Discussing the toxicity of wokeness

Post Reply New Topic

This very thread has fulfilled every single prediction I had on the topic. Criticism not allowed . . .

. . . called a bigot, privileged and ignorant . . .

. . . No room for nuance or dissent. . . .

. . . Have fun defending your ideology with tooth and nail, folks. . . .

. . . I'm done debating this and being misconstrued. . . .

. . . One of the mods can close the thread or something I don't care. . . .

. . . It was nice being in this community but I already tell I'm too "privileged" for my opinions to matter here.  I'm going back to my extremely privileged life, protected by the patriarchy of course.  Happy 2025, wokies.

I was just thinking that the meaning of words is determined by usage. The word “woke” seems to most often be used by the right to disparage and dismiss opinions they don’t like. Overall, I think it’s a tricky word to use because people do use it in different ways and each insists that they’re using it the correct way. No single usage is correct if it’s commonly used in other ways. If someone is going to label me as woke because I care about marriage equality then I’ll happily wear the label even if they meant it as an insult. In that case, I’m woke as f**k.

As a general FYI, no one in this thread called anyone a bigot.

Woke is defined by the DeSantis administration as "the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them," according to DeSantis' general counsel, as reported by The Washington Post.

"We reject woke ideology," DeSantis said in his election 2022 night speech. "We will never ever surrender to the woke agenda. People have come here because of our policies."

WHEREAS, Black history is a critical aspect of American history and has shaped American culture, including the evolution of language; and

WHEREAS, The words "Wake Up" and "Woke" have served as a call to action as conveyed by social activist Marcus Garvey who stated, "Wake up Ethiopia! Wake up Africa", and the Negro Mine Workers who in 1940 issued the statement, "We were asleep. But we will stay woke from now on," in advocating against discriminatory pay; and

WHEREAS, The term "Woke" was first highlighted in the 1962 essay, "If You're Woke, You Dig It", featured in the "New York Times" by Harlem-based writer William Melvin Kelley who documented the cultural appropriation and distortion of language, resulting in certain idioms being abandoned by their original Black creators; and

WHEREAS, The term "Woke" has been similarly misused, as traditionally and white-focused media have reframed "Woke" as trendy new slang, eroding its cultural connection and separating the term from its historical grounding in social justice; and

WHEREAS, Six decades later, anti-Black racists have engaged in a similar exercise of cultural appropriation to weaponized and misdefine the term "Woke", as evidenced by the "Stop W.O.K.E. Act", specifically targeting the teaching of American history and Black educators; and

WHEREAS, Black educators are more likely to teach subjects that incorporate an inclusive view of history, and legislation like the "Stop W.O.K.E. Act" threatens the free speech and livelihood of teachers, and the quality of education received by all students, most recently students in Florida.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the NAACP affirms the term "Woke" and its historical connection to Black history, Black liberation movements, and social justice.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the NAACP through its units encourages a historically accurate and correct use of the term "Woke" when its misuse is identified.

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the NAACP condemns cultural appropriation, misuse of Black idioms, and specific efforts by anti-Black racists to distort and redefine the specific term "Woke."

Further, there has been a push to reclaim the word by the NAACP:
It does seem especially problematic to use the term “woke” in a disparaging way. Obviously, the meaning of words evolve and change, but I think the way this particular word has done so - to become a sort of mockery of the very thing it originally stood for - may not be worth upholding.

It does seem especially problematic to use the term “woke” in a disparaging way. Obviously, the meaning of words evolve and change, but I think the way this particular word has done so - to become a sort of mockery of the very thing it originally stood for - may not be worth upholding.

When in 2017 the editors of the Oxford English Dictionary added “woke” to their list of new words, they defined it as “alert to racial or social discrimination and injustice.” The earliest modern citation of “woke,” according to the OED, was a 1962 article, “If You’re Woke You Dig It,” written for the New York Times by the African American novelist William Melvin Kelley. Coincidentally, Kelley passed away the same year “woke” was recognized by the OED. In a 2018 profile of the late author, The New Yorker’s Kathryn Schulz drew her readers’ attention to the same Times article.

