In the contemporary landscape of political discourse riddled with unfounded ideologies, the newfound fascination with ‘wokeness’ has become a concerning trend. It often seems like there is an ongoing battle among left-leaning politicians and their media allies, which also includes that one relative you try to avoid at family gatherings, over who can discredit traditional values most vehemently. If one had a small sum for every condemnation uttered against sensible conservatism, there would be a sizeable heap of spare change. Yet, it’s fascinating to note that for most of these vocal critics, the true connotation of ‘wokeness’ remains elusive.
Wokeness wasn’t always a term wielded against conservatives. In the times preceding the unfortunate event of George Floyd’s death, the phrase ‘stay woke’ within the African-American community primarily meant to be on guard against systemic oppression. This was a reference to the very type of systemic unfairness that could potentially put you in suffocating circumstances at the hands of law enforcement. Yet, following Floyd’s passing, the phrase was adopted by the Black Lives Matter movement and thus, altered forever.
Since this time, the term was latched onto by political and cultural absolutists of the left, analogous to their misuse of ‘political correctness’. It was co-opted as a blanket term for any policy or initiative that contrasted their partisan beliefs. In terms of marketing, the strategy was remarkable. Now, whenever your attention is drawn by the term ‘woke’, sneered out during a press brief or featured in opinion columns, it’s likely being voiced by a political player keen on safeguarding their societal advantage.
Public figures, such as former President Donald Trump and Peter Dutton, confronted this new ‘woke’ culture in a manner not dissimilar to Joseph McCarthy’s conflict against communists – it’s all about perception. There’s no break from the cascade of belligerent comments flooding social media feeds, triggered by the most benign of statements, with a collective outcry against the so-called ‘woke’ nonsense.
The current understanding of ‘wokeness’, however, seems somewhat distorted. Bizarrely, it seems any policy or initiative demonstrating a shred of compassion or empathy is lambasted as ‘woke’. Case in point, local cultural welcomes that could potentially remind us of our shared complex history are discreditingly deemed ‘divisive and woke ceremonial practices with no meaning’.
Mentions acknowledging First Nations people at an occasion? That’s viewed as ‘woke’. A simple display of a rainbow flag? Denounced as ‘woke’. Any attempt to provide support to the underprivileged? Categorized as ‘woke’. Choosing to critique the celebration of Australia Day? Labeled as ‘woke’. Expressing that this holiday might not be a joyous occasion for all Australian citizens? Decried as ‘woke’. Diversity, Equality, Inclusion (DEI) initiatives? All bracketed under the umbrella term of ‘woke’.
One can almost understand why this change might be confronting. Grammatical adjustments like the use of the ‘they/them’ pronouns can occasionally cause confusion – not for any distaste towards trans individuals but due to the pluralistic nature of these pronouns. However, if such a simple adjustment can make someone’s life a bit easier, then it’s worth it.
Recently, those on the conservative side are becoming more discerning in their critique. Such was the case when an exceptionally skilled and deserving black, lesbian fire chief in Los Angeles was unfairly ridiculed as a ‘DEI appointee’. Yet, the situation took a turn for the absurd when Kamala Harris was called, quite ludicrously, the ‘DEI vice president’.
The term ‘woke’ has quickly become the left’s favorite catchphrase, replacing other derogatory slurs seen as inappropriate. For many of us who prefer not to participate in such divisive labeling, it seems this term has outlived its usefulness. However, if the new and broadly accepted definition equates to advocating for empathy and fairness regardless of race, gender, sexuality, and culture, we may have to reconsider our stance.
In these tumultuous times when the most vulnerable in society are regularly the targets of discrimination, empathy and understanding are indeed vital. Of course, those who take offense to such concepts aren’t primarily anti-woke; instead, they are revealing a fundamental deficit of human kindness. The ‘wokeness’ dialogue represents a skewed view of reality, which is degrading to society’s overall wellbeing and cohesion. We should strive for productive conversations and foster a community where disagreements can be voiced without resorting to divisive labeling.
More than ever, it’s crucial to challenge ideologies that detract from rational and constructive dialogue. As we continue to grapple with ethical discourse, may we remember that accusations of ‘wokeness’ from any angle are merely obstructions to genuine conversation.
While self-proclaimed ‘woke-ists’ prematurely reject nuanced discussion, the rest of us must strive to dig deeper for meaningful insights and ethical debates. It’s worth noting that erasing any complexities under a monolithic term like ‘woke’ risks undermining our shared resolution of attaining societal balance and parity.
Just as the ‘woke’ term is inclusively applied to any belief contrasting their perception, its critics are also readily labeled. It’s a striking reflection of the case when genuine dialogue is sacrificed at the altar of political correctness.
In the final analysis, while the term ‘woke’ was intended to awaken awareness of societal injustice, it has unfortunately been hijacked, transformed, and weaponized. But, mercifully, social trends wax and wane, and the polarizing discourse of ‘woke’ politics will eventually lose its potency.
We can only hope that society is more resilient than the current alarming narratives of ‘wokeness’ suggest. Through thoughtful dialogue, mutual understanding, and a common goal to improve the status quo, the ‘woke’ wave can be counteracted.
We must remember the core values of empathy, understanding, and fairness, even amid the clamor caused by the ‘woke’ discourse. As a society, fostering an environment where disagreements can be expressed without succumbing to adversarial labeling is the necessary path forward.