Is the backlash against wokeness a case of the cure being worse than the disease? Is all the complaining about wokeness much ado about nothing? If you think so, this thread is for you.
My first thought, if youâre anti-anti-woke, what does that make you?
A nice alternative opinion to the endless culture war.
Instead, letâs focus on whatâs so funny about the âfree thinkers,â which is their delusional victimhood and overblown estimation of their own iconoclasm. For starters, none of these people are actually suffering from being canceledâthey all have large platforms and huge audiences of people who nod in agreement with every inane point they make. Netflix, Spotify, and Substack are not no-manâs lands, and most of them continue to collect plenty of money and audience adulation from like-minded âdebate meâ bros, âfree speech absolutists,â Intellectual Dark Web aspirants, libertarian edgelords, professional devilâs advocates, âIâm just asking questionsâ dudes, right-wing trolls, and garden-variety shitposters.
Consequences and criticism are not tantamount to cancellation. Be for real.
But also, itâs just absurd that these people think they are, to quote college freshman everywhere, âsubverting the dominant paradigm.â
4 Likes
First of all, if the culture war is endless it is because people like us, that is you and me, think it is important. It takes two to tango, canât have a war if one side goes home
Second, just looking at the title, the premise is flawed on the face. The only opinion the anti woke will all share is a vague anti wokeness.
I can see how that is easier and more self gratuitous than focusing on the merits of their best points, but such dismissal doesnât exactly prove them wrong
To be fair, they do have platforms. But also to be fair, they are chased after and people do work to take their platforms away. I donât think Jonathan Haidt or Brett Weinstein, for example, play the victim. Nor are they delusional.
It probably isnât the do.inant paradigm with the average joe, sure. It is undoubtedly the dominant paradigm at North American universities.
I guess now Iâll take a look at the link, but based on the title and your post, I have low expectations that there is anything interesting thereâŚ
Edit: missed this on my first skim of your post
They have their feeble minded equivalents on the left, neither side of the horseshoe is veryb appealing at the edge. The intellectually and morally respo sible thing to do, IMO, is to find some reasonable middle ground without demonising everyone who disagrees.
Not all the antiwoke agree with me there, but not all the ignorant fools on the left do either
Continued editing as I read:
Lol, the first paragraph goes Kanye West and Hitler right out the gate. This is going to be awful.
Ok, Tulsi Gabbard, Milo Y., definitely avoiding academics who are actual intellectuals here. Is the author being dishonest or are they just that ignorant?
As for Rogan, they say:
But one of the great things about Rogan is that he is curious, and he is honest that he isnt very smart and doesnât know much. So he invites people like Michael Pollan, and how many dozens of other respected journalists and academics? Sure, heâs more likely to invite like-minded people, heâs not looking to have arguments with people he knows he disagrees with (so, no debate, bro)
Has Dave Chapelle complained about cancelations? Seems this author hasnât done the basic research
The other complaints about martyrdom and hyperbole, this is literally violence. That is to say, Iâm not saying it doesnât happen with some of the woke pushback, but that doesnât mean it doesnât equally happen on the other side of the war/debate
I donât know much about Andrew Sullivan, but 1619 has been widely discredited and giving the benefit of the doubt on the big black cocks, seems like a single cherry picked quote to discredit a larger body of work. Again, why not pick the BEST arguments? This is a cheap debate trick
Ah, Steven Pinker. Finally, an actual academic. The author says:
This author has embarassed themselves. I could go on, but I wonât
I scanned to the end, looking for names of actual intellectuals and didnt see a single one
FAIL
2 Likes
The only thing I care about is that the obsession over perceived wokeness distracts from other issues and progress in other areas. Culture wars are hyperbolized wedge issues intentionally dividing people.
Thatâs because the concept of woke, used as the pejorative, is vague, flimsy and changes with the whims of whoever is weaponizing the term.
This is proving them wrong. They are not in any way shape or form cancelled. They are not free thinkers because they donât allow the opinions of others into their group.
That is your opinion based on a vague smorgasbord of CRT, wokeness.
Confirmation bias at its finest.
You keep mentioning actual intellectuals which is sort of pompous. Rarely do people give a shit what an academic says in a vacuum. So not sure whose names you are expecting to see. But the people driving the anti woke movement are mentioned in the article. The author makes the point that they are neither cancelled nor free thinkers. Iâm fine if you donât agree.
I like to see more diversity of opinion rather than just the same old regurgitated nonsense.
