At the Oxford Union a few months ago, Toby – who as well as being Editor-in-Chief of the Daily Sceptic is General Secretary of the Free Speech Union – delivered an impressive speech in favour of the motion “This House Believes Woke Culture Has Gone Too Far”. It was uploaded to YouTube about a week ago.
Several times in his speech Toby expressed the view that it is not the ends of woke culture that are objectionable, but rather the means used to try to attain those ends.
Toby is not alone in his view. Far from it. In the last three or four years I have lost count of the number of times my heart has sunk when, usually early on in an otherwise excellent article or podcast, someone criticising wokeness says the woke “have good intentions”, their behaviour is “well-intentioned”, or “they mean well”. In other words, their heart is in the right place, and their goal is a noble one. It is only their chosen route to that goal which is a problem.
I think people who believe this about the woke have misjudged the situation in several ways. And in the battle against the often pernicious effects of wokeness, this matters. Such praise is unjust and hands the woke a free gift they simply do not deserve.
One of the main problems with thinking the woke have honourable intentions and laudable goals is not that they really have malicious intentions and wish to cause misery – though there is a pretty good case to be made for that view, which I’ll return to below. Nor is it that the woke’s relentlessly sanctimonious attitude and their uncompromising and often brutal behaviour greatly outweigh any supposedly good intentions, to the extent that they aren’t worth mentioning. The problem is more fundamental than that.
It is clear from what the woke say and do that they are in the grip of a powerful ideology. They are therefore not truly free agents calmly and voluntarily making a series of rational decisions which they believe are in the interests of all, or even in the interests of some. Quite the opposite. They are effectively slaves to the ideology, and are ultimately acting in their own interests, to meet the demands made of them by the grand meta-narrative that has possessed them.
We might even have begun to pity the woke for their state of mental bondage if it wasn’t for the fact that their views are so damaging – and that we know their worldview brings them a satisfying sense of meaning and virtuousness. But because they are not entirely free in their choices and actions, praising their intentions and their goals, however briefly and in passing it is done, is misguided. It is like praising rabbits for breeding, or a dog for chasing a ball.
I feel I may be more justified than some in making this case, because – if you will pardon the expression – I have lived experience of what I‘m talking about. I was once a true believer; a youthful, headstrong disciple of Marx, who – having seen the light – wandered the streets of a northern town feeling superior and misunderstood. This was some time ago, when the far Left was primarily concerned with class inequalities rather than the woke obsession with race and gender. I eventually liberated myself from the ideology and subsequently lived an almost normal life, as if nothing untoward had taken place. The point is, it taught me that during that time I was not my own man and should not have been praised for wanting to save the world.
There is another reason why we should not, in any way, commend the woke: their actual goals, as they exist in reality, are not commendable. What they say they seek – equality, justice, and as Toby said at the Oxford Union, “to reduce prejudice and discrimination and improve outcomes for historically disadvantaged groups” – are not really ends at all. They are, in the main, only vague generalisations and abstractions, and indeed ones which reflect the ideology by which the woke have been captured. What the woke need to be judged on, and praised for if justified, are their ends as they are in practice, on what they aim for and increasingly achieve on the ground.
So let’s judge them. Let’s see how things are going with wokeness, when it comes to actual ends, not some likely unachievable utopian ideals.
Is it good, for example, that in Scotland, 16 year-olds may soon be able to self-declare their gender? Is it good that, under the same legislation, the dignity and sex-based rights of women, fought-for for so long, are being attacked? Ends like these, which are claimed to provide equality for trans people, knowingly disregard the rights and interests of so many others. Were the woke ever going to achieve what they think is trans equality in a different and more reasonable way? It’s doubtful. So it is probably fair to say that they are driven as much by malice towards some, as by anything else.
Is it good that white people, whatever they say or do, are deemed by the woke to be inherently racist? Or that black and ethnic minorities are constantly encouraged to believe everything is stacked against them? Most importantly, would any of that change if equality of outcome was achieved? Again, it’s doubtful. I’m struggling to see how the aims of the woke are good, even for those whose interests the woke claim to represent.
And should we automatically assume that, even if it was possible, aiming for a 50-50 gender balance in all types of employment would not have potentially negative effects elsewhere, such as for family life, for the quality of children’s upbringing and their wellbeing, and for the companies and organisations themselves prioritising quotas over competence?
And should we be happy that, in the most tolerant civilisation that has ever existed, buildings, police cars, firework displays, zebra crossings and sometimes even trains, are subjected to the rainbow treatment, as though bigotry is rife? You can argue that this is a means not an end. But it feels very much like such things have often become ends in themselves, rather than another step towards equality. The separation between woke means and ends isn’t so clear cut.
