The excesses of Trump and the online influencer right have revived talk of the Woke Right. I get the emotion, but as a scholar who, like the political scientist Giovanni Sartori, is a stickler for the rigorous use of concepts, I must rebel.
Sometimes I think that Dr Lindsay and others are looking to extend their own relevance and tenure as influential woke dissidents with this notion. It's 'Prevalence Induced Concept Change' Eric! (I learned about that from you). As the real thing begins to show signs of waning, the definition of woke starts getting expanded in order to preserve just enough 'stock' of it for people like James to keep writing about it! Or am I being too cynical there??
Like all valuable critics of harmful social trends and problems, woke dissidents should in fact welcome, and indeed be trying to bring about, their own obsolescence.
By definition there can indeed be no woke right. I agree that this does reflect the interplay between positive and negative prejudice, sacralization being the positive form in wokeism and demonization the negative one. It is highly unlikely that any mainstream ideological movement could sacralise men and boys and simultaneously demonize women and girls. And we are certainly not seeing the rise of such a thing now.
Another thing that strikes me as significant here is the difference between 'hidden', 'systemic' and 'implied/inferred' discrimination, on the one hand, and and real, measurable, direct discrimination on the other. Wokeism tends to 'specialise', shall we say, in the former. A key part of the state of being woke is being able to "see" the hidden power grids that fall so conveniently around sex, race, gender (Patriarchy; Whiteness, cis-gender Heteronormativity etc.).
This can result in a belief and an insistence upon the existence of prejudice and discrimination even when it isn't there.
Much of the backlash against wokeism from the right is nothing like that. The woke solution to 'imagined' or 'perceived' discrimination is REAL direct discrimination against white people, men and boys etc. Just as it wasn't really 'woke' for 20th century liberal feminists and civil rights activists to call out direct discrimination against women and POC in the past, it surely also isn't woke for people on the right to be concerned about direct discrimination against white men etc today?
One of the worst things about the woke obsession with hidden discrimination, and its response to it, is that it turns something that it THINKS is unjust into something it really KNOWS is unjust.
Pushing back against that isn't woke. It's simply pushing back against an obvious injustice and unfair discrimination.
Smart analysis as ever. While the right may not be best comprehended as "woke," there are strands of the right that are decidedly illiberal. That can include people who decry woke coercion and then apply corresponding tactics when it suits their purposes and they hold the reins of power. For many on the receiving end, that understandably can prompt applying the woke label to both.
“Woke Right” sounded sloppy the first time I heard it. Thank you for taking the time to explain why it’s not apt. I’m surprised by the number of people who I had considered thoughtful people throwing this term around. Sometimes it seems “defenders of liberal values” are more interested in getting on podcasts with their latest theories more than they want to solve problems.
"Woke Right" makes no sense and seems to be more of a marketing tool.
Now that we all live and die in the attention economy, new phrases, jargon and slogans are like product launches, with the entrepreneurs of discourse hoping their new product catches on so they can cash in. (I assume "Woke Right" books are being shopped as we speak.)
But just being dogmatic or illiberal doesn't make one "Woke", just like putting marinara sauce on everything doesn't make it "Italian".
This is silly. “Woke” was always a political slogan, not a coherent concept. It started on the left but the right smartly weaponized it, just like they do in describing Obama or Kamala as a Marxist.
Woke right” may or may not catch on to, but that will be determined by market forces, not pedantic essays. I think Lindsay is a Twitter brained idiot but he *is* very good at marketing. The fact that you feel the need to respond is proof of that.
Perceiving that systems have changed to flatten outcomes, punish masculine virtues, and favor minority groups and women is the truth. That does not make us woke. Wokeness would be if we believed words had power and started taking over education curricula and school boards and started marching through cities burning them down while bullying coffee drinkers to show solidarity with us.
Normal democratic politics can accommodate young activists who notice a problem and try to change policy. That is what we, the New Right, are. If we were woke and were getting people fired from mainstream institutions and tearing down centuries old statues the world would look very different. We can provide evidence to back up our claims and we want reform. We do not think that the very air is white supremacist and the English language itself needs to change.
"Wokeness" is paranoia. Wokeness is mass mental illness and PRIDE in mental illness. The New Right are hard working reformers, trying to repair the damage that weak liberals and progressive wokes have done to our society and education system.
No there can indeed be no such thing as Woke Right..... and the only reason it has become an issue of 'debate' in the online Right ecosystem is the seeming attraction (to some people) of ephemeral click-baity nonsense. I re-post here a comment I made on this site in Jan 25:
‘Woke’ is fast becoming an unhelpful label..... as this nonsense concept ‘Woke Right' well illustrates. When labels get co-opted by people to mean very different things then they risk becoming essentially meaningless. (A similar fate has sadly befallen the once highly meaningful term conservative.) A much better term than Woke is Hyper-Progressivism. Progressivism became the rule and conservatism the exception from the early 20th c. onwards. Then a massive late 20th c. expansion of tertiary education put this partisanship on steroids...ie to hyper. This progressive intellectual hegemony is the great political-philosophical story of the 20th century and beyond. But this is only part of a broader story of how, what I have called a madness of intelligentsias leaked out from the groves of academe and spread virus-like, first through the political and then – much more importantly - through the apolitical fabric of Western civilisation. The story, in other words, of its relationship to a 21st c. madness of crowds. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/the-madness-of-intelligentsias
I find James Lindsay bizarre, in that he can't seem to grasp the main problem with the right at the moment is a strange type of ideological conformity - particularly on the issue of Israel - that mirrors a similar tendency on the left. Instead, he's focusing on this nonsensical concept of woke right.
