Quebeckers are typically unfamiliar with the term « woke », which is more commonly used in English Canada and with our neighbours to the South—at least in the media and on conservative platforms.
The meaning of the term has evolved significantly over the years. « Woke » comes from African American slang and originally referred to an awareness of racial and social injustices, particularly those experienced by Black communities in the United States. The word then evolved to describe people who are generally aware of social justice issues, inequalities, and discrimination.
Over time, the term « woke » has been more broadly adopted to include awareness and commitment to various social issues such as feminism, LGBTQ+ rights, and environmental concerns.
Up to this point, I don’t really see a problem with identifying as woke; after all, who can be against virtue? I like to think of myself as woke, in the sense that I am sensitive to social injustices in general.
The problem began when the conservative (American) right appropriated the term. Nowadays, being woke is associated with hypersensitivity, even a certain extremism regarding social issues and political correctness. Being woke means getting offended over minor things, being a snowflake, that is, someone perceived as too easily outraged or unable to handle opposing viewpoints. Wokes are also accused of virtue signalling, meaning they wrap themselves in their cloak of virtue to display their moral superiority without taking concrete actions.
Being woke can also be seen as prioritizing the rights of minorities over those of the majority. According to anti-wokes, it is about stepping aside for those who are part of a fringe of society, like apologizing for being a middle-aged white man, for example (which I clearly am).
Wokism has also been strongly associated with cancel culture, the practice of withdrawing support or publicly criticizing individuals or organizations in response to behavior or statements deemed offensive, inappropriate, or problematic.
Everything seems too woke for anti-woke critics. Even the Paris Olympics are considered too woke for some. Promoting drag queens in the opening ceremony, allowing women who like like men to compete —these things seem to deeply shock part of the ultra-conservative right, as if the world as we know it is adrift.
Do some wokes exhibit excesses, get outraged over trivial matters, and tend to hide behind minorities? Certainly. Is this a real societal problem? I leave it to you to judge. There is always a correction after a period of excess.
From what I understand, the opposite of woke could be « insensitive » or « indifferent, » or even « reactionary. » Personally, I prefer to be seen as woke. How about you?
Eric,
I think that in the main, social justice considerations have their place in democracies. The problem with ‘woke’ comes, in my view, when social justice considerations are framed along immutable characteristic lines, rather than being based on need – every Aboriginal Australian is disadvantaged, every same sex couple is disadvantaged, all men are rapists and all ‘whites’ are well off.
The ‘woke’ view, at least in Australia, frames all of these issues into oppressor and oppressed (or some version of that). When framed that way, and using immutable characteristics such as race and sex, the social justice argument, to me, loses its credibility. You get the exact issue you raised in your last paragraph. To oppose or even to question the woke view is to be labeled ‘insensitive’, ‘indifferent’, ‘intolerant’, ‘racist’, ‘misogynist’ or some other equally odious term. Social justice, like everything else in liberal democracies, should be open to questioning and inquiry. The ‘woke’ framing tends to (but not always) skew this basic concept towards infantile name calling and the insidious cancel culture you mention in your article.
Just my views of course.
Kind regards
Chip
Bonjour Chip,
First of all, I would like to thank you kindly for replying in a sensitive manner to a topic that I knew would get under some people’s skin. I don’t mind pushing the envelope a little bit to get people to react, while always keeping a civilized debate.
About the term « woke », I genuinely want to understand why a benign term about being aware of social injustices as become so despised that American states would pass anti-woke laws. Is it really such a big deal to be open to social injustices?
The problem is two-fold, I believe. For one, there are indeed some « woke » who have taken their philosophy to the extreme, asking us to believe « we should be responsible for our ancestors actions hundreds of years after, in a different era with different moral standards » (from a FB friend). Or that there are topics that can never, ever be discussed. And words that cannot be spoken. For two, I think that the woke movement has been depicted by the alt right/far right as simply a bunch of extremists who want the society to be handed out to minorities (ethnic minorities, different genders, etc). That is where I beg to differ: being aware of social justices doesn’t mean to always take one side, blindly, without looking at the cause of the supposed social injustice. Being woke doesn’t either mean to be a « useful idiot » who plays in the hands of those extremists who really want to destroy our societies.
The right has systematically undermined the virtue of ‘wokeism,’ which was originally a way for minorities to stand up for themselves and not be trampled on. A friend of mine recommended the recently published book « At a Loss for Words » by Canadian author Carol Off, where she examines how words such as freedom, democracy, truth, woke, choice, and taxes have been redefined and distorted in political discourse. Her thesis is that these words have lost their shared meanings, becoming tools for division and manipulation. That could be an interesting read.