What neither the editors of the Oxford English Dictionary nor Schulz did, however, was provide a close reading of Kelley’s important essay, and as a result they lost an opportunity to dampen the culture wars now being waged in public and in private in the name of “woke.” “If You’re Woke You Dig It” is an essay that deserves rescue from the obscurity into which it fell for many years. But above all, it deserves to be seen for what it is—a work of cultural description rather than a battle cry.

I knew Kelley for many years as a Sarah Lawrence College faculty colleague. He enjoyed provoking readers with his fiction. His debut novel, A Different Drummer, published three weeks after his NYT essay, more than lives up to the title it borrows from Thoreau’s Walden. A Different Drummer tells the story of Tucker Caliban, a black farmer living in an imaginary Southern state who by his example persuades every African American living in the state to leave it.

By contrast, “If You’re Woke You Dig It” is not designed to set readers on edge. It’s an expository essay about the richness of black idiom that comes with a series of whimsical drawings that illustrate Kelley’s text. Written a year before the 1963 March on Washington, “If You’re Woke You Dig It” reflects its time (to the point where he uses the term “Negro”).

The essay begins with Kelley commenting on a New York City subway poster that advises train riders to keep the cars clean in 21 different “languages.” Among them is a variation telling train riders, “Hey cats this is your swinging-wheels, so dig it and keep it clean.” Kelly has no quarrel with the message. What he objects to is how the poster labels the message as “Beatnik.” Kelley’s point is that the language the New York Transit authority is calling Beatnik is really black idiom.

What follows is an account of the role in American life played by black idiom. “It is not only a language of vocabulary, but of context and inflection,” Kelley writes. Black idiom takes its meaning from those using it as well as those to whom they are speaking, Kelley argues. The language is constantly changing. The men and women using it take “pride in something that belongs completely to the Negro.” Whites who try to use black idiom, Kelley adds, are invariably going to be behind the learning curve, and for blacks that situation is, he acknowledges, often a source of pleasure. “The Negro’s pride in this idiom is that of a man who watches someone else do ineptly what he can do well.”

Kelley’s contention is not that the black idiom he describes can’t be widely appreciated. It translates well, he believes. “The American Negro feels he can, on the spur of the moment, create the most exciting language that exists in any English-speaking country today,” Kelley writes. Kelley even provides his non-black readers with an alphabetized lexicon that starts with “ace” and ends with “woof.” The entry for woke defines it as an adjective meaning “well-informed, up-to-date.” Nothing in the definition Kelley supplied suggests a code word for identity politics.

Kelley, who was just 24 when “If You’re Woke You Dig It” was published, saw himself taking the role of a friendly cultural guide in his essay, and he assumed goodwill on the part of his readers. He was not asking them to take an ideological stance but to attune themselves to a language filled with a complexity and wit they might not have fully grasped on their own.

Today, it is increasingly rare to see “woke” being used in a way that doesn’t reflect our racial divisions. Even the term’s defenders concede as much. In an op-ed headline “In Defense of Woke,” Damon Young, the author of What Doesn’t Kill You Makes You Blacker, notes that “woke” can no longer be said unironically. “What was a compliment just a few years ago has become, at best, an eye roll,” Young observes.

It’s worth revisiting “If You’re Woke You Dig It” to understand that for Kelley analyzing black culture also meant celebrating it. His essay doesn’t deserve to be burdened with our current cultural battles. The last thing Kelley imagined when he used “woke” in the title of his essay was that the word would be weaponized. If he can be faulted all these years later, it is for being too optimistic.

Nicolaus Mills is professor of literature at Sarah Lawrence College and author of Like a Holy Crusade: Mississippi 1964—The Turning of the Civil Rights Movement in America.

Given its imprecision and the fact that it’s a loaded word, I think it’s a tricky term to use in debates. The way it was used at certain points in this thread seems to highlight my overall point.

My personal experience challenges the broad claim that all men, simply by virtue of being male, are inherently privileged in life. While I fully acknowledge that women and other marginalized groups face unique and significant challenges, I reject the idea that all men live with ease or advantage. This oversimplification not only disregards individual circumstances but also diminishes the complexity of systemic issues.

