Do you feel this might be because any kind of attempt to criticize wokeism is a meal ticket to get slapped with all kinds of labels and shunted into a box full of people who hold quite radical views in the opposite direction? I feel like the black and white "for us or against us" disposition that wokeism keeps to on many if not all of its positions make it very hard to criticize publicly unless you: A: don't give a damn about the social and career consequences that might follow B: like you pointed out, have a transactional gain to make from opposing it, or are speaking to and have built up an audience that's receptive to the criticism C: Find the danger of unchecked wokeism outweighs any personal risks Doubly so because wokeism has coopted the moral high ground, and any criticism automatically paints you as unlovely and unvirtous.

Near as I can make out, you've not explained just what this 'woke hyper identity politics' is, who exactly is promoting this in any significant way and how it is extreme compared to past identify politics. Is there anyone who describes themself as "wokist" or as subscribing to "wokism" the way folk describe themselves as "marxist" or as subscribing to "marxism"? I'm familiar with the origins of "woke", largely via reading Black American media like The Root, but it seems to me that "wokism" is a right wing slur term used only by opponents of 'identity politics' when it is anything but white, male, cis, religious, national identities. All of those have been the basis of identity politics but people don't use "identity politics" of them but pretend their particular politics are merely 'neutral' or 'normal'. And when you use "hyper", remember, Nazism was national identity politics , the Ku Klux Klan, white terrorism, disenfranchisement of Blacks and 100+ of economic disadvantage was white identity politics, the restriction of the franchise to men was gender identity politics, Putin uses religious (Russian Orthodox) identity politics and the right in America jumping up and down about trans rights as being the end of civilization is cis identity politics. As 'identity politics' go, 'wokism' is of the mildest sort when you realize that, contra the right, it is not the only identity politics out there. IMO, promoting the idea of 'wokism' as a threat to democracy is promoting the right wingers in western democracies. When you find yourself slamming the same folk as the Marjorie Taylor Greenes, QAnons, Orbans and Putins of the world, you need to ask yourself whether you're suffering from a failure of target selection.

@@roflmaodudeable When you are using a term that is only used by opponents, and nobody describes their own politics as "wokism" or themselves as "wokist" (like marxism and marxists) you invite being lumped in with Ron DeSantis, Marjorie Taylor Greene, QAnon, etc. Adopting the far right's term for believing that work needs to be done on equality beyond an essentially marxist focus on economics makes you an ally of theirs, whether witting or unwitting.

@@mikehjt I find it very limiting to view everything in terms of allies and enemies. I don't care whose camp my views put me in according to others. There's plenty of points "woke" people make that I agree with, what makes me weary of them is that it's impossible to criticize them without being ostracized in some form. As soon as I see a reactionary thing like that happening it's a sign that a movement is on it's way to moral corruption. If you can't be criticized, you can do no wrong, and will believe your own evil deeds to be for the benefit of mankind.

Vlad, please, dig that topic !!

Great to have you words - rare as they are!

Thank you!

😂

It’s the third biggest threat to the survival of democracy, I sometimes say. The no 1 threat is parts of the right giving up on democratic institutions. These are absurd statements of course, but useful as short hand indicators of how to judge each challenge. I haven’t made a video yet that answers your question, but I will. Wokeism is today obstructing left wing and centrist political parties in several western countries, as well as university bureaucracies, journalistic institutions and climate movements. This is a major crisis which renders the left and centre politically ineffectual and invites the hard right to succeed. - this diagnosis is compatible with democratic right wing politics but equally compatible with Green New Deal, a vote for eg Bernie, the view that racism is systemic etc. In an old video on whether wokeism is Neo Marxist, I explain why it isn’t and is in fact a deformation of liberal values. I will be coving this more.

