"Wokeist" - When people talk about progressivism without acquaintance

[NovaKart]

Because "liberal" is too old and historical of a word to successfully pervert it's meaning. It dates back to the enlightenment, that's how old and established it is.

"Woke" on the other hand is more recent and started out as a slang term identifyer among certain individuals. It was much more easy to pervert because only a small subset of the population was using it as complement when it first came into use. Most people didn't hear about it until it got demonized, so the perverted definition is most people's first introduction to it.

Ann Coulter tried.

 

[Angst]

See my point about "liberal". I just am not convinced at all by this supposed big machine that manage to manipulate everyone into transforming a word into an insult.

For the record, I appreciate the previous post, and don't have much more to say. I also agree that left and right is reasonably vague btw. I think that woke often means "bad left" (or to those who think left bad, just "left"). I think it's rather a layer of vagueness on top of the vagueness of the compass, but I'm not willing to die on that hill. Whether left and right are also bad terms or not, I don't think woke is that useful regardless (because no, I don't think people know what they're talking about when they use it, generally).

A note on this though. About words being warped.

Segments of the right being able to spin terminology as part of a media machine is kinda conspiratorial, and when looked at by a political segment (vague left) that understands that controlling language equates power - when the left has tried to do this often to little avail - this language control often seems improbable to succeed. I understand the appeal to not believing that the right does this actively with these tools. Because there's no (large) hidden propaganda movement and we know from experience how hard it is controlling language.

But to put it bluntly, rather empirically, it has been the case, several times. Somehow, some undercurrent (or overt attempts) by the right to coopt and misappropriate left language has worked, a lot. This is baffling because there's no real illuminati; there's alt-right who remain hidden and quote god forsaken Dragon Ball memes as part of their internal discussion, but they're still relatively few, even if having become more prominent recent years. Then there's stuff like Fox. Can they do this? They're not supposed to be able to - the left has tried to direct language to become more healthy so many times, but ineffectively - and yet, we've seen it happen by the right, over and over again.

 

[Joij21]

But to put it bluntly, rather empirically, it has been the case, several times. Somehow, some undercurrent (or overt attempts) by the right to coopt and misappropriate left language has worked, a lot. This is baffling because there's no real illuminati; there's alt-right who remain hidden and quote god forsaken Dragon Ball memes as part of their internal discussion, but they're still relatively few, even if having become more prominent recent years. Then there's stuff like Fox. Can they do this? They're not supposed to be able to - the left has tried to direct language to become more healthy so many times, but ineffectively - and yet, we've seen it happen by the right, over and over again.

Many of these alt-right have said the reason they believe they are more successful at spinning the narrative is because the liberals are too emotional, idealistic, and often far too complacent (not to mention too politically correct) to play dirty or create actually funny comedy.

 

[Evie]

If I take the definition of the Ku Klux Klan from Birth of a Nation - valiant protectors of the south! - and a more contrmporary definition (say, a racist organization working to suppress african-american rights, they're both defining the same group, but they sure as heck aren't the same definition.

Doesn't take a big conspiracy to change the definition. Just three ingredients: a term that's relatively obscure and reserved to a certain niche (academics, online social justice circles, etc), a handful of pundits with a large trusting audience (which the right wing media machine has aplenty), and an audience who outnumber the originsl niche and is largely unaware of the terms. The pundit tell their audience about the term; the audience assumes the pundit's definition is correct, and suddenly, the most common understanding of the term is whatever the pundit wants it to be. Other pundits, now aware that part of their audience know of the term, pick it up and spread it further, while the original niche group has no comparable media access to contest the definition.

No conspiracy needed. Just making sure that your version of the word is the fist that register with a large chunk of the population.

 

[Angst]

Many of these alt-right have said the reason they believe they are more successful at spinning the narrative is because the liberals are too emotional, idealistic, and often far too complacent (not to mention too politically correct) to play dirty or create actually funny comedy.

Seeing how absolutely absorbed by emotions alt-righters are, I'm unsure it squares, even if I understand the approximate appeal of it. The idealism however I can understand is a problem (more on that below)

Also comedy can be funny without being offensive. Needing your comedy to be offensive as a premise is actually quite shallow and juvenile. I remember when swearing offensively (and I mean offensively) was funny. When I was like 12. But that's another thread.

If I take the definition of the Ku Klux Klan from Birth of a Nation - valiant protectors of the south! - and a more contrmporary definition (say, a racist organization working to suppress african-american rights, they're both defining the same group, but they sure as heck aren't the same definition.

