If I ever needed another reason to dislike Tyler Cowen, he just supplied it. This is a bizarre twist on neocon arrogance. Let's invade China to bring them the enlightenment of LBGTwhatever. Liz Cheney and Pete Butegieg first in.
Seems like Cowen is just trying to be a bit of a contrarian with an out-of-left-field opinion that few people other than him hold. I doubt most of the woke Left see it the way he does. From my perspective, he seems to be ignoring some pretty basic and obvious flaws in his own argument that almost don’t deserve mentioning.
This latest culture war saga is not winning us friends abroad. It just makes us look like idiots in the eyes of most of the world.
I don't think he's being naive or conflating it with classical liberalism. But implying that Wokeism won't just go away because plenty of people find its negative aspects unpalatable. So it might as well be coopted in its best form, i.e. promoting female equality in less equal societies.
Much more likely Beijing appropriates the New Faith to further diminish American influence wherever they need to. Not hard to sell opposition to being handcuffed to lunacy.
The most competent thing they’ve done since 1945, or at least 1965. The Progs have destroyed elections and the Republic- and so their own legitimacy and the basis of laws. Woke the Religion provides a new and higher legitimacy- Religion and Holy war…er, relentless diplomacy.
Having murdered King Constitution they replace him with Bishop Woke.
Should also be noted this is the new young Protestant ascendancy (post Christian of course) and they will not share power- for example the Zionists are out. Yes that means they will not share power with Jews. Sharing power is unnatural, to share it with rude outsiders intolerable.
As far as sharing it with White Common Peasants that’s even worse, indeed the White Commons are marked for ERASURE, which is pretty clear.
As far as overseas influence…if they have unencumbered control of America the world is of little importance, indeed can be gotten to later and almost at leisure. What is important is America - they keep foremost in mind the main object.
Woke is the replacement for the Constitution and its competent to have one.
"Woke" was a slang word invented by black people in the US in the 70s to describe white people who understood the crap they have to deal with for having more melanin in their skin.
Am I missing something? Why is being aware of another's life somehow bad?
I have heard from feminist friends about their objections to allowing trans men into their facilities just because they "identify" as a woman, which is right in that people think they have "rights" but not a responsibility to see what harm to another their "rights" might cause, in this case having a safe space violated by a man in a dress who thinks (I kid you not) that his penis is magically feminine. Feminists are angry for having had decades of work snatched away for the sake of a few selfish, unhappy men. In this case, I understand the pernicious effects of what is called Woke-ism.
But sweeping all cases under the rug provides a nice covering for racism, sexism, american exceptionalism and all the other -isms that run like threads of rot through society.
Damn the ideologues, what is real is what counts, and who gets hurt.
I'm not hugely happy with the term "Woke" myself, as it is too vague. But it seems to be what most people are going with when trying to describe a complex but distinctly recognizable ideological mix.
I get concerned when popular terms are ill-defined. Being in the UK, I can vouch for this with Brexit: everyone I spoke to about it thought it was something different, and this enabled people to manipulate others: "vote for me, get Brexit!", oh, now you've lost your job because you thought it was one thing (personal freedom) and it is now another.
Same with this.
Can you give a specific action that would be described as woke?
"Can you give a specific action that would be described as woke?"
I can give you several:
“Directors now have the chance to ask boards about how willing they are to rethink their strategy, especially in the areas of diversity and inclusion,” said Jane Hsu, an associate vice president at the Arts Consulting Group. “Nobody wants to step into a position and realize there is a major issue.”
If you think "being aware of another's life" is, ultimately, the extent of the effects of "wokeism," yes, you are "missing something." In fact, you're missing a lot.
If you don't like the word, come up with a better one. But clearly the term woke has undergone some changes since the 1970s (largely thanks to co-opting by white liberals).
The "wokeists" routinely claim to be the sole owners of a position like "being aware of another's life is good" while smuggling in all sorts of ideological baggage that the vast majority of humanity thinks is lunacy. But to disagree with the lunacy means that you also disagree with the vapid statement that everyone takes for granted. It's a devious rhetorical strategy.
You know exactly what 'woke' means in the context of this post. Your post reminds me of people who in the early 00s online woulds say British culture (whatever that is!).
I read the piece couple of days ago and thought it was naive....but didn't really allow myself to think that because it was TYLER COWEN! But yes, very cosseted American, very naive.
And by the way, that "LGBTQI".....I guess not too many people have understood that the T doesn't play very well with those L G and B. Or feminism. In fact, rather hostile to them.
If I ever needed another reason to dislike Tyler Cowen, he just supplied it. This is a bizarre twist on neocon arrogance. Let's invade China to bring them the enlightenment of LBGTwhatever. Liz Cheney and Pete Butegieg first in.
But he's not a neocon or arrogant. And doesn't mention China in the piece.