I take issue with the tendency to paint men with a broad brush, as though their lives are easier in the vast majority of cases. Privilege is not a one-size-fits-all concept, and reducing people’s experiences to their demographic categories overlooks the intersectional nature of struggles that individuals face. Gender, race, socioeconomic status, disability, and personal circumstances all interact in ways that make sweeping generalizations unhelpful and counterproductive.

For example, as a “cis white male,” I have often felt my opinions and struggles dismissed or diminished simply because I don’t belong to a traditionally oppressed group. While it’s good to have compassion for the oppressed, that doesn’t mean people outside these groups lack valid perspectives or don’t face their own challenges. It’s harmful to suggest that their suffering is irrelevant or insignificant by comparison.

I have also struggled with challenges that extend beyond identity politics. I suspect I have autism, though my psychologist has not given a formal diagnosis. Instead, she frequently refers to me as having “autistic characteristics.” This has affected my ability to connect with others and contributed to a lifelong sense of loneliness and alienation.

Throughout my life, I have battled depression and deep feelings of isolation. I’ve never had a girlfriend, and as someone in their late 20s, this affects me profoundly. While some might dismiss this as trivial, for me, it is a significant source of pain. Intimacy and connection are fundamental human needs, and their absence creates a longing that no amount of philosophical detachment can alleviate.

Economic hardship has also been a major factor in my life. I come from a lower-middle-income family that faced severe financial challenges when I was 17. These difficulties limited my opportunities for work, education, and even basic milestones like owning a car. I am now working full-time while pursuing my studies. This dual burden is exhausting, especially when many of my peers are able to focus on college full-time without the added stress of employment.

The problem there is that the word is pretty much radioactive right now. That's not to say that it can't be reclaimed, but trying to reclaim a word that has so much use is incredibly challenging. And, the track record on doing so hasn't necessarily been the best. It's really not my place to say whether words like the n-word can/should be reclaimed, but as a practical matter, reclaiming it pretty much requires that the word be available for basically anybody to use, and therein lies a large part of the problem, the n-word is definitely not OK for everybody,and I don't expect that to change. In terms of woke, I don't see that being a problem, but I do see the problem of people insisting on using it in a derogatory way because the same folks that would refuse to accept a new definition are largely the same folks that make it necessary.

But, we'll see. I've certainly been wrong about things like this in the past, but I do expect this will go the way of "on fleek" if they try to switch the definition back to something more consistent with it's origins.

I wasn’t claiming that they’d necessarily be successful.

I don’t expect the word to be fully reclaimed any time soon given how widespread “anti-wokism” and racism is in this country. Knowledgeable people can avoid using the term in inappropriate contexts or they can try to inform others. Informing others is a bit challenging because the anti-woke crowd seems to rely heavily on emotion despite accusing others of doing so. Some refuse to recognize that systemic injustices still exist even though there’s no shortage of research out there on this topic. Of course, that seems to tie into the issue of anti-intellectualism…

I’m expecting the use of the word “woke” in this context to gradually die out and be replaced with something else although I suppose time will tell.

I think this is a simplification of the position you are arguing with. I think most people who use the phrase "male privilege" would generally take an intersectional approach. They (we) don't think every man automatically has an easy life, because that's a ridiculous thing to think, but there are many situations where being a man is advantageous.

Throughout my life, I have battled depression and deep feelings of isolation. I’ve never had a girlfriend, and as someone in their late 20s, this affects me profoundly. While some might dismiss this as trivial, for me, it is a significant source of pain. Intimacy and connection are fundamental human needs, and their absence creates a longing that no amount of philosophical detachment can alleviate.
..<snip>..
Economic hardship has also been a major factor in my life. I come from a lower-middle-income family that faced severe financial challenges when I was 17. These difficulties limited my opportunities for work, education, and even basic milestones like owning a car. I am now working full-time while pursuing my studies. This dual burden is exhausting, especially when many of my peers are able to focus on college full-time without the added stress of employment.
..<snip>..
I often feel invisible in the world.