Doesn't take a big conspiracy to change the definition. Just three ingredients: a term that's relatively obscure and reserved to a certain niche (academics, online social justice circles, etc), a handful of pundits with a large trusting audience (which the right wing media machine has aplenty), and an audience who outnumber the originsl niche and is largely unaware of the terms. The pundit tell their audience about the term; the audience assumes the pundit's definition is correct, and suddenly, the most common understanding of the term is whatever the pundit wants it to be. Other pundits, now aware that part of their audience know of the term, pick it up and spread it further, while the original niche group has no comparable media access to contest the definition.

No conspiracy needed. Just making sure that your version of the word is the fist that register with a large chunk of the population.

Well yes, but... Why is the left so bad at it? Some left-wingers I've read note that the problem is mostly that influential left pundits tend to have more of... a rigidity to their claims. They need substantiation and are often not strategic or pragmatic or, to put it bluntly, callous enough, to outright mislabel. Of course enough pundits exist that do this, but... Well, compare lefttube to righttube. Joe Rogan and Crowder vs. eg. ContraPoints. Which of the two care about the two sides of the media care the most about being rigid?

 

[Evie]

Rigor rather than rigidity might be the better term. And yes, that's a huge part of it. Because it not only limits them from making the claim, but it also means they're not willing to amplify left-wing social media, whereas there is zero qualm among right wing pundits in amplifying right-wing social media.

The tendency of major left-wing media to be establishment media (not interested in popularizing or cross-pollinating with populist movements), whereas to the right fox pundits and the general right-wing talk show host sphere has always been fundamentally populist, and so much more willing to embrace the emotions of the base and the people who express it (meaning right-wing social media pundits have a lot more visibility beyond social media than left-wing ones), not helping.

And, you know, the Fronts of Judea factor. The left has a long history - probably because it tends to distrust hierarchies - of being factious to a fault. The right, not nearly as much (and, when it does turn against its hierarchies, it tends to form new ones quickly).

 

[Akka]

Because "liberal" is too old and historical of a word to successfully pervert it's meaning. It dates back to the enlightenment, that's how old and established it is.

But many other terms are more recents and haven't become derogative. Ecology is strongly left-themed and actively fought by economical powers, and yet it's never become an insult, and even the ecology-themed insults (like "tree-huggers") have rather backfired than took on. More significantly, "feminism" is very close as a core ideology, and it's been subject to attempt to smear it for quite a bit longer than "woke", and yet somehow it has quite a bit of staying power as a political badge, and even tends to be used as derogative only insofar as it's, precisely, close to the "woke" ideology (this latter point is especially noticeable in France, where "feminism" is a much more widely used label than "woke", and tends to suffer more from the "woke" stigma).

I think that woke often means "bad left" (or to those who think left bad, just "left").

I disagree, "woke" as I've mainly seen used, refers to a specific aspect of the left/far left, that is strongly tied to identity politics. It's not about "bad left" in general. There is a significant difference between a select subset that is seen as bad by itself, and a subset that covers everything that is bad.

Whether left and right are also bad terms or not, I don't think woke is that useful regardless (because no, I don't think people know what they're talking about when they use it, generally).

Dunno. I don't think people "knows better" what exactly entail "left", "right" or "neo-liberal" than they do about "woke". I find all these terms to be equally useful.

But to put it bluntly, rather empirically, it has been the case, several times. Somehow, some undercurrent (or overt attempts) by the right to coopt and misappropriate left language has worked, a lot. This is baffling because there's no real illuminati; there's alt-right who remain hidden and quote god forsaken Dragon Ball memes as part of their internal discussion, but they're still relatively few, even if having become more prominent recent years. Then there's stuff like Fox. Can they do this? They're not supposed to be able to - the left has tried to direct language to become more healthy so many times, but ineffectively - and yet, we've seen it happen by the right, over and over again.

I'm afraid I simply don't have experienced the same. This might simply be due to the fact that I have little contact outside of Internet with the political right (I have a few friends and acquaintances that I suspect vote right/extreme-right, but they are dwarfed by the amount who are left/extreme-left, and even then they are more of a "personal vote" kind of people, not politized at all), but I've actually felt the opposite. Nearly every word that have seen its meaning changed, nearly every change to the vernacular coming from political roots, have come from, precisely, the "woke" subgroup (again, this is especially noticeable in France due to French being a gendered language, and there is a whole battle happening on how to alter the grammar to make it more progressive).

Can you give examples of terms that have been twisted and misappropriated ?