@@VladVexler I do see these elements. Climate sensationalism vs scientific, systematic, and pragmatic approach to climate solutions. Forced embracing of alternative lifestyles vs liberal acceptance of the rights of others to live in their own mode. I wonder, it seems that in some ways the initial wave of right wing reaction to social movements was a pendulum swing against 90s middle class social awakening, which in itself was a reaction to 80s neo-liberalism (I know it's not quite that linear). In that sense is modern day Workism a reaction to the reaction? In the sense that the right wing had closed ranks and dug their heels in on climate denialism etc to such an extent that the left began catastrophising in order to be heard?

@@evelcustom9864 if I might interject a question, does Greta Thunberg necessarily fit this aspect of being 'woke'?

@@erichbrough6097That's a great question, I honestly don't know. I know very little about Greta Thunberg. I know she's quite young. I know that the 'left wing' has been using her as a mascot of climate activism and the 'right wing' has been using her as the effigy of wokeism. In all honesty, if she is nothing more than 'Woke', she's allowed to be, she's an adolescent, it's in their nature to be hyper idealistic. I'll also say this, if the scientific consensus is correct, and there are really catastrophic global changes coming, then it's interesting that it has come to screeming children to cut through the din

It’s real, especially in urban cores in the USA, and in daily life it does rear it’s head in ways that personally affects those around me. Many of whom would consider themselves ‘woke’ (but I suspect really haven’t given it particularly deep thought). When ‘felt’ (rather than discussed) it’s usually a negative thing and revolving around someone trying to use it as a tool to get something they want. Still, with that said, it’s not as prevalent, or as egregious in real day to day life as you would think if you rabbit hole on the issue on KZfaq.

Thanks so much. What KZfaq channels do you follow the most for similar discussion?

@Vlad Vexler I guess I haven't followed any channels for discussion, specifically, until recently, when I stumbled upon Carefree Wandering and the adjecent videos from yours and Then&nows channel. What led the algorithm and myself to this discussion I assume are my general interests in topics of psychology and philosophy and applying them in the modern world. For this I've mainly listened to Bret Weinstein and Heather Heyings podcast, Jordan Petersons podcast and free lecture material, and also Joe Rogans podcast when he has an interesting guest. Do you have any recommendations for similar content?

that guy really will do anything to avoid saying 'neoliberalism'. He'll call it wokeism or anything else, but yeah, it's just neoliberalism, folks. Left on the surface, right at the core.

It's unfortunate that in the UK a lot of anti-trans activism has a veneer liberal or even feminist sentiment that seems to fool a lot of people.

The right and left use it differently so people often have conflicting definitions

I will be speaking about this in detail. This is my expertise - identity politics in contemporary democracies. The best book on this is Mark Lilla’s Once and Future Liberal.

I’ll look forward to that, but an expertise in identity politics is not the same as an understanding of the issues facing trans people.

Something is wrong with your comment. It’s closed. It’s the opposite of what I ask here on the channel. I will be discussing this in the context of hyper ID politics. Trans rights discourse today often takes forms that are destructive and unsustainable. Worse, these destructive elements are either not challenged, or transphobically attacked by the anti-woke right - people who don’t acknowledge that trans people are real, that their rights are real, that their experience is extraordinarily challenging, and that society has to meet them with inclusion.

Disappointing.

Thank you for saying this, I find this whole wokeness thing stupid as hell from the very first time I heard of it, and I can't define it because it's being used in wide array of issues (and non issues). It's clear there most certainly are some issues with peoples voices being unjustly depressed, like the examples in this video. But the right wing has unfortunately also highjacked that phenomenon to include racists and all kinds of bigots feeling uncomfortable that society shuns their atrocious world views - that the 'cancel culture' they experience is literal fascism, even though it's basically just the fact that companies and people generally don't want to associate with bigots and fascists. "Wokeness" to the right also includes all kinds of social issues that to me really shouldn't be an issue if you're a non bigoted person with common sense, without having looked into it myself your LOTR comment sounds like a good example of this. I really hate the culture war that's been going on, I can't wrap my head around why people just can't live and let live. The right wing should really stop caring so much about what other people like to wear or what they like to do in their bedroom, for christ sake it doesn't fucking affect them at all. I just don't understand why it's such a huge issue for them, and I guarantee if they weren't being told to be angry about this and that by the right wing propaganda pieces like Fox Entertainment they wouldn't see all this as such a huge problem. At the same time the left wing should really start recognizing that there most certainly _are_ problems and clashes that needs to be looked at and handled in a rational respectful way, and that in itself is not racism or bigotry or what have you. Both political wings create problems where there are none and generalizes too much. I'm left leaning and I despise the far right wing (that in reality doesn't seem so _far_ right in certain countries) as I see them as one of if not the biggest threat to democracy, equality and stability in the world, but I also sincerely dislike the left leaning people who hurts the cause and people more because they either take things too far or blatantly denies reality because there are certain conflicts and problems that might hurt the cause or partly breaks their world view. So when the problems persists or escalates, guess where the frustrated citizens who experience these problems will go then? That's right towards the loud mouthed right wing populists who (rightfully) points out the incompetent or even malicious non-acts of the left, and who makes big claims _they_ alone can make the country great again.