And then, of course, there are questions about whether equality as an end is a good, when there are strong arguments suggesting hierarchies, whether you like them or not, and despite their downsides, have always been the natural and most beneficial way for a society to be structured.
And it could even be that the more frustrated the woke become in not achieving their abstract and supposedly noble ends, the more vicious and deranged the means will become. Best not to agree with the woke that those ends are good.
Of course, few if any of the things I cite above, whether means or ends, are good, and everyone but the woke know it. I am simply asking those who I feel are sometimes too generous to the woke, to bear them in mind and re-examine their belief that “the moral impulse underpinning this movement is laudable”, as Toby put it.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The only crime committed here was by the police. Wasting police time.
Just the term “hate crime” makes me shudder.
When did hating something become a crime?
Terrifying, just terrifying.
I don’t think hatred comes naturally to most people. I think it’s usually in response to an event or stimulus. I find myself more inclined to hate certain groups the more I’m told I must love or respect or approve of them otherwise I will be considered Literally Hitler.
Who decides a word or action was motivated by hate? Apparently anyone hearing that word or seeing that action can decide it was hate and therefore it is infact HATE. —How bizarre.
It’s perfect. The more opaque and nebulous the crime definition, the more blanket control they can exert. It’s literally Orwell’s wrongthink.
“we take any allegation of hate crime seriously”
Pity they don’t seem to take actual real crimes seriously any more.
Is there an actual “hate crime” law?
John James is correct. Pride now has nothing to do with the gay community. I’ve even read of gays being called ”TERFs” by the trans loonies FFS! Just one example of how this whole shebang is now used as a vehicle for gender and trans ideologies to push on with their agenda to recruit the vulnerable and infect society with their poisonous madness;
”A female-only lesbian advocacy group in France was excluded from their local Pride parade on the basis that they did not allow the membership of trans-identified males. Femmes Entre Elles was labeled “transphobic” for restricting its advocacy to issues faced by women.
Femmes Entre Elles, which translates to “Women Among Themselves,” is a single-sex association for lesbian and bisexual women that has operated for over 30 years. It has been involved in campaigns to support women’s sex-based rights and the rights of lesbian women.
But on May 27, the group was informed via email that they were not welcome to participate in the annual Pride march in Rennes, which was held on June 17. Leading local LGBT center Iskis explained that the decision was made because Femmes Entre Elles did not welcome the membership of men who claim to be women.”
https://reduxx.info/france-female-only-lesbian-groups-barred-from-pride-month-events-over-transphobia/
And these two peeps from the group Gays Against Groomers make a lot of sense in this short clip;
”There is indeed a “civil war” happening as some in the LGB community try to distance themselves from the TQIA++ because of the madness. Especially the grooming and indoctrination of minors in places like over-sexualized drag shows. They’re both standing with Olympus Spa and are against transgender women with penis’ entering this women only facility. Incredible insight from both of them.”
https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1670312589992280064?cxt=HHwWgIDS5e2ckq4uAAAA
Trans activists are often anti gay and lesbian as research has shown that a lot of people who go through a gender questioning phase mature into happy well adjusted same sex attracted adults. Convincing them that they’re actually of a different gender is therefore highly damaging to a lot of young people who are gay or lesbian but have yet to figure out that’s their true sexuality. More gays and lesbians need to stand up against the idealogues e.g. by having nothing to do with stonewall or the traditional pride movement and joining the LGB Alliance.
Well there’s not a trans person in sight ( at least, not an attention-seeking ‘in yer face’ one anyway ) but I’d be interested in hearing what men think of Bud Light’s new ad. There’s like, zillions of other lagers and beers on the market so I think anyone who chooses to spend money on this kack is just mental tbh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg7iiVKJ2CU&ab_channel=BudLight
I don’t watch much TV nor am I exposed to much advertising in other contexts but I find the majority of the ads I see distasteful or annoying. A lot of them are blatantly political. The advertising industry must be quite a horrible one to work in.
https://www.technocracy.news/universal-basic-income-and-the-anti-human-agenda/
“No less than eighty UBI trials are underway globally, and many more have already started and ended.”
On the back of the bus in front of me at this moment is a police advert telling me that saying “nice legs, Hun” is a hate crime and gives me a number to report it to!
That is really sick.
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/near-to-zero-sterilisation-viruses
Sterilisation was baked in to the so-called “vaccines.”
“Everything is now policed except crime.”————I think I heard that on the Mark Steyn Show . ————–Hey Mark we love you mate. Maybe Laurence Fox could have really confused the police though had he burned a golliwog.
I DO like this guy. Well done Lozza.