Comment by s1artibartfast
6 days ago
I agree with what you said, but I still think performance and moralizing is the central aspect.
In your hierarchy, I think most people would also agree that an activist blogging about using the world "unhoused" instead of "homeless" is more woke than the one advocating for the wealth tax.
Similarly, someone arguing for wealth tax and transfer on moral grounds is more woke than someone who argues the identical policy saying it will result in long term cost savings.
Why do you put more emphasis on the language than the proposed solutions. Is that to control the speech?
I'm not sure what you mean.
In my opinion, and many others, the type of speech is what wokeness is about. Particularly of the kind that are moralizing lectures explaining how Superior the speaker is.
Concrete solutions are far more preferable.
> most people would also agree that an activist blogging about using the world "unhoused" instead of "homeless" is more woke than the one advocating for the wealth tax.
Just wondering why you are allowing "homeless" to be used without retribution, but someone using "unhoused" is disparaged as woke. Seems like language policing to me.
1 reply →
Sure. I'm not saying that a focus on language or whatever is the opposite of "woke." I'm just saying that it is a general sling thrown at left wing politics, not a thing that exists to distract from revolutionary class politics.