In brief, “woke” means having awakened to having a particular type of “critical consciousness,” as these are understood within Critical Social Justice. To first approximation, being woke means viewing society through various critical lenses, as defined by various critical theories bent in service of an ideology most people currently call “Social Justice.” That is, being woke means having taken on the worldview of Critical Social Justice, which sees the world only in terms of unjust power dynamics and the need to dismantle problematic systems. That is, it means having adopted Theory and the worldview it conceptualizes. Under “wokeness,” this awakened consciousness is set particularly with regard to issues of identity, like race, sex, gender, sexuality, and others. The terminology derives from the idea of having been awakened (or, “woke up”) to an awareness of the allegedly systemic nature of racism, sexism, and other oppressive power dynamics and the true nature of privilege, domination, and marginalization in society and understanding the role in dominant discourses in producing and maintaining these structural forces. Furthermore, being woke carries the imperative to become a social activist with regard to these issues and problems, again, on the terms set by Critical Social Justice. This-especially for white people-is to include a lifelong commitment to an ongoing process of self-reflection, self-criticism, and (progressive) social activism in the name of Theory and Social Justice (see also, antiracism). Historically, the term “woke” has been used somewhat extensively in slang throughout the twentieth century to refer to a state of awareness of the discrimination, disenfranchisement, and mistreatment of blacks, especially in America, and it is in that sense always had some connection to the critical mode of thought in the New Left. (See also, black liberation, liberation theology, false consciousness, and consciousness raising.) The term is alleged to have gained its first contemporary connotation in 2008 with the Erykah Badu song “Master Teacher,” in which Badu envisions and dreams of a world of racial equality and then advises genuine activism with the admonishment that listeners should “stay woke.” The term developed from there, particularly via black activism on Twitter. The term then gained particular significance and tied itself to the contemporary Social Justice movement in the mid 2010s as it became an activist watchword of the Black Lives Matter movement. There, say following the police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, the phrase “stay woke” took on the very specific meaning of being aware of the reality (according to critical race Theory) of systemic racism in American society that activists blamed for being at the root of the incident. This has, in turn, led to the term being nearly synonymous with having a critical consciousness as provided through critical race Theory, although it has been appropriated through intersectional thought to apply to other issues of identity relevant to postcolonial Theory, queer Theory, feminism, and so on. It has since expanded and memefied further and is now seen from the outside as being wholly synonymous with having been converted to a Social Justice critical consciousness. As such, “wokeness” often refers to both critical Social Justice doctrine and the state of having accepted it. In that “wokeness” has become a term directly associated with the critical consciousness provided by applied postmodern Theories, especially critical race Theory (see also, postmodern, Marxian, Neo-Marxism, Post-Marxism, and Cultural Marxism). As such, it is centrally concerned with being aware of the intersecting systems of racism, sexism, and other forms of alleged societal oppression and analyzing these in terms of privilege. This is most often done, under woke consciousness, by engaging in discourse analysis, especially using close reading, which enables racism (or other systemic bigotries) that are assumed to be present in all situations to then be read into them. This is then treated as proof of the systemic problem that was assumed to exist in the first place (see also, mask). Being “woke” would entail being able to “see” the intersecting web of dominance and oppression that arises from the function of privilege in society and taking up efforts to challenge, disrupt, subvert, deconstruct, or overthrow the existing system in the attempt to bring those unjust intersecting power dynamics to an end (see also, Matrix of Domination).

