Feb 28, 2023 03:00 AM
(This post was last modified: Feb 28, 2023 03:24 AM by C C.)
That's okay, though. I've got a replacement.
- - - - - - - - -
Don’t use the W-word
https://quillette.com/blog/2023/01/28/do...he-w-word/
EXCERPTS: . . . Whatever it’s supposed to mean, use of the word “woke” forces individuals into one tribe or another, even when almost all of us have complex beliefs about the underlying societal issues in question. For instance, I believe that systemic racism is a real phenomenon that’s worth discussing and being concerned about. I’m for doing what we can to restructure society to mitigate inequities. I’m not against the implementation of (sensible) Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies. Does that make me “woke”?
Before you decide, you should also know that I think defunding the police would be a disastrous idea. I believe most modern anti-racism campaigns are, themselves, racist and counterproductive. And I am emphatically against policing speech, deplatforming, and the claim that words are “violence.” Does that make me “anti-woke”? I’ve been called—or accused of being—both.
The slew of comments under Walsh’s tweet and Yang’s rejoinder to it illustrate how divided we are on the meaning of “woke.” As with most culture-war conflicts of this type, discourse around the word’s meaning consists almost entirely of people talking past each other. This inhibits us from effectively addressing the problems that woke ideas are supposed to solve—which is what should matter to everyone.
[...] Accusations of racism still cause severe offense and alarm. But the substance of the underlying accusations has become more and more diluted. Eventually, people stop taking the accusation seriously. What we’re left with at that point is the carcass of a word, and a newfound inability to articulate (and denounce) an age-old evil. The parasite has devoured its host.
That’s why progressives should join their political opponents in helping to preserve the true meanings of terms such as “racism,” “violence,” and “trauma.” Those words describe serious problems in our society. And if they become meaningless due to dilatory misuse, that’s disastrous for our public discourse.
[...] It’s important to analyze what we’re actually trying to do when we underscore and address “wokeness.” Are we attempting to mitigate the damage caused by specific ideas, or are we looking to identify, fight, and ultimately defeat some nebulous “them”? We all say we want the former, but all we seem to do is the latter... (MORE - missing details)
- - - - - - - - -
Don’t use the W-word
https://quillette.com/blog/2023/01/28/do...he-w-word/
EXCERPTS: . . . Whatever it’s supposed to mean, use of the word “woke” forces individuals into one tribe or another, even when almost all of us have complex beliefs about the underlying societal issues in question. For instance, I believe that systemic racism is a real phenomenon that’s worth discussing and being concerned about. I’m for doing what we can to restructure society to mitigate inequities. I’m not against the implementation of (sensible) Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies. Does that make me “woke”?
Before you decide, you should also know that I think defunding the police would be a disastrous idea. I believe most modern anti-racism campaigns are, themselves, racist and counterproductive. And I am emphatically against policing speech, deplatforming, and the claim that words are “violence.” Does that make me “anti-woke”? I’ve been called—or accused of being—both.
The slew of comments under Walsh’s tweet and Yang’s rejoinder to it illustrate how divided we are on the meaning of “woke.” As with most culture-war conflicts of this type, discourse around the word’s meaning consists almost entirely of people talking past each other. This inhibits us from effectively addressing the problems that woke ideas are supposed to solve—which is what should matter to everyone.
[...] Accusations of racism still cause severe offense and alarm. But the substance of the underlying accusations has become more and more diluted. Eventually, people stop taking the accusation seriously. What we’re left with at that point is the carcass of a word, and a newfound inability to articulate (and denounce) an age-old evil. The parasite has devoured its host.
That’s why progressives should join their political opponents in helping to preserve the true meanings of terms such as “racism,” “violence,” and “trauma.” Those words describe serious problems in our society. And if they become meaningless due to dilatory misuse, that’s disastrous for our public discourse.
[...] It’s important to analyze what we’re actually trying to do when we underscore and address “wokeness.” Are we attempting to mitigate the damage caused by specific ideas, or are we looking to identify, fight, and ultimately defeat some nebulous “them”? We all say we want the former, but all we seem to do is the latter... (MORE - missing details)