 

[Traitorfish]

I'm just saying I don't think the arguments you're using are very good, because they heavily rely on treating right-wing bogeymen as though they are real things. I said your use of right-wing memes in your arguments reflects right-wing success in shaping this discourse, not that it contributes to or creates that success.

Which right-wing bogeymen, specifically, have I employed? Which right-wing memes, specifically, am I using?

You allege them I'm employing right-wing arguments, that I've taken in by right-wing influence, but you don't describe which arguments, what influence. You just seem to be taking it for granted that it's self-evident.

 

[Narz]

Which right-wing bogeymen, specifically, have I employed? Which right-wing memes, specifically, am I using?

You allege them I'm employing right-wing arguments, that I'm a victim of right-wing influence, but you don't describe which arguments, what influence.

Saying someone's using 'right wing arguments' is the regressive 'left''s version of RINO.

 

[Joij21]

Well yes, but... Why is the left so bad at it? Some left-wingers I've read note that the problem is mostly that influential left pundits tend to have more of... a rigidity to their claims. They need substantiation and are often not strategic or pragmatic or, to put it bluntly, callous enough, to outright mislabel. Of course enough pundits exist that do this, but... Well, compare lefttube to righttube. Joe Rogan and Crowder vs. eg. ContraPoints. Which of the two care about the two sides of the media care the most about being rigid?

I'm not sure what your talking about, plus I thought Joe Rogan was like center left and not at all righttube.

But the thing is the world is still kinda run by boomers who have no clue what the young whippersnappers are up to on this so called "Youtube". So instead they get their slow, not exactly up to date news from people like Tucker Carlson.

But many other terms are more recents and haven't become derogative. Ecology is strongly left-themed and actively fought by economical powers, and yet it's never become an insult, and even the ecology-themed insults (like "tree-huggers") have rather backfired than took on. More significantly, "feminism" is very close as a core ideology, and it's been subject to attempt to smear it for quite a bit longer than "woke", and yet somehow it has quite a bit of staying power as a political badge, and even tends to be used as derogative only insofar as it's, precisely, close to the "woke" ideology (this latter point is especially noticeable in France, where "feminism" is a much more widely used label than "woke", and tends to suffer more from the "woke" stigma).

"Ecology", and "Feminism" are fairly old. "Feminism" as a word dates back to I think the 19th century and "Ecology" has always been a scientific term that I believe also comes from the enlightenment (although I'm not too sure, it is a specific field of science though) .

But "wokism" probably succeeded in being perverted because it was framed by conservatives as something that is a rabid phenomenon of the mob. Like a disease or something that prevents you from making jokes, flirting with women, can destroy your reputation, and is unstoppable and like slander/defamation on steroids/you could be unfairly framed for a crime by the "people of woke". So its this sort of fight or flight "you could be victimized by this phenomenon next!" kind of selling point that has allowed it to be seen as something despicable. It is for this reason why probably in France "feminism" might be seen as adjacent to "woke", the idea that evil women could accuse you of raping them when you never did.

 

[Evie]

Yes, France is a great source of facepalms in that regard to the French speakers on this side of the Atlantic, at least as far back as when the whole fiasco with feminization of professional and courtesy title started. Is the Academy still whining about how we're barbarous rednecks for using "ingénieure"?

I was in stitches when I heard I forgot which French notorious figure say that "see I support feminizing professional titles, I'm totally progressive, but, this,this is a bridge too far!" or words to that effect (re gender-neutral terms), and I was like, "Ah, yes, the great progressivism of playing catch up to 1970s Quebec."

At that rate, you're lucky we still speak French. Whole language would be fossilizing if it were left to France .

 

[Angst]

Joe Rogan has moved politically recently afaik but even if he doesn't count the other examples apply.

Can you give examples of terms that have been twisted and misappropriated ?

I have real life acquaintances that are very right, but it's on the internet too, so idk how you miss it. I follow a lot of right wing media to keep up.

Terms that are often warped. Hoo boy. Can I include groups? Academic movements that have leftist progressive roots but no real argument as to economic redistribution?