I also have this problem with the definition. And even if somebody who talks about being woke defines the term, the problem remains that therr is no generally accepted definition. I mean, I was told I am (not woke, because in my country this is not a widely used term .... but I was called politically correct - another term that can mean anything) politicaly corect because I say that vaccines work. 🤔

@@gillsejusbates6938 so if one, like me, never even heard of such theories ( I have a feeling it's an American thing) can not be woke?

So now I must ask, why are Republicans holding "The Great Awakening" rallies all across America if wokeness is abhorrent to them? It's totally confusing to me.

Yeah thats why I prefer Then & Now. Centrists take 'wokeism' to the furthest possible extent and prophesize a future with no diversity of thought. Like why is that anyone's takeaway from just being aware of social issues or using someone's preferred pronouns? I think it would be helpful if they better defined what being "woke" is

@@OGAshton - definitions don't actually matter anymore. Nor does truth. The right wing propaganda machine knows that "woke" is a trigger word for the angry white racists in our country. All they had to do was buy enough tv time, and all the mouth breathers would believe it means whatever they say it means.

I think this kind of shows were the problem might lie. Wokeism doesn't connotate caring to me, but selfishness. Wokeness is a superficial level of caring that doesn't understand the problems from within them but from a privileged position. It demands a language not from the people who's causes it adopts but to appease people who want to feel better (more moral) while remaining remote, uninformed and subverting movements to service ones ego. Which is how in Vlad's example they are able to dismiss women's concerns because it is not about solidarity or identifying with but perceived moral superiority. If it were about caring it would no spend so much effort trivializing the suffering and avoiding understanding the trauma of so many parts of society or creating special languages of hierarchy.

@@mysticonthehill - And yet you describe what it connotates to YOU. So again, the frame of reference is yourself. No mention of the origins of the word and the community it evolved from. No comment on the perspective of the black community who came up with the term. Just ... this is what it connotates to me. You might as well say "Fox News and the Aristocracy have paid billions of dollars in air time to change the meaning of this term to mean 'anything Democractic' and I that's not my team, so I think it's bad." Moral superiority? If being a good person and caring about others is morally superior, then so be it. I call it being human.

There is more a definition in a video called Is Wokeism Marxist? Agree this is a very poor video (except for the views expressed).

Thank you very much these thoughts and suggestions. I was thinking to tackle taking the knee in a future video - a video that would need a lot of sensitivity. Appreciate your curiosity about music - the next upload in a couple of days will be on an extremely rare young pianist who is still a child. Take good care!

Thanks for sharing your view, I appreciate it.

@@VladVexler maybe you could expand on this a bit more? Do a seprate video on why you see it as such a big threat, give more examples to paint some sort of a trend?

@@dontyoufuckinguwume8201 I plan to. There are a couple of videos on the channel that add to the argument here, but no overall comprehensive presentation yet.

Wut? "Wokeism" is simply viewing others with empathy. Even classes of people previously deemed to be unworthy of consideration . That's it. I have a working class job & I have worked in professional white collar jobs. Working class jobs need more "wokeism" or rather a realization that the assumptions and generalizations people have been taught to assume....benefit no one....not the person perpetrating injustice, not the person receiving it, and not the company in which it is happening . Why does working class need " wokeism" or rather empathy towards all classes of people(not just white males) MORE than professional classes (which still suffer from discrimination) is because working class people are significantly less intelligent. With intelligence comes the ability to see nuance and a decreased need to jump to overgeneralizations to effectively their lives. Seems like you are really overthinking this so as to avoid the real problem/ solution.