2 Likes
You repeat the same talking point over and over, which is to say you donât see âwokeâ as the problem, itâs the anti woke crowd who are the ones stirring up shit for no good reason.
Maybe you would be happier opening a thread on âThe anti woke crowdâ and leave those who want to post instances of âpeak wokeâ on here?
1 Like
You only say that because you donât care about those issues. Instead of ignoring the fact that some people do care about them or debating their importance with them, youâre insisting that A) people not care about them and B) people care about âissues and progress in other areasâ that are important to you (which you are not advancing or debating either).
Not according to the writer of this article, who uses the term âanti-wokeâ for people, which implies a clear definition of woke. Perhaps itâs you who doesnât get what people mean when they say âwokeâ?
1 Like
Iâm not sure how you qualify advancing but I certainly do discuss/debate on here and advocate for issues IRL that I think are important.
If a majority of content is devoted to complaining about woke, then that seems like a good identifier.
I think a lot of people lose the thread of what woke is because itâs constantly changing and ever expanding.
Great but youâre not doing that by doing this. I could equally criticize you on the same basis. Why not just do that, or perhaps debate some of the points addressed in a thread such as this?
That doesnât matter. People are not just saying âI hate woke.â Theyâre pointing at specific events (many can be seen above). Woke is just a loose identifier for them. Would you like separate threads to complain about each particular manifestation of what people have come to think of as âwokeâ? Then we would probably need a whole âWokeâ forum! 
1 Like
To be clear, I am not criticizing you in my post above. And I do believe I am engaging in discussion as well as advocating for issues that I think are important. Though maybe not all at the same time.
That is a problem, but also part of the reason some people use this term since anyone can change it to whatever they want it to mean.
Sure, I didnât think you were. I mean that if you are saying that people criticizing wokeness are wasting time by not focusing on what you see as more important concerns, I can also point out that you are wasting time by trying to tell us to stop
Why is it a problem? Things are happening, people see connections between them, they refer to them in a loose grouping as woke. This is how language works. Anyone who would consider themselves an anti-woke campaigner or what have you will be concerned with those component issues. And itâs not just anti-left wing either, if people have problems with work stoppages by unions say, they wonât be calling that woke. The organizers may even be anti-woke in ways.
1 Like
The article and the reason I posted is criticizing the content creators. They have good reason to do it because it is very very profitable. The same journalists that get posted over and over from substack are making way more off a few thousand subscribers then they ever would at a traditional publication like the NYT. Not to mention podcasts, speeches, books etc.etc. The impact though is that so much time and content is devoted to transgender bathrooms and so little to issues that actually have an impact on 99% of real people.
There is no way anyone will come together and agree because that is not how issues are presented. Itâs all about owning the other side.
Because it stigmatizes and stereotypes millions of people.
The fact that you had to clarify itâs notâŚmeans that it is. At least that is how itâs presented. None of the content presents any solutions to this supposed widespread woke plague. What Iâve heard on the forum is we should ignore them. Well that wonât happen any time soon if we devote all of our content to the tiniest most minute example we can find all day every day.
I think you would be happier maybe. I like to share alternative viewpoints that I find interesting. Like woke content being a giant grift to provide a platform where one previously did not exist -for content creators, political parties and the like.
You like to post about the establishment, MSM etc. and Iâm sure you will continue to do so, even if others find it repetitive. So letâs all share our different opinions, engage in debate like we always do.
1 Like
Youâre doing the same thing again, telling people what they can and canât pay attention to. Itâs a media ecosystem. People are interested in this stuff and want to read about this. That you think other things are more important is irrelevant.
Look, if millions of people have certain ideas and feel themselves stigmatized by a labeling of them, tough cookies really. No one gets a free pass to not be criticized.
No, it means I knew you would try to say it is. I showed itâs not.
1 Like
Then you should care about such disingenuous, bad faith, hypocritical writing. Instead, youâre sharing it like it has value
I donât disagree, but i see this as a foundational problem with the dogma on the academic left. Kendiangeloism, for example. Anyways, once again your linked article failed to make the point
In a way, some of them are. I specifically asked about Chapelle, if you want to reply to the substance of my post
They allow others to think differently, and they have disagreement and discussion regularly. John McWhorter and that other AA professor, for example (these 2 also not mentioned(
From an education standpoint, I am literally an expert, it is an expert opinion based in part on lived experience. You can keep dismissing that, i know i canât convince you, but i donât really care. The fact is, the only arena where I have claimed any expert knowledge is education (and specifically higher education). My posting has borne this out, and when others couldnât do more than respond with accusations that I was a liar, I shared my CV with @mick (and later, I think, @tempogain). If you state my opinions are based on a âvague smorgasbordâ, despite my having posted to the contrary, well that seems disingenuous to me. But in the spirit of a good faith argument, what would you say your opinion is based on?
