I encourage you to read Andrew Sullivan’s essay on the “roots of wokeness”. Here’s its peroration:
My view is that there is nothing wrong with exploring these ideas. They’re almost interesting if you can get past the hideous prose. And I can say this because liberalism can include critical theory as one view of the world worth interrogating. But critical theory cannot include liberalism, because it views liberalism itself as a mode of white supremacy that acts against the imperative of social and racial justice. That’s why liberalism is supple enough to sustain countless theories and ideas and arguments, and is always widening the field of debate; and why institutions under the sway of Social Justice necessarily must constrain avenues of thought and ideas. That’s why liberalism is dedicated to allowing Ibram X. Kendi to speak and write, but Ibram X. Kendi would create an unelected tribunal to police anyone and any institution from perpetuating what he regards as white supremacy—which is any racial balance not exactly representative of the population as a whole.
For me, these theorists do something less forgivable than abuse the English language. They claim that their worldview is the only way to advance social progress, especially the rights of minorities, and that liberalism fails to do so. This, it seems to me, is profoundly untrue. A moral giant like John Lewis advanced this country not by intimidation, or re-ordering the language, or seeing the advancement of black people as some kind of reversal for white people. He engaged the liberal system with non-violence and persuasion, he emphasized the unifying force of love and forgiveness, he saw black people as having agency utterly independent of white people, and changed America with that fundamentally liberal perspective.
When he says “liberalism” he means Enlightenment values not progressivism. I’m not as optimistic as Mr. Sullivan. He sees what’s presently emerging is liberalism clawing its way back from the pit. I don’t believe that accommodation with the “woke” is possible. Those of us who continue to believe in Enlightenment values can submit to the authoritarian tribunals which will police the new and ever-changing cacophony of “wokeness” or we can betray Enlightenment values by suppressing the “woke”. There is no living with them; there is no middle ground and they cannot leave us alone. Allowing others to believe as they wish is an Enlightenment value.
This seems to me like a radical left coming out to match the radical right we experienced first in the form of the Tea Party and then with Trump. The difference here is, from my personal experience, that the radical right is a larger group. I have now had a couple of meetings (in groups) with our new congressperson and she has little interest in the radical agenda. Our yearly trip out to Harrisburg I heard the same.
Steve
If you like that Sullivan piece, you’ll probably enjoy this from James Lindsey:
https://newdiscourses.com/2020/07/woke-wont-debate-you-heres-why/
Steve,
I don’t think the comparison with the tea party is accurate. A better one is the Moral Majority and associated moral panics of the 1980’s that came from the right – violent rap lyrics, video games, sex on TV, etc. The woke left has functionally the same goals – imposing and enforcing their moral code on the rest of society. But the weapons and methods today (enabled by social media) are far different.
Personally I’m not overly worried about the woke brigades. They are a tiny part of the population and are busy with an inquisition against what would normally be their own allies for minor heresies. If they are willing to do that to people who agree with them 90% of the time, then I think the vast majority of people understand that wokism will come for them next. And so I think that once woke inquisition against the progressive left is complete (assuming it succeeds, which is questionable) it won’t progress any farther. You’re already seeing a lot of progressives opposing them. A lot of us in the “middle” are more than happy to tell them to go eff themselves.
This is even before considering the deficits of woke ideology – namely that it offers no practical means to actually solve problems. Getting everyone to read and subsume their lives to “White Fragility” and using the correct woke-speak isn’t going to stop police brutality or any of the other problems the woke left claim to oppose.
Andy- The Moral Majority probably is better example in the attempt to enforce group think/values on everyone. I was using the Tea Party to demonstrate a group that was completely unwilling to compromise, even with members of their own broader political party. Though on second thought your example is pretty good even in that regard. It was Reagan who said “The person who agrees with you 80 percent of the time is a friend and an ally – not a 20 percent traitor.”
Steve
I just don’t see a logical comparison of the Tea party movement with the current so-called social justice groupings, such as BLM and Antifa. Antifa, has been cited as germinating from the Weatherman genre, while BLM has co-founders wedded to Marxist/communist orthodoxy, and heavily financed by the notoriously anti-American Billionaire, George Soros. In contrast, the Tea Party movement’s inspiration was derived from being force-fed the ACA, causing a more patriotic embrace of rights approved by the people rather than mandated and passed by politicians, on a late Christmas Eve night. This desire to not give away unalienable rights, granted to citizens by the Constitution, was visibly amplified by the huge display of flags, red-white-blue colors, and colonial costumes worn at their gatherings. Even the larger Tea Party events were unfettered by riots, damage to property and people, concluding with trash-free grounds, as many participants carried out their own trash.
The symbolic dress of SJW has been black clothing and covered faces. As for their actions, pictures are better than words when you see the destructive aftermath of the BLM/Antifa civil unrest.
“Fixing†problems usually doesn’t go very far under the hammer of screaming, hate-filled mobs. However, what I do think has been accomplished, by a new breed of Marxist legislators winning elections, is an enormous intimidation of not only other politicians in both parties, but also in various private sector industries. It’s like a mafia-like influence is afoot, whereby people feel the need to conform or suffer cancel culture consequences of public shunning or the physical destruction of their business. I’ve never seen this happen in my lifetime, to such a great, aggrieved extent. And, unfortunately, there is a slow drip of new extremely progressive legislators being added to the governing mix with each election, or so it seems. Yesterday’s primaries, for instance, saw a BLM operative, Cori Bush, winning a Congressional seat, over a long term liberal democrat. She thanked Bernie Sanders for her success.
