@@GeorgePapadopolous You can’t. It’s technically a blanket term for authoritarian corporate businesses who are trying to permentely change the political landscape to ensure they have permanent control over the world economy while forcing the average citizen to give everything they have up for the sake of peace and security. They have happily divided society up and are slowly destabilising entire nations to cover the ongoing efforts. They will get away with and succeed with it because the funds they already have are being used to stomp out dissent and to spread a false narrative of equality just to gain money. Money and control, that’s all woke really is about. As long as they get one or the other, the businesses win
"Joanna Williams Explains (in between getting interrupted and spoken over)"? Did Joanna finish a single response? At all? If Rob Forsyth wants his own pulpit, maybe there's a suitable forum for it, but suffocating a guest with his own commentary seems to go against the idea of having a guest at all. Something that gets overlooked with wokeness is that it piggybacked on genuine social progress. A sincere desire to protect groups, to advocate for individual rights, etc. in ways that only fully emerged post-WW2 was the fertile ground in which woke ideologies could exploit a victim identity for power gains. The issue is whether we (as a society) are overcoming ingrained historical prejudices and disadvantage, or are we just elevating a new minority group as somehow "better", this time for their victimhood. Protecting rights is one thing, but holding people up as special because of a group membership is as toxic and regressive as the "privilege" of the "other" that they seek to overcome. If we took wokeness and removed the hypocrisy and double standards, what would that look like?
I think you are using the word "woke" too liberally. Post-WW2 fertile ground woke ideologies? In this video, I think it is fairly obvious that they are talking about the idea of woke that surfaced during #staywoke hashtag. Post-WWII fertile grounds was a thing because after WWII people realized that they should also put weight into social academics and they should be much more critical of societal standards since they resulted in the rise of Nazism. It is common trope nowadays to tie that advancement in soft sciences to the #staywoke movement, yet #staywoke movement has not been realized in the Soviets or even the Europe. It was a very neo-liberal American thing that companies can jump on grind for claps. Since then, that #staywoke movement have been diminishing, at least the obviously negative parts of it like the mob mentality. What we have left is some type of "positive discrimination" which is an oxymoron to begin with, and I can see that is diminishing also. So, yes, the woke won but what they won is not sustainable to begin with, so it will disappear. The real equality, although little, has been provided because the woke made it popular to be progressive in the age of populist politicians. Now we have anti-woke. I see only one really woke content against 10 anti-woke content on the internet in 2024. I always hated the woke, now I hate anti-woke precisely for the same reasons I hated the woke. Both are, in essence, ultra-sensationalist movements that try to push to public towards one direction by simplifying real and complex societal issues, while also creating enemies because of their general hostility. Just like the woke called everyone they disagreed with racist, homophobic, etc; the anti-woke calls them cultural marxists, deviants, etc. To be more concise, I agree with almost all of your points but I disagree that it was the real academic progress that happened after WWII that caused the exploit you mentioned. In my opinion, it is the neo-liberal wokism that exploited all the academic work in their favour.
@@echorises I appreciate where our sentiments are shared. I don't think you quite characterised or paraphrased my words as I wrote them. That may be where some disagreement has arisen. Also, the thrust of my point was about social progress, not academia. In response to your own points, there is a challenge in such polarised times to not be overly influenced about our positions based on the calibre of those who share the position. I think wokeness is harmful. Yet, even though lots of anti-woke bandwagonners are not "my people" either, I continue to oppose wokeness, and I let it be happenstance that some I do not support are also supportive of anti-wokeness. Thanks for your comment!
Has woke won?
Define woke.
No.
In Denmark it's being rejected
Never had a chance.
@@GeorgePapadopolous
You can’t. It’s technically a blanket term for authoritarian corporate businesses who are trying to permentely change the political landscape to ensure they have permanent control over the world economy while forcing the average citizen to give everything they have up for the sake of peace and security. They have happily divided society up and are slowly destabilising entire nations to cover the ongoing efforts. They will get away with and succeed with it because the funds they already have are being used to stomp out dissent and to spread a false narrative of equality just to gain money.
Money and control, that’s all woke really is about. As long as they get one or the other, the businesses win
This lady is making too much sense!!
The alphabet Mafia is going to put out a hit on her !
We need to clarify the meaning of Panglossia. I understood it to mean excessive optimism.
"Joanna Williams Explains (in between getting interrupted and spoken over)"? Did Joanna finish a single response? At all? If Rob Forsyth wants his own pulpit, maybe there's a suitable forum for it, but suffocating a guest with his own commentary seems to go against the idea of having a guest at all.
Something that gets overlooked with wokeness is that it piggybacked on genuine social progress. A sincere desire to protect groups, to advocate for individual rights, etc. in ways that only fully emerged post-WW2 was the fertile ground in which woke ideologies could exploit a victim identity for power gains. The issue is whether we (as a society) are overcoming ingrained historical prejudices and disadvantage, or are we just elevating a new minority group as somehow "better", this time for their victimhood. Protecting rights is one thing, but holding people up as special because of a group membership is as toxic and regressive as the "privilege" of the "other" that they seek to overcome.
If we took wokeness and removed the hypocrisy and double standards, what would that look like?
I think you are using the word "woke" too liberally. Post-WW2 fertile ground woke ideologies? In this video, I think it is fairly obvious that they are talking about the idea of woke that surfaced during #staywoke hashtag. Post-WWII fertile grounds was a thing because after WWII people realized that they should also put weight into social academics and they should be much more critical of societal standards since they resulted in the rise of Nazism. It is common trope nowadays to tie that advancement in soft sciences to the #staywoke movement, yet #staywoke movement has not been realized in the Soviets or even the Europe. It was a very neo-liberal American thing that companies can jump on grind for claps. Since then, that #staywoke movement have been diminishing, at least the obviously negative parts of it like the mob mentality. What we have left is some type of "positive discrimination" which is an oxymoron to begin with, and I can see that is diminishing also. So, yes, the woke won but what they won is not sustainable to begin with, so it will disappear. The real equality, although little, has been provided because the woke made it popular to be progressive in the age of populist politicians.
Now we have anti-woke. I see only one really woke content against 10 anti-woke content on the internet in 2024. I always hated the woke, now I hate anti-woke precisely for the same reasons I hated the woke. Both are, in essence, ultra-sensationalist movements that try to push to public towards one direction by simplifying real and complex societal issues, while also creating enemies because of their general hostility. Just like the woke called everyone they disagreed with racist, homophobic, etc; the anti-woke calls them cultural marxists, deviants, etc.
To be more concise, I agree with almost all of your points but I disagree that it was the real academic progress that happened after WWII that caused the exploit you mentioned. In my opinion, it is the neo-liberal wokism that exploited all the academic work in their favour.
@@echorises I appreciate where our sentiments are shared. I don't think you quite characterised or paraphrased my words as I wrote them. That may be where some disagreement has arisen. Also, the thrust of my point was about social progress, not academia.
In response to your own points, there is a challenge in such polarised times to not be overly influenced about our positions based on the calibre of those who share the position. I think wokeness is harmful. Yet, even though lots of anti-woke bandwagonners are not "my people" either, I continue to oppose wokeness, and I let it be happenstance that some I do not support are also supportive of anti-wokeness.
Thanks for your comment!
The interviewer needs to STOP constantly interrupting her!