This works both ways. I could equally say the only reason you approve of and share this ânice alternative viewâ is that it confirms your bias. A big difference is that I carried on to read and give a point by point rebuttal.
Weâve flogged this dead horse many times. Donât you have any talking points you have already regurgitated?
Not the specific people I mention, no. What we have here, is some boogey man âanti-wokeâ that is ague, flimsy, and changes with whims. Some people, such as Jordan Peterson, have objectively dealt with cancellation. As has Brett Weinstein. I asked about Chappelle⌠crickets.
I guess I have a scholarly bias, being a scholar. Perhaps to you Kanye West is a serious thinker. I have actual read a few books by Steven Pinker.
As I have written about previously, there is concept creep (I learned about that one from Jonathan Haidt); there is also the trickle down effect. The professors who write this stuff teach classes, the people who take those classes get jobs and apply what theyâve learned. This stuff has been written and posted about on the threads already. Iâm not sure if you donât read it, or just donât get it.
I named a few. I have also named several in this thread and CRT. Because I know what Iâm talking about and who Iâm looking for. Actual academics, not Kanye West.
I think it is a shite article, Iâm fine if you donât agree.
Then please, stop regurgitating the same old nonsense!
Yes
I think Iâll just do it. I tried moving some of this discussion to an existing thread and he didnât like it. There was also flogging woke horses (aka regurgitated talking points). Time for the peak anti-woke thread.
Which is a position of ignorance, if true. At least some people vote for politicians like trump specifically because they are tired of the social justice agenda in their faces telling them theyâre bad because of their skin color. If you really donât want politicians capitalizing on the backlash, you should care about solving the root problems.
1 Like
I suggested it because I knew you would reject it as an idea. Why did I think that?
Because the repeated pattern of posting is to counter âpeak wokeâ postings with criticism of the anti woke crowd. Which I am guessing you didnât just stumble over or find that article interesting and decided to share, a google search on âanti woke crowdâ perhaps, it would be why it was dated from about a month ago.
Then a quick scan to find the most insulting name calling you can find and quote it here.
Well, you get to give those posting on the âpoke wokeâ thread a piece of your mind and what you think of them!
Not exactly engaging in polite discourse and a polite exchange of ideas though.
No Iâm not. This is why the woke cancel culture trope is so grating. Criticizing something is not the same as censorship. Just because I post a view counter to the popular view on this thread does not mean I am telling others what to do. Others can decide for themselves.
Or different approaches are more effective.
Nobody is stopping them. That is why Weiss, Taibbi, Greenwald, Rogan, Peterson are doing so well.
Exactly, including those who profit off of hyperbolizing issues they call woke.
If the perception is already there and you need to clarify, even if someone didnât say it, then thereâs a reason for that. I donât think youâve showed that is not in any respect.
1 Like
Then you should care about such disingenuous, bad faith, hypocritical writing. Instead, youâre sharing it like it has value
I donât disagree, but i see this as a foundational problem with the dogma on the academic left. Kendiangeloism, for example. Anyways, once again your linked article failed to make the point
In a way, some of them are. I specifically asked about Chapelle, if you want to reply to the substance of my post
They allow others to think differently, and they have disagreement and discussion regularly. John McWhorter and that other AA professor, for example (these 2 also not mentioned(
I am literally an expert, it is an expert opinion based in part on lived experience. You can keep dismissing that, i know i canât convince you, but i donât really care
This works both ways. I could equally say the only reason you gind this drmmm
Not afraid if the opinion, bored of the discussion. But look, a dedicated thread for your favorite topic! Please remembet posting on-tipuc is a part of the forum. You are not being cancelled, you are being encouraged to stay on this platform.
But if you insist on posting off topic, Iâll get annoyed. Keep it over here
An expert of what exactly? If the term woke is so loose, then what aspect of wokeness are you an expert?
Props to you in advance for your accomplishments.
Then certainly if you are bored you can ignore my post and choose not to engage. I find unraveling the political/media machine behind this new trend interesting.
That doesnât mean Iâm forcing anyone to think a certain way.