Yes, steve, you are correct. We should all be ashamed of the Tea Party and their looting, fire bombing, police attacking, private citizen attacking tactics, just like………..oh, wait, that didn’t happen. Its only BLM and Antifa, the Democrat’s new darlings. Chalk up a new bald faced lie for steve. Well, let’s be charitable, “hyperbole.”
Most people are classic liberals, even if they differ on issues. But let’s cut through the bullshit. Democrat politicians right now see a path to power by supporting and polly parroting these goons on the left. That’s all it is. Its despicable. Are they correct in assuming thats where the votes are?
We will find out soon enough. Either Dave is right and these far, far left people are a small minority and the real base will reject this. Or he’s wrong, and this is what his party is right now. You can’t explain Portland, Seattle, SF, LA, NYC, Atlanta, DC, Chicago or Dallas etc unless its the latter.
The present primary, seniority, and funding systems support extreme ideologues coming into positions of considerable power. That’s true in both parties. The way certain portions of the Constitution, e.g. the Commerce Clause, have been interpreted by the courts removes barriers to the Congress’s power and the 16th Amendment has substantially expanded the Congress’s ability to act.
That’s not the way the Founders envisioned things at all. They thought that the elected representatives would resemble their median constituents in their views except more prudent and the harm the Congress could do would be mitigated by the limitation to enumerated powers and limited ability to raise revenue.
Antifa is a bogeyman. There might be a few thousand of them and they are really anarchists. The proper comparison there would be the KKK. Probably about equal numbers. (Notice that you still haven’t found any Antifa.) Yes, in your minds the Tea Party was wonderful and everyone on the left is a Marxist. In reality it was a radical group that was unwilling to compromise and proud of that.
Most people in BLM or those who support them dont support the violence.
“You can’t explain Portland, Seattle, SF, LA, NYC, Atlanta, DC, Chicago or Dallas etc unless its the latter.”
Sure you can. A lot of mayors dont want to have their voters get shot or beaten. This is generally not an issue for conservatives who like to pose as being tough. Who only value free speech when it agrees with what they believe in.
Steve
Steve, I often disagree with your positions on issues. But, the comments, in your last post are stunningly off base, reminding me of Nadler’s “It’s a myth†response, as to any recognition of the violence taking place everywhere. Whew!
‘This is generally not an issue for conservatives who like to pose as being tough. Who only value free speech when it agrees with what they believe in.’
I’m a conservative, and I dispute that statement.
Steve, we aren’t dealing with liberals, Democrats, or Progressives here. We are dealing with Cultural Revolutionists, whose goal is to overturn society and remake it into their version of ‘utopia’ (translation, total power for them, none for anybody else) no matter who dies or how many. A lot of the fellow travelers might be engaging in recreational mayhem and Marxism, but their leaders aren’t. The Democrats winning the White House and both houses of Congress won’t satisfy them, because the Democratic establishment isn’t on their team. IMO no matter what happens in November they’ll keep on doing what works for them until they win or they are crushed.
jan- Easy to disprove. Show me the many hundreds of Antifa that have been arrested. For you Antifa is just a pejorative to throw around. People have actually written a book or two about them and they are few in number and are mostly anarchists who dont really like any political party.
” as to any recognition of the violence taking place everywhere.”
Nope. I have acknowledged that there is violence and people should be arrested. I have suggested that it is hard to tell how bad it really is. If it bleeds it leads is how things work in news coverage so I am not as sure as you are that it is everywhere in the cities you list. Talking to people who live in those cities it seems as though it is generally limited to a few, often small areas.
“the elected representatives would resemble their median constituents in their views except more prudent and the harm the Congress could do would be mitigated by the limitation to enumerated powers and limited ability to raise revenue.”
While a few recognized that the primacy of the political party would be bad none of them realized how toxic it would become. Also, I am certain that none of them even conceived of the idea that Congress would abrogate most of its powers to the executive branch and the courts.
Steve
The woke dominate media outlets, colleges, big tech and many other companies. The tea party never had anything close to this level of influence. Rush Limbaugh and Fox News influence is small compared to Ivy League colleges, the NY Times, Hollywood and Silicon valley
The right wing group that I would compare to the woke are the people who pushed for the Iraq war after 9/11. They talked about “moral clarity” like some woke do. Their plans for the postwar mideast were utopian like the woke talk of reducing violence by defunding the police. They were also eager to fire people from their jobs who did not agree like the SJW. Their influence fell after Iraq turned into a quagmire and no wmds were found. Because most people in the media embrace woke theology it will probably take US cities crime rates soaring to record levels for several years for the SJW influence to fade.
I disagree on the influence of Rush and Fox. Directly or indirectly they and colleagues dictate how half of America thinks about everything. I guarantee you they dont care what Ivy League colleges think. I dont care what they think either, unless it is the research they generate. Really. I dont care what some assistant professor I have never heard of thinks about some weird social justice thing. Neither do my friends and co workers.
However, I do thank you for yet another example. So many to choose from. Conservatives really do try to have us all think the same thing.
Steve
â€Conservatives really do try to have us all think the same thing.
That’s a funny observation, because I see social progressives as being the epitome of intolerance towards others, demanding strict adherence to their way of thinking. Just look, honestly, at the social disturbances provoked not by conservatives, but by SJW, a subset of counter culture, virtue-signaling, politically correct Dems.