What is 'woke' and why do we use it?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lets be honest, it's already heavily infiltrated every organisation, institution universities, corporations, you name it... But if any of the individuals in high profile positions accidentally say the quiet part out loud, the overwhelming reaction from the public is negative... Just look at the reaction the Diane Abbots comments...

Starmer is desperately trying to hide the fact that most of the Labour party support ideology like CRT, including gender and race theory, but it's a bit like trying to hide an elephant under a rug at this stage.

What is critical race theory exactly?
 
Oh you think "the left" all speak with one voice? like they are the Borg or something.

What's a "senior leftie" anyway? You mean that she's old or that all the other lefties have somehow elevated her in to the powerful position of....MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington.


There is definitely something of the evil collective hive mind about the left so I dont disagree with your comparison to the Borg..

In terms of high profile / senior leftie politicians there aren't many that come to mind - Sir Kneeler / Softie, ginger basic instinct, magic grandpa* and her..


*not any more obviously lol..
 
Last edited:
What warrants an extremist far left view in your opinion?

Did you mean ‘what warrants an extremist far left view’ (as you wrote)? Nothing really warrants an ‘extremist’ view, although obviously it’s very subjective as to what an ‘extremist’ view is. People that hold extremist views tend to be a product of their circumstances and environment, so I try to keep that in mind to understand those people a little better.

Or did you mean ‘what warrants giving attention to an extremism far left view’? In which case, I suppose it’s a case of materiality. If there is a bona fide terrorist organisation that’s causing havoc to further a far left agenda, then it’s going to be of my concern. If it’s just the opinion of somebody if the internet, I’ll probably think ‘hmm - I don’t agree with that’ and get on with my day.
 
Did you mean ‘what warrants an extremist far left view’ (as you wrote)? Nothing really warrants an ‘extremist’ view, although obviously it’s very subjective as to what an ‘extremist’ view is. People that hold extremist views tend to be a product of their circumstances and environment, so I try to keep that in mind to understand those people a little better.

Or did you mean ‘what warrants giving attention to an extremism far left view’? In which case, I suppose it’s a case of materiality. If there is a bona fide terrorist organisation that’s causing havoc to further a far left agenda, then it’s going to be of my concern. If it’s just the opinion of somebody if the internet, I’ll probably think ‘hmm - I don’t agree with that’ and get on with my day.
Its a very simple question, you said people with extremist far left views should be ignored, I'm asking you what you would consider an example of that to be.
Small example, I'd consider thinking its ok to give children life altering drugs and chopping of their genitalia to be extremist. Buts that's a fairly common view held by folks on the left.
 
Last edited:
'Woke' is a shorthand for cultural Marxism.

PLEASE NOTE: basic ******** (see below) often like to make their usual, wild accusation of others being 'anti senitic' 'Nazi's' or 'facists' for using the phrase 'Cultural Marxism' by claiming it was a phrase used by the Nazi's to attack their opponents.

Such people are just demonstrating their ignorance.

The Nazi's uses the phase 'cultural bolshevism' (Kulturbolschewismus) when talking about what they perceived as degenerate artistc expression and cultural practises. They weren't describing the application of the basic marxist theory to systems outside of capitalism.

Also, as is very common with these sorts of people, the usage of the phrase originally came from 'progressive' literature before it's wider use.

Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain: History, the New Left, and the Origins of Cultural Studies​


In this intellectual history of British cultural Marxism, Dennis Dworkin explores one of the most influential bodies of contemporary thought. Tracing its development from beginnings in postwar Britain, through its various transformations in the 1960s and 1970s, to the emergence of British cultural studies at Birmingham, and up to the advent of Thatcherism, Dworkin shows this history to be one of a coherent intellectual tradition, a tradition that represents an implicit and explicit theoretical effort to resolve the crisis of the postwar British Left.
Limited to neither a single discipline nor a particular intellectual figure, this book comprehensively views British cultural Marxism in terms of the dialogue between historians and the originators of cultural studies and in its relationship to the new left and feminist movements. From the contributions of Eric Hobsbawm, Christopher Hill, Rodney Hilton, Sheila Rowbotham, Catherine Hall, and E. P. Thompson to those of Perry Anderson, Barbara Taylor, Raymond Williams, Dick Hebdige, and Stuart Hall, Dworkin examines the debates over issues of culture and society, structure and agency, experience and ideology, and theory and practice. The rise, demise, and reorganization of journals such as The Reasoner, The New Reasoner, Universities and Left Review, New Left Review, Past and Present, are also part of the history told in this volume. In every instance, the focus of Dworkin’s attention is the intellectual work seen in its political context. Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain captures the excitement and commitment that more than one generation of historians, literary critics, art historians, philosophers, and cultural theorists have felt about an unorthodox and critical tradition of Marxist theory.