For an academic who claims to lay hold to a rigorous definition of woke, you are remarkably elastic. The original definition of woke is to be “awake to racism”. It was never to do with gender assignment or sexual orientation.
As for claiming that “woke” is to assert a sacred element, that would be offensive if it weren’t laughable. And laughable if it weren’t so offensive.
To be awake to racism (to be “woke”) is to assert an equal right to respect and opportunity regardless of skin colour. Nothing more and nothing less. There’s nothing sacred about wishing to be equal.
Of course, other opportunistic groups have sought to extend the definition of the term to promote their own interests. These groups include the trans lobby and right wing advocates who sought either to piggyback off the woke campaign or to dilute/muddy the term’s original definition.
They also include academics who wouldn’t have the course they wish to teach if they honoured the original definition and were honest about the term’s etymology.
We all need to earn a living, I get that, but rigorous you are not, sir.
I think it's worth adding that woke DEMANDS guilt and repentance. You can't just give in, accept their measures etc, you must feel in your heart that any and all measures taken against whites, Christians, or males, etc. are deserved and that you as one of those are deserving of it. Even the most fanatically antisemitic right winger doesn't give a shit whether Jews feel guilty or repentent, they just want them gone or dead. Whereas to repeat myself, whites must feel that replacement migration is deserved punishment for colonialism, men must feel the damage done to their dating chances are justified because women had to exist in a primarily family oriented sphere (the horror!!), etc. Good piece Eric.
Wokeness refers to being "alive to and aware of hidden systems of oppression". Sounds like MAGA and woke to me. Woke is not political beliefs but an epistemological pose. Evangelical Christians share all major stylistic traits with the woke.
I agree with you completely on this Eric.
Sometimes I think that Dr Lindsay and others are looking to extend their own relevance and tenure as influential woke dissidents with this notion. It's 'Prevalence Induced Concept Change' Eric! (I learned about that from you). As the real thing begins to show signs of waning, the definition of woke starts getting expanded in order to preserve just enough 'stock' of it for people like James to keep writing about it! Or am I being too cynical there??
Like all valuable critics of harmful social trends and problems, woke dissidents should in fact welcome, and indeed be trying to bring about, their own obsolescence.
By definition there can indeed be no woke right. I agree that this does reflect the interplay between positive and negative prejudice, sacralization being the positive form in wokeism and demonization the negative one. It is highly unlikely that any mainstream ideological movement could sacralise men and boys and simultaneously demonize women and girls. And we are certainly not seeing the rise of such a thing now.
Another thing that strikes me as significant here is the difference between 'hidden', 'systemic' and 'implied/inferred' discrimination, on the one hand, and and real, measurable, direct discrimination on the other. Wokeism tends to 'specialise', shall we say, in the former. A key part of the state of being woke is being able to "see" the hidden power grids that fall so conveniently around sex, race, gender (Patriarchy; Whiteness, cis-gender Heteronormativity etc.).
This can result in a belief and an insistence upon the existence of prejudice and discrimination even when it isn't there.
Much of the backlash against wokeism from the right is nothing like that. The woke solution to 'imagined' or 'perceived' discrimination is REAL direct discrimination against white people, men and boys etc. Just as it wasn't really 'woke' for 20th century liberal feminists and civil rights activists to call out direct discrimination against women and POC in the past, it surely also isn't woke for people on the right to be concerned about direct discrimination against white men etc today?
One of the worst things about the woke obsession with hidden discrimination, and its response to it, is that it turns something that it THINKS is unjust into something it really KNOWS is unjust.
Pushing back against that isn't woke. It's simply pushing back against an obvious injustice and unfair discrimination.
Smart analysis as ever. While the right may not be best comprehended as "woke," there are strands of the right that are decidedly illiberal. That can include people who decry woke coercion and then apply corresponding tactics when it suits their purposes and they hold the reins of power. For many on the receiving end, that understandably can prompt applying the woke label to both.
“Woke Right” sounded sloppy the first time I heard it. Thank you for taking the time to explain why it’s not apt. I’m surprised by the number of people who I had considered thoughtful people throwing this term around. Sometimes it seems “defenders of liberal values” are more interested in getting on podcasts with their latest theories more than they want to solve problems.
Clarity from Eric - a glass of cool spring water.
