Why is woke a dirty word now?

Post Reply New Topic

This is why I try to avoid buzz terms. Or, like ASPartOfMe, I put it in quotes. Also, when others use it, I look at the context. Someone critiquing a specific aspect of "woke ideology" or "woke culture" is very different than someone just saying "go woke, go broke" and walking away like they've just dropped the ultimate comeback.

However, whatever term is used, I think that's what's going to happen to it, as that seems to be what happens to buzz terms in general. The definition becomes broader and broader until it means whatever the person using it wants it to mean.

Only because you've explained it at great length over and over again. Without those lengthy and repeated explanations, many of us would likely assume you're a hardcore right winger.


"Illiberal left" is clearer and more precise than "regressive left" and is probably your best option IMO. Even "illiberal left" has become a right wing snarl word, but a far less slippery one than "woke."


You don't have to make it go viral. Just use it and explain it when needed. Your explanations could probably be shorter than your explanations of "woke."


Don't do it to "help them out." Do it to clarify what you mean and what you stand for.

I use illiberal here but liberal like woke became such a catch all slur that it has largely been replaced by progressive. I’m afraid with illiberal left I would still have to give lengthy explanations before people get it because what I am describing is a very specific subset of illiberal leftism.

If the people whose views I am describing want to reclaim the word or replace it they need get off the euphemism treadmill and make a sustained consistent effort. No guarantees but it worked splendidly with “queer” and to an extent with the aforementioned “progressive”.

Actually the history of the term "liberal" is much more complex than that, and is VERY different from the history of the term "woke."

Although the exact meaning of "liberal" has varied over the years, it has always been defined as referring to a specific category of political schools of thought.

And, although the categories "liberal" and "progressive" overlap, there has always been a distinction between them. "Progressive" is not a mere euphemism for "liberal."

For an example of a liberal critique of illiberal leftists, see this 2017 article by Jonathan Chait. On the other hand, see also this Marxist critique of Jonathan Chait's liberalism.

For more about liberalism (in the American sense), see The short FAQ on liberalism by Steve Kangas, written in around 2000 or so. Note the distinction between liberalism and socialism, for example. See also the Wikipedia article on Liberalism in the United States.

"Progressive" is a category that includes both the more left-leaning liberals and people with various more-radical views, such as Marxist socialists. The more radical leftists have always rejected liberalism, e.g. Mao's Combat Liberalism and, here in the U.S.A., the satirical song Love Me, I'm a Liberal by Phil Ochs, 1966.

"Progressive" is the true opposite of "conservative," in the most literal sense of both terms. The term "liberal" -- as understood in most English-speaking countries outside the U.S.A., and as understood in academia even inside the U.S.A. -- actually overlaps, to some extent, with American-style "conservativism," as well as with American-style "progressivism." Milton Friedman, for example, called himself a "liberal."

These days, more and more people are calling themselves "progressive" rather than "liberal." Most of these people are probably socialists, with intrinsic reasons to reject the term "liberal."

Due to my intermittent involvement in various kinds of political activism, I've been aware of the distinction between "progressive" and "liberal" for my entire adult life. However, for whatever reason, American journalists have tended to be very sloppy about this, so Americans outside of political activist circles and/or outside of relevant academic discourse might not fully understand this distinction.


Perhaps so, but "illiberal leftism" is still a whole lot more specific than the ultra-slippery term "woke."

At least "illiberal leftism" is derived from a combination of two terms that have always been defined as referring to specific categories of political thought. "Woke," in contrast, was never defined in such a way. As far as I am aware, no one has ever written a "Wokeness Manifesto" or anything similar using the term "woke."


What you should be concerned about is what your use of the word "woke" -- and calling yourself "anti-woke" -- says about you, as the word "woke" is increasingly used by right wingers to mean anything even slightly to the left of themselves. IMO it is not appropriate for a political moderate to use ill-defined snarl words from either side.

I know what it says about me. If you want to think my use of “anti woke” makes me a bigot or a sheep to MAGA’s I can’t change that. One thing you do know about me is that I have an aversion to language policing. It could very well mean I stay with a lost cause too long. If that is the case I will suffer consequences not you.

With that I am done discussing this particular topic with you. I still would like to be a part of your chat group. Feel free to respond you both have earned and deserve that.

Other members feel free to engage with me on this topic.

I'm sorry my post apparently came across as more of a personal accusation than I intended.

Just a quick clarification:

My point is not that it makes you "a bigot or a sheep to MAGA’s," but that it will be increasingly likely to make you come across that way and thereby cause misunderstandings.

I am well aware that you are, in fact, one of the few true moderates here on WP.

Again, I'm sorry for coming across as more accusatory than I intended.

Who wants to read an extremely odd and random thought on this topic?

Today, I thought of the term "Skullgreymon Progressive" to describe the kind of behavior ASPartofMe is using the word "woke" to describe. It's a reference to the Digimon anime. I don't expect this term to catch on.

Basically, in the anime, the human kids have cute little monster friends that "evolve" into a more powerful form when the kid is in danger. The main kid tries to force his Digimon partner to evolve to a higher level and this results in him evolving into Skullgreymon, a creepy skeleton monster who can't tell the difference between friend and foe and tries to destroy everything in his path. So he technically "evolved," but it went horribly wrong. It's only later that he achieves his true Ultimate Level evolution of MetalGreymon, which, while also fierce, is much less creepy and more rational.

So, tl;dr, just because some ideas that are currently considered "progressive" are "evolved" and different from past ideas that were once considered to be progressive, doesn't necessarily mean that they're "better" or headed in a positive direction. Anyway, that's just off the top of my head. In general, I don't like to dismiss people with labels. I just think sometimes people online behave like "Skullgreymon Progressives."