@@kimmcdonagh6756 What you describe isn't wokeism and it would be wonderful if it was about empathy, understanding and solidarity. But it isn't, it is about maintain their privilege while appearing moral. To hijack the language of solidarity while trivializing the actual participants and not intimately learning their struggles, acknowledging their voices but commandeering the public space, gate keeping who's concerns are virtuous and reinterpreting things in away to claim to be any ally without personal cost.

Thank you. I’ve screen shot your comments and will share a perspective - probably on video on the Vlad Vexler Clips channel.

Yes this is in no way a right wing take and I deeply believe is structural disadvantage and systemic racism. I don’t regard the crisis of wokeism as a left thing. I regard it as a kind of hyper liberal hysteria. A kind of hyper active liberalism in reverse. But it’s not just an excess- it is a serious threat to democracy. Though perhaps not the main one.

I voted democrat my whole life, until this woke social justice crap came around. I doubt I'll vote Democrat ever again.

@@stevecariggillio4139 Bad news, the Republicans are even worse. They practice reactionary "anti-wokism" which is really just being "woke" in their own way, but catering to different groups. They aren't better, they are worse. Their reactionary based politics is also extremely dangerous to democracy. There needs to be more parties and more options.

@@AK-jm1sc I disagree.

@@stevecariggillio4139 So you're going to vote Republican? Please explain.

Thank you! I do look forward to discussing these issues again, in a smoother and more organised manner!

There is a conflict between values such as liberty, equality and solidarity. There is conflict within each of these values too. We need to see how we can have as much of each relevant conception of each value as we can.

Thanks for you schematic but systematic presentation. I appreciate it. I won't critique it, because you have laid it out so clearly. And because, this is very much an ongoing conversation. I will be exploring soon some mechanisms of transcending hyper identity politics in the climate movement.

Also - if your comment is not showing properly, that's YT and not me. I've approved you on this channel so that your comments never get filtered for review, but somehow when I click TOP COMMENTS, your comment doesn't show up. But it does show under NEWEST COMMENTS. Weird.

@@VladVexler TX. It's fine here, maybe a very minor update bug.

The Kremlin currently may prefer Desantis strategically and Trump tactically - for disruption rather than a policy line.

“Cis” is a made up term to placate trans invisibility. “Woke” is nothing more than extremism and tries to redefine the sexes. People don’t have any desire to be redefined. Real women have a right to safe spaces like showers, bathrooms, shelters, even prisons. Trans women can make their own spaces without taking rights away from real women. If you can’t see that real women and girls sharing spaces with biological men is harmful to their well being, I suggest you use some critical thinking.

Thank you so much! I hope you are well.

So you don’t like Peterson, but you also didn’t like Then and Now’s video?

@@VladVexler Would you explore the possibility and or probability that wokism is a human hack perpetrated by CCP and Russian intelligence services.

@@damiangrouse4564 it’s not! It’s western societies losing their mind!

@@VladVexler I know my limitations but, here goes: No doubt societies can loose their mind (those that have one to loose)…October revolution, Germany in the thirties come to mind. But, I don’t discount the effects of china’s co-opting of our entertainment industries, the introduction of Confucius centers in educational institutions and massive introduction of fentanyl into the drug culture. Just to name a few.

Thank you as always!

I hope it does say a lot about me!

@@VladVexler It certainly does. White male self centeredness never helped Philosophy. Wokeism can be criticized, but by your video you seem disgusted that gender and race issues have a place in the public sphere.

That completely misses the phenomenon under discussion.

In what important ways do they differ from earlier generations of cultural liberals? If you’ve discussed this previously and I’ve missed it, then I’ll gladly listen

