can you rephrase without “woke” to establish what you mean by it, in order to separate it from other things others might refer to as woke that you wouldn’t? I’m not familiar enough with the term to know what people actually mean by it in this context, given the differences in how different subcultures talk.
I guess I probably meant it a lot broader than others do—it’s more of a spectrum than a binary classification and I’m including support for open immigration, affirmative action, etc. in what I’m thinking of. The more the support for a policy is based on some firmly held moral conviction that is at odds with most of the population, the more I’m thinking of it as woke I guess.
I see. For what it’s worth I don’t think that’s the only important split here. I think a lot more people accept the firm moral convictions than there are people who endorse pressuring others about them in the particular flavor that defines what I hope I can simply refer to as corporate wokism and be understood, which is what I see in the halls of power. Merely “staying woke” in self defense as a different thing than “woke ideology” as a different thing than “woke authority”. I personally define my moral convictions by anti-authoritarianism and pro-flourishing-autonomy, and with that as the guiding reference I find a lot of common ground with centrists I meet online (discord, games, etc) on morality, the disagreements are over how that morality should be implemented, usually, though of course there are plenty who don’t agree morally. It seems to me that the sense in which Sam Altman is woke is the one to be afraid of, given that my my standards the thing to stay woke about is the threat from him! If authoritarian regime change occurs, I think it will at this point be heavily entangled with the way his interaction with government changed the system.
Hmm yes the “pressuring others about them” aspect is a major part of what I’m thinking of as woke too. But, regarding:
Merely “staying woke” in self defense as a different thing than “woke ideology” as a different thing than “woke authority”
If people in an institution have to “stay woke” in self defense, that is a major degree of influence, even if few actually endorse pressuring others as you say.
Not sure what you’re saying after that point, perhaps you could elaborate.
agh I should probably do more useful things than reply to this in detail. basically I think sam altman is a great example of what this video describes. (ai summary with human edits.) this is an unabashedly left channel—not even liberal, which this channel would describe as centrist. It’s not a full citation, but it’s a solid overview.
Some folks have been increasingly concerned about a “woke corporate agenda” where corporations pretend to care about social issues like racism and sexism to defend their wealth and power.
The video claims the real problem is not that corporations care too much about social justice, but the amount of power and control they have over working people.
Identity politics was originally coined by Black feminists to fully participate in political movements and engage in politics, but got coopted and the name means something else to most people now
Identity politics was proposed to focus on undoing inequality and building solidarity, not just solutions based on identities. Perhaps nominative determinism screwed it up. (What if we designed by nominative determinism?)
Corporations have captured identity politics because they see how valuable it is, but they don’t actually change the unequal structures.
Corporations use progressive and identity politics language to defend their interests and union bust (thereby changing what the zeitgeist uses those words to refer to.)
Corporations engage in “deference politics” where they recognize marginalized voices within power structures but don’t change the unequal structures.
We need “constructive politics” focusing on positive outcomes for working people, starting with identity but arriving at solidarity.
True solidarity unites working people against corporate elites and fights for a more equitable distribution of wealth and power.
Once we realize who is trying to divide us (the elite), we can work towards solidarity and economic justice for all.
can you rephrase without “woke” to establish what you mean by it, in order to separate it from other things others might refer to as woke that you wouldn’t? I’m not familiar enough with the term to know what people actually mean by it in this context, given the differences in how different subcultures talk.
I guess I probably meant it a lot broader than others do—it’s more of a spectrum than a binary classification and I’m including support for open immigration, affirmative action, etc. in what I’m thinking of. The more the support for a policy is based on some firmly held moral conviction that is at odds with most of the population, the more I’m thinking of it as woke I guess.
I see. For what it’s worth I don’t think that’s the only important split here. I think a lot more people accept the firm moral convictions than there are people who endorse pressuring others about them in the particular flavor that defines what I hope I can simply refer to as corporate wokism and be understood, which is what I see in the halls of power. Merely “staying woke” in self defense as a different thing than “woke ideology” as a different thing than “woke authority”. I personally define my moral convictions by anti-authoritarianism and pro-flourishing-autonomy, and with that as the guiding reference I find a lot of common ground with centrists I meet online (discord, games, etc) on morality, the disagreements are over how that morality should be implemented, usually, though of course there are plenty who don’t agree morally. It seems to me that the sense in which Sam Altman is woke is the one to be afraid of, given that my my standards the thing to stay woke about is the threat from him! If authoritarian regime change occurs, I think it will at this point be heavily entangled with the way his interaction with government changed the system.
Hmm yes the “pressuring others about them” aspect is a major part of what I’m thinking of as woke too. But, regarding:
If people in an institution have to “stay woke” in self defense, that is a major degree of influence, even if few actually endorse pressuring others as you say.
Not sure what you’re saying after that point, perhaps you could elaborate.
agh I should probably do more useful things than reply to this in detail. basically I think sam altman is a great example of what this video describes. (ai summary with human edits.) this is an unabashedly left channel—not even liberal, which this channel would describe as centrist. It’s not a full citation, but it’s a solid overview.
Some folks have been increasingly concerned about a “woke corporate agenda” where corporations pretend to care about social issues like racism and sexism to defend their wealth and power.
The video claims the real problem is not that corporations care too much about social justice, but the amount of power and control they have over working people.
Identity politics was originally coined by Black feminists to fully participate in political movements and engage in politics, but got coopted and the name means something else to most people now
Identity politics was proposed to focus on undoing inequality and building solidarity, not just solutions based on identities. Perhaps nominative determinism screwed it up. (What if we designed by nominative determinism?)
Corporations have captured identity politics because they see how valuable it is, but they don’t actually change the unequal structures.
Corporations use progressive and identity politics language to defend their interests and union bust (thereby changing what the zeitgeist uses those words to refer to.)
Corporations engage in “deference politics” where they recognize marginalized voices within power structures but don’t change the unequal structures.
We need “constructive politics” focusing on positive outcomes for working people, starting with identity but arriving at solidarity.
True solidarity unites working people against corporate elites and fights for a more equitable distribution of wealth and power.
Once we realize who is trying to divide us (the elite), we can work towards solidarity and economic justice for all.
Thanks, that was very clarifying. I’m definitely talking about the post-elite-capture version, and not the original grassroots version.