Liberal referring to marxists (which I believe can be argued as originally rooted in the same strand of thought, but not as used; it's another discussion), liberal referring to anything neoliberal really (Smith lost his position to a Burke-esque takeover), feminist where outside knowledge of the plurality is a hellscape (Butler, gender critical, sex positive, sex negative, whatever, all being conceptualized as minute grievance farming or whatever EDIT the point is that feminism is talked about as a monolith which is a misappropriation), postmodernist which is kind of left rooted but is used for anything, marxist for liberals, marxist for literally any other strand of communism, Frankfurt school, anarchist referring to violence and not peaceful voluntarism and local organization, woke referring to social subsidies and marxism and whatever, socialist being whatever it is in the states, political correctness being picked up from an active stance in the.. 80s? to an exonymous concept now, critical race theory's treatment (not for what it is, but for what it isn't), totalitarian leftism when someone is pushing for rights. More recently, in concrete organizations, view of antiwork contrary to what antiwork actually thinks of work, how some police abolitionists want restructuring and defunding rather than actual abolition, and otoh how some police abolitionists actually want abolition (ie: not one movement), black lives matter' general treatment contrary to concrete views...

I'm kind of out of examples here from memory, but I presume you can see the point.

 

[amadeus]

I haven’t been following this much lately, just a disclaimer.

Broad strokes, the “woke” and “cancel culture” positions, to what extent they can be said to exist, I wonder how those that predate the widespread use of social media would be looked at.

I’m thinking of two cases in particular: Tipper Gore’s crusade against heavy metal music in the eighties, and Joe Lieberman’s versus Mortal Kombat.

How are these different from what conservatives claim is happening today? And what of conservative efforts to regulate pop culture? Barbara Bush called The Simpsons the “dumbest thing” she ever saw.

I feel like these new terms are just the euphemism treadmill, reinventing the wheel.

 

[Angst]

And @Akka , if you want a concrete example... This is from May 9th. https://www.foxnews.com/media/supreme-court-justice-home-protests-ted-cruz-biden-communists

EDIT right forum rules. Quoting a part of it which I think demonstrates misappropriation:

"Joe Biden has handed the agenda over to the socialists – and not just the socialists: This is now the Marxists. This is now the Communists," Cruz continued, adding that it is clear "today's Democratic Party believes in violence."

 

[RobAnybody]

I don't believe "woke" was ever used entirely unironically, though.

just, fwiw, if you feel like taking the time, go listen to the Director's Commentary for Get Out. Jordan Peele uses it unironically to refer to himself & his film in 2017:

fwiw, the very first time I ever heard the term "woke" was while listening to the Director's Commentary to the movie Get Out. Jordan Peele used it to describe himself & how he wanted his movie to be sort of a "woke" horror movie. He viewed it as a positive that he wanted to encourage in others.

It's a long Commentary (the length of the movie, obviously), but he first refers to "being Woke" as a positive at 4:57 I think, but also quite often after that.

 

[Lexicus]

Fair enough. I still don't think that particular use of "woke" (at 4:57, obviously I'm not watching the whole thing) is entirely without irony but I'm not going to argue about it.

EDIT: I have just discovered that in the song being referenced there, "stay woke" refers to being aware that one's spouse is being unfaithful.

EDIT AGAIN: I've done wikipedia research now. Apparently "woke" was being used completely unironically in the social justice sense back in the mid-2000s.

 

[João III]

just, fwiw, if you feel like taking the time, go listen to the Director's Commentary for Get Out. Jordan Peele uses it unironically to refer to himself & his film in 2017:

I was always under the impression woke was originally used sincerely to express an understanding or awareness of social injustices and not until more recently has it become a bit of a meme. The former would certainly fit with Peele's usage.

I think I remember originally seeing woke become popular around when Michael Brown was killed in 2014(?). I'm not sure if there was a specific moment since then when it shifted in meaning or if it was more gradual

 

[Lexicus]

Which right-wing bogeymen, specifically, have I employed? Which right-wing memes, specifically, am I using?

You allege them I'm employing right-wing arguments, that I've taken in by right-wing influence, but you don't describe which arguments, what influence. You just seem to be taking it for granted that it's self-evident.

I feel like I've spent our whole conversation in this thread up til now explaining my answers to these questions. To a certain extent I think that "cancel culture" itself is a right-wing bogeyman.

Certainly, framing boycotts of media products as attempts to establish a form of totalizing control over all cultural expression is exactly what conservatives argue about "political correctness" on a daily basis.

I also think you are to some extent buying into the conflation between the right to speak and the right to an audience which is a very common characteristic of conservative arguments about these issues.

 

[RobAnybody]

EDIT AGAIN: I've done wikipedia research now. Apparently "woke" was being used completely unironically in the social justice sense back in the mid-2000s.

Oh, hah, I am absolutely sure it was in circulation well before I heard of it.

 

[Bugfatty300]

I'm not sure if there was a specific moment since then when it shifted in meaning or if it was more gradual

Follow the grifter money. Four lettered "woke" is better for search engines and algorithms than "SJW."