Seems like Cowen is just trying to be a bit of a contrarian with an out-of-left-field opinion that few people other than him hold. I doubt most of the woke Left see it the way he does. From my perspective, he seems to be ignoring some pretty basic and obvious flaws in his own argument that almost don’t deserve mentioning.
This latest culture war saga is not winning us friends abroad. It just makes us look like idiots in the eyes of most of the world.
I don't think he's being naive or conflating it with classical liberalism. But implying that Wokeism won't just go away because plenty of people find its negative aspects unpalatable. So it might as well be coopted in its best form, i.e. promoting female equality in less equal societies.
Much more likely Beijing appropriates the New Faith to further diminish American influence wherever they need to. Not hard to sell opposition to being handcuffed to lunacy.
Woke is actually competent.
The most competent thing they’ve done since 1945, or at least 1965. The Progs have destroyed elections and the Republic- and so their own legitimacy and the basis of laws. Woke the Religion provides a new and higher legitimacy- Religion and Holy war…er, relentless diplomacy.
Having murdered King Constitution they replace him with Bishop Woke.
Should also be noted this is the new young Protestant ascendancy (post Christian of course) and they will not share power- for example the Zionists are out. Yes that means they will not share power with Jews. Sharing power is unnatural, to share it with rude outsiders intolerable.
As far as sharing it with White Common Peasants that’s even worse, indeed the White Commons are marked for ERASURE, which is pretty clear.
As far as overseas influence…if they have unencumbered control of America the world is of little importance, indeed can be gotten to later and almost at leisure. What is important is America - they keep foremost in mind the main object.
Woke is the replacement for the Constitution and its competent to have one.
In in its actual practice, "woke" translates into a complete attach on competence. Here is an example:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/arts/music/blind-auditions-orchestras-race.html
And the sentiment of the piece is being duplicated across medical schools, law, math and on and on.
"Woke" was a slang word invented by black people in the US in the 70s to describe white people who understood the crap they have to deal with for having more melanin in their skin.
Am I missing something? Why is being aware of another's life somehow bad?
I have heard from feminist friends about their objections to allowing trans men into their facilities just because they "identify" as a woman, which is right in that people think they have "rights" but not a responsibility to see what harm to another their "rights" might cause, in this case having a safe space violated by a man in a dress who thinks (I kid you not) that his penis is magically feminine. Feminists are angry for having had decades of work snatched away for the sake of a few selfish, unhappy men. In this case, I understand the pernicious effects of what is called Woke-ism.
But sweeping all cases under the rug provides a nice covering for racism, sexism, american exceptionalism and all the other -isms that run like threads of rot through society.
Damn the ideologues, what is real is what counts, and who gets hurt.
I'm not hugely happy with the term "Woke" myself, as it is too vague. But it seems to be what most people are going with when trying to describe a complex but distinctly recognizable ideological mix.
I get concerned when popular terms are ill-defined. Being in the UK, I can vouch for this with Brexit: everyone I spoke to about it thought it was something different, and this enabled people to manipulate others: "vote for me, get Brexit!", oh, now you've lost your job because you thought it was one thing (personal freedom) and it is now another.
Same with this.
Can you give a specific action that would be described as woke?
If you think "brexit" literally mean "lose your job", then you are a moron. Pure sophistry.
"Can you give a specific action that would be described as woke?"
Another one:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/nov/21/former-executive-accuses-american-express-firing-h/
"Can you give a specific action that would be described as woke?"
I can give you several:
“Directors now have the chance to ask boards about how willing they are to rethink their strategy, especially in the areas of diversity and inclusion,” said Jane Hsu, an associate vice president at the Arts Consulting Group. “Nobody wants to step into a position and realize there is a major issue.”
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/u-s-museums-director-vacancies-2038335?utm_content=from_artnetnews&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Morning%20US%20Newsletter&utm_term=US%20Daily%20Newsletter%20%5BMORNING%5D
If you think "being aware of another's life" is, ultimately, the extent of the effects of "wokeism," yes, you are "missing something." In fact, you're missing a lot.
If you don't like the word, come up with a better one. But clearly the term woke has undergone some changes since the 1970s (largely thanks to co-opting by white liberals).
The "wokeists" routinely claim to be the sole owners of a position like "being aware of another's life is good" while smuggling in all sorts of ideological baggage that the vast majority of humanity thinks is lunacy. But to disagree with the lunacy means that you also disagree with the vapid statement that everyone takes for granted. It's a devious rhetorical strategy.
You know exactly what 'woke' means in the context of this post. Your post reminds me of people who in the early 00s online woulds say British culture (whatever that is!).
I read the piece couple of days ago and thought it was naive....but didn't really allow myself to think that because it was TYLER COWEN! But yes, very cosseted American, very naive.
And by the way, that "LGBTQI".....I guess not too many people have understood that the T doesn't play very well with those L G and B. Or feminism. In fact, rather hostile to them.