I haven't shared a video on how past social justice politics differs from today's woke hyper identity politics. I am in two minds about this. For now I have been tempted to leave explaining the difference to others. That's because I think the problem is likely to be further back than people simply failing to tell the difference. It would feel like arguing that an elephant is different to a zebra. There is already something wrong with the conversation if you have to make that argument. That's because the difference is not close, it's not subtle. It's vast, and it has permeated institutions including political parties, media institutions, and universities. At least in the US and UK. That rather points to my role being about helping make sense of this, rather than persuading those who can't see it that it's real. But it's a complex world, and there is also much pointing in the opposite direction. Here is one such consideration. A large proportion of the arguments against the toxicity and political harm of hyper-identity-politics has come from (1) the Weinstein brothers, Jordan Peterson etc; that's to say pop intellectuals (2) to a lesser degree from left wing opinion journalism (e.g. Freddie de Boer, Kyle Kulinski) That's to say - very few major intellectuals, intellectuals in the non-Pop sense, have come out strongly on this. One prominent example is Mark Lilla, with his book The Once and Future Liberal. John Gray has come out on it - as a public intellectual. And Michael Ignatieff did a minor talk about it. But it is very limited. Avishai Margalit, Charles Taylor, Alasdair MacIntyre - arguably 3 of the leading philosophers who comment on politics have said very little. This has left the anti-woke argument in the hands of either (1) people who lean right (being anti-woke has nothing to do with being left, right or centre), or (2) Pop figures, or, worst of all, (3) intellectual entrepreneurs who swim about and scheme to ride the waves of public opinion in a quite transactional way. There is an older video where I offer something closer to an historical definition. Here it is with a timestamp, to about minute 7 in that video. But that's it for now. I will certainly be engaging with this deeply going forward on and off KZfaq. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/gquhpbur0rfUnJs.html

Thank you for engaging thoroughly. I have now watched Hans Georg Moeller’s video on wokism and two of your subsequent ones on the topic (Wokeism: Carefree Wandering, and Is Wokeism Marxist?). You are much better read than I but, just so I can establish a bit of credibility in this area, about 20 years ago I did a politics MA in critical theory (one of the wokest degrees then available!). I had wanted to do Geography, but it couldn’t work out. Over the last 30 years I have also been an active Lib Dem and much more recently a Green member, so feel in a good position to comment on liberal and left liberal politics and, due to studying critical theory, have a better appreciation of some of the political undercurrents within academia. Some wokists do hold very silly opinions. The example you cite of someone wanting to overcome disability disadvantage by changing perceptions of disability is terrible. But wokists tend to be young and I think some instances of our foolishness can be explained by naivety, which people tend to grow out of. I am not clearer about why you think wokists are a threat to the west - and perhaps that’s something you will explore another time - but was pleasantly surprised to agree about wokism being essentially an expression of hardcore liberalism (something I consider a compliment, rather than an insult). I had instead expected to hear criticisms of hard left inspired beliefs of some wokists. That said, wokism brings together people inspired by different traditions and there is a subset of hard left wokists. I think it helpful to acknowledge this and note that some criticism of woke people doesn’t apply across the board. As a radical liberal, you may not be surprised to read me try and blame hard left wokists for some of woke’s problems, but I do. For example, I think there is big problem with those wokists who apply a traditional Marxist analysis on class (that someone’s political and ideological consciousness is determined by their class position) to other forms of identity. This ends up with some hard-left wokists placing someone’s identity as core to objectivity and, for example, framing those with a disadvantaged identity as the only ones who can or should comment on their disadvantage. I find this kind of analysis particularly backward given that a central ambition of mainstream wokism is to encourage people to empathise with and be more sensitive to the disadvantage of others, which some hard left wokists appear to infer is near impossible. This outlook also further empowers woke identity sectarians, which is at odds with the woke mainstream who (given that we accept they are mainly liberals) I hope you will agree are non-sectarian. With the benefit of having studied critical theory, I strongly agree with Jordon Peterson when he draws a link between a Marxist view of history and those wokists who view it as a power struggle between those with disadvantaged identities and oppressors. There are analogies with fascistic thought, as you point out, but they have got to where they are through the influence of Marxist and post-Marxist thinking. That said, I consider these wokists to again be part of the hard left sub-set, rather than typifying the liberal woke majority. Class/ socio economic disadvantage is not currently centre stage in the woke agenda, but I think it would be unfair to claim it is absent. Intersectionality is afterall a strong woke theme. And many wokists are economically left wing & define themselves in opposition to market fundamentalism. I have to say I reject any notion of woke cancel culture being inherently engaged in liberticide. In my view, some wokists (again, especially those inspired by hard left thought) can be very censorious and pose a threat to free enquiry, but liberals support free speech, not consequence free speech, and the intolerance of most wokists towards discriminatory attitudes can be justified by Karl Popper’s paradox of tolerance. I used to work for a humanist group before I got ME/CFS. Many wokists are irreligious, but I agree there are post-religious aspects of wokism and especially from liberal Christianity and Judaism (though because of the evangelising more so Christian). Incidentally, I think this short post on the ‘post-protestantism’ of many non-religious young people helps to underline the point - that young progressives still carry liberal religious impulses of forbears: web.archive.org/web/20140920005738/www.patheos.com/blogs/geneveith/2014/08/the-post-protestants/. I fully accept wokism is having a big impact across civil society in the UK and US and, although I don’t think it is exceptional by historic standards, there is clearly a counter-reformation backlash. Us woke people evidently also seem to really piss you off! I do feel like I have skin in the game but am a recent convert to your channel, appreciate your thoughtfulness, and look forward to you exploring this topic in future.