So despite both phases using the word 'cultural' and both using words connected with socialism 'bolshevism' and 'Marxism' they describe different things

So Cultural Marxism is the use of the key ideas and roles of 'classical' Marxism outside of the bourgeoisie/ proletariat/ capitalism framework (to be replaced by other supposed roles of oppressor class, oppressed class and systemic means of oppression)

Originally 'woke' was used by black Americans talking about supposed systemic racism in the US. They claimed to be 'awake' about the intercation between blacks (the oppressed class) whites (the supposed oppressor class) and 'white supremacy/ systemic racism' (the supposed form of oppression).

The word was later co opted by largely white collectivists to describe being 'aware' to a wider array of supposed oppressor/ oppressed/ systemic oppression systems such as thoose supposed to be in play in gender identity.

It them of course because a widely used pejorative to describe basic faux virtue signalling ******** who support fraudulent orgs and causes with easily refuted claims that certain demographics are 'marginalised/ vulnerable' subject of a 'genocide' and that another group are actually the disproportionate 'victims' of violent interacial crime in the US when they actually commit key interacial violent offences (like homicide) at rates at least an order of magnitude greater than the group supposedly oppressing them.

Connected terms

Critical theory
- the 'study' of marxist style supposed systems of oppression.


'X' lens - a way at looking at the world through a particular 'framework' often one of the afermentioned variants of cultural Marxism hence a person looking at differences between ethnicities through a 'racial lens' will see that disparities are caused by an oppressor group using a systemic form of oppression to subjugate and 'oppressed' racial group regardless of the facts

'Progressivism' / 'progressives' - a meaningless word intended to to show ones adherence and submission to poltical right think often by subscribing to the tenets of things like cultural Marxism. There is nothing inherently 'good' about change 'progress'. The sensible person knows that changes have to be assessed by measuring their results/ outcomes.

Intersectionality - the application of multiple vectors of supposed oppression, as outlined by cultural Marxism, whereby some may claim to be the victims of multiple forms of systemic oppression or other might simultaneously be accused of being both oppressed and oppressor, in different ways (like a gay white man - gay so oppressed by heterosexual normative systems. But 'oppresser' as 'CIS' and white)

Progressive stack - the attempt to apply the nonsensical and incoherent ideas of cultural Marxism and intersectionality to generate a 'pecking order of oppression'. Commonly deployed to try and tell some people they can't talk or offer an opinion on a particular matter because they aren't as 'oppressed' as someone else.

Examples include people who think shouting "but your a white man!" Is a substitute for actually having a argument when confronted with some facts that undermine a narrative.
 
Last edited:
Its a very simple question, you said people with extremist far left views should be ignored, I'm asking you what you would consider an example of that to be.
Small example, I'd consider thinking its ok to give children life altering drugs and chopping of their genitalia to be extremist. Buts that's a fairly common view held by folks on the left.

I can only respond to the questions that you write :o :p

Putting your two posts together, I now understand you are asking: “what do you [Nitefly] consider an extreme far left view to be?”

Well, more context is needed, but yes encouraging children to consume ‘mind altering drugs’ and chopping off genitalia does sound pretty extreme… I’m don’t think that is anything I’d associate with ‘the left’ though. Let alone that being a ‘fairly common left-held view’?!

Something like, ‘abolish the police entirely’ in response to police failings, would be a pretty extreme leftist view. So that and other things which are quite child-like in their reasoning.
 
Well, more context is needed, but yes encouraging children to consume ‘mind altering drugs’ and chopping off genitalia does sound pretty extreme… I’m don’t think that is anything I’d associate with ‘the left’ though. Let alone that being a ‘fairly common left-held view’?

It's the far-left that predominately obsess over "protecting" the rights of LGBT+ people, nobody associates this with the right. lol
 
It's the far-left that predominately obsess over "protecting" the rights of LGBT+ people, nobody associates this with the right. lol

If there is one thing 'wokism' (Marxism) is very adept at doing it is screwing over groups it previously claimed to represent.

The poor white working class (the original class Marxism claimed to represent) were jettisoned decades ago.... when the proles turned out to be a dissapointment for Marxism (for largely rejecting the idology once its failures in places like the USSR became apparent) Marxism moved onto women and then same sex attracted people.

However these days the proponents of contemporary Marxism can't provide a coherent defintion of the former group and have throughly undermined the LGB groups by insisting that these people are 'bigots' for actually being same sex attracted!
 
If he was a wrestler his special move would be boring the opposition into submission

Typical OCUK GD response... a question gets posed... an answer is provided with expansion to try and counter at least some of the bad faith accusations that get thrown about...

People then