I don't understand that last paragraph. Is the idea that the right is inherently the side of the "oppressor class"?
Yes - it’s BS meme generation by former lefties who are horrified that they are now nominally on the right
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS WOKE RIGHT
Thanks for this dose of clarity and reality.
"Woke Right" makes no sense and seems to be more of a marketing tool.
Now that we all live and die in the attention economy, new phrases, jargon and slogans are like product launches, with the entrepreneurs of discourse hoping their new product catches on so they can cash in. (I assume "Woke Right" books are being shopped as we speak.)
But just being dogmatic or illiberal doesn't make one "Woke", just like putting marinara sauce on everything doesn't make it "Italian".
Words have meanings!
This is silly. “Woke” was always a political slogan, not a coherent concept. It started on the left but the right smartly weaponized it, just like they do in describing Obama or Kamala as a Marxist.
Woke right” may or may not catch on to, but that will be determined by market forces, not pedantic essays. I think Lindsay is a Twitter brained idiot but he *is* very good at marketing. The fact that you feel the need to respond is proof of that.
Idk, “boys doing worse in school” —> the Longhouse, systemic anti male bias in schools, big Karen; seems woke to me?
Perceiving that systems have changed to flatten outcomes, punish masculine virtues, and favor minority groups and women is the truth. That does not make us woke. Wokeness would be if we believed words had power and started taking over education curricula and school boards and started marching through cities burning them down while bullying coffee drinkers to show solidarity with us.
Normal democratic politics can accommodate young activists who notice a problem and try to change policy. That is what we, the New Right, are. If we were woke and were getting people fired from mainstream institutions and tearing down centuries old statues the world would look very different. We can provide evidence to back up our claims and we want reform. We do not think that the very air is white supremacist and the English language itself needs to change.
"Wokeness" is paranoia. Wokeness is mass mental illness and PRIDE in mental illness. The New Right are hard working reformers, trying to repair the damage that weak liberals and progressive wokes have done to our society and education system.
No there can indeed be no such thing as Woke Right..... and the only reason it has become an issue of 'debate' in the online Right ecosystem is the seeming attraction (to some people) of ephemeral click-baity nonsense. I re-post here a comment I made on this site in Jan 25:
‘Woke’ is fast becoming an unhelpful label..... as this nonsense concept ‘Woke Right' well illustrates. When labels get co-opted by people to mean very different things then they risk becoming essentially meaningless. (A similar fate has sadly befallen the once highly meaningful term conservative.) A much better term than Woke is Hyper-Progressivism. Progressivism became the rule and conservatism the exception from the early 20th c. onwards. Then a massive late 20th c. expansion of tertiary education put this partisanship on steroids...ie to hyper. This progressive intellectual hegemony is the great political-philosophical story of the 20th century and beyond. But this is only part of a broader story of how, what I have called a madness of intelligentsias leaked out from the groves of academe and spread virus-like, first through the political and then – much more importantly - through the apolitical fabric of Western civilisation. The story, in other words, of its relationship to a 21st c. madness of crowds. https://grahamcunningham.substack.com/p/the-madness-of-intelligentsias
I find James Lindsay bizarre, in that he can't seem to grasp the main problem with the right at the moment is a strange type of ideological conformity - particularly on the issue of Israel - that mirrors a similar tendency on the left. Instead, he's focusing on this nonsensical concept of woke right.
For an academic who claims to lay hold to a rigorous definition of woke, you are remarkably elastic. The original definition of woke is to be “awake to racism”. It was never to do with gender assignment or sexual orientation.
As for claiming that “woke” is to assert a sacred element, that would be offensive if it weren’t laughable. And laughable if it weren’t so offensive.
To be awake to racism (to be “woke”) is to assert an equal right to respect and opportunity regardless of skin colour. Nothing more and nothing less. There’s nothing sacred about wishing to be equal.
Of course, other opportunistic groups have sought to extend the definition of the term to promote their own interests. These groups include the trans lobby and right wing advocates who sought either to piggyback off the woke campaign or to dilute/muddy the term’s original definition.
They also include academics who wouldn’t have the course they wish to teach if they honoured the original definition and were honest about the term’s etymology.
We all need to earn a living, I get that, but rigorous you are not, sir.
I think it's worth adding that woke DEMANDS guilt and repentance. You can't just give in, accept their measures etc, you must feel in your heart that any and all measures taken against whites, Christians, or males, etc. are deserved and that you as one of those are deserving of it. Even the most fanatically antisemitic right winger doesn't give a shit whether Jews feel guilty or repentent, they just want them gone or dead. Whereas to repeat myself, whites must feel that replacement migration is deserved punishment for colonialism, men must feel the damage done to their dating chances are justified because women had to exist in a primarily family oriented sphere (the horror!!), etc. Good piece Eric.
Excellent article.
Wokeness refers to being "alive to and aware of hidden systems of oppression". Sounds like MAGA and woke to me. Woke is not political beliefs but an epistemological pose. Evangelical Christians share all major stylistic traits with the woke.