I don’t know what kind of definition of liberal you’re using, but a lot of the wokesters are anything but liberal, if the tendency towards intolerance of opposite or even slightly different views, displaying a distaste for free speech and advocating for the censorship of unpleasant speech ("hate speech"), as people like Owen Jones have, as well as the fact that plenty of them are expressly anti-liberal or Marxist or both are any indicator. They are a lot more like late 1791 Jacobins than liberals, a semi-coherent coalition of people with diverse and oft-conflicting motives but all united in being fairly authoritarian without necessarily even realizing it. Just as the Jacobins originally stood for changes that are fairly liberal but eventually evolved into an authoritarian monstrosity, wokesters though it may well have partly grew out of American liberalism is now about as "liberal" as the Jacobins from 1791 onwards.

That's not what "wokeism" is. Wokeism is giving women more room than men, because they're, women, giving blacks more rights than other "races" (there are no human races), because they're blacks, and giving LGBTQ+ people more rights than non LGBTQ+ people, because they're LGBTQ+. That by itself would be annoying, after all everyone should get equal rights, but the problem comes when stuff gets limited, speech gets censored or people get less opportunities due to their political opinion and might even lose positions. The so called "cancel culture" is a product of "wokeism". It ruins all kinds of entertainment media, leads to segregation, limited freedom of speech, inequality and even death, suffering and more spread of the Wuhan Coronavirus in the United States. My views are mostly left and on some areas right, but due to most left parties supporting woke policies it makes it really hard to vote for them. These woke policies ruin a lot of things and cause a lot of damage.

I had to watch it a number of times. Sovereign identity is what Vlad was critiquing.

WOKE is new-naive-left. Sahra Wagenknecht is the old cadre communist. The infighting belonging to left so naturally as shooting squad, nationalization and famine.

Because men are not threatened by a female. Women’s lives are threatened by men masquerading as women. A “woman’s” shelter should be to provide safety to women only. All women’s spaces need to be for real women and not a man with male packaging pretending to be a woman. Trans women have no place in women’s spaces. Trans women can make their own safe places without infringing on real women’s rights. There’s no reason why real women should be thrown under the bus to placate a man’s desire. Real men are not impacted by the actions of trans men in the same way real women are impacted by trans women.

Very bad in my view, but being politically awake is good.

Political prediction markets? I am thinking about it. Trump was at 1/10 to win 2024 presidency, last I checked a few weeks ago. . But if his health holds, I think it’s closer to 50/50. These odds express an establishment in denial.

@@VladVexler Politics and other things. Agree with your point here on Trump.

A magnificent question - I will reserve it for the next Q&A on the second Channel Vlad Vexler Clips. There will be a timestamp to your name when the next Q&A drops.

@@VladVexler I look forward to it. Thanx!!

My understanding is that the word originally comes from black communities and was subsequently coopted and weaponized by the right to attack progressive movements, so I would agree it is currently a loaded word.

