Dead? I've never even learned what it was. the people who rail against it get all Pikachu-eyed when your follow-up starts with the word "what" and ends with a question mark.