The pattern is not petty - it is a political disaster. It deflates the efficacy of political projects caught up in it.

@@VladVexler I though the word might be a problem. I should have used "narrow". But I'm not trying to be slippery.

That could be because you consume your ideas about what’s wrong with wokeism form JP or James Lyndsey - not from serious critics of how it is harming our politics. Like Mark Lilla, or John Gray.

​@@VladVexler No. Pigeon holing aside actually my main criticism is from the CIA who infiltrated and analyzed the critical theorists in the 1970's onwards and deemed them no threat to American hegemony and in fact beneficial. Now why would the people who assassinated civil rights leaders and started the drug war to disrupt the black community find Woke ideology so compatible with their own goals? Could it be that the common denominator of the fixation on race tends to make social cohesion among normal people impossible? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ad2AobSYz7m-ZWg.html Makes you wonder.

How do you envision that blacklash though? I'm concerned that a blacklash will just lead to extremely reactionary and illogical politics that becomes a emotion fueled witch-hunt towards minority groups, POC etc. When one side gets more extreme, so often does the other. That's not a good thing for anybody who is sensible.

Woke is exactly what you say you are afraid of: extremely reactionary and illogical political[ly]… and a witch-hunt towards anyone who doesn’t toe their line.

There already IS a backlash against wokeness. It's Trumpism.

Not really, wokeism as you know it today is not a pure American product, far from it. The theories are from two French philosophers 40 years ago: Jacques Derada and Michel Foucault... Whatever they touched ranging from justice to sexuality was perverted, manipulated, rendered chaotic...

Wokeism is not left wing. As I point out in another video. It’s a kind of liberalism on steroids.

@@VladVexler semantics.

The Republicans are even worse. They might not believe strongly in social justice, but they are extremely reactionary and careless about greater consequences. Environmental destruction, climate change, shrinking middle-class, growing levels of poverty etc. things that actually have to power to completely destroy the livelihoods of future generations, and their solution is pretty much "let's keep doing everything exactly like we are, it's fine, let's keep having more tax cuts for the rich, allowing the middle-class to continue towards the trend of poverty, tell everyone that they can just pull themselves up by bootstraps and completely ignore the systematic issues killing the wealth of younger generations, and get rid of protections for the environment so some fat cats can make even bigger bank. I'll take a little lip service to "woke" social issues any day of the week over what the Republicans are offering.

@@VladVexler I think "identitarian left" is pretty much what wokeism describes best and might be the much better term for it.

@@IsomerSoma No. it’s not left. As I argue in their videos. For instance: Is wokeism Marxist

In that case Elon Musk would win over 7 billion people to move to Mars!

@@VladVexler Okay, in that case, how about Philosopher King? A little less contentious, no?

And what is complaining about something that doesn’t affect you personally? Making a huge issue about a private enterprise decision that isn’t against the law?

@@tangaz5819 yet most of those private enterprises are moving in lockstep with each other, if it was just one movie, that would be one thing, but it's not! Hollywood is corrupt, it is uncompedative and it has been taken over by Wokees! One big exception is West Side Story by Steven Spielberg, I wonder why the Sharks included no black people, they were all white people, that is so unrepresentative of New York City, why is that do you suppose? They were happy to have a black Viking, happy to have one of Robin Hood's merry Men be a black Muslim, but the Sharks from West Side Story are all white!

For 50 years we have had preference for dark skin pigmentation written into our laws: in education, jobs, housing, welfare, everything. During that time hundreds of billions of dollars have been poured into s******es like Detroit and Baltimore. That brings up two questions: -Why aren't they running the country? -If it doesn't work why can't we stop?

Nope. That would be an ethical position and a political position which underdetermines what one thinks about the role of the individual in explanatory terms. I gave the two poles of the explanatory spectrum in the video. HGM need to fit in somewhere on that spectrum. And from the 4 or 5 videos I have watched, it's not fully clear what his position is. I have been professionally initiated in these conversations for a long time, but the videos don't give me a chance to place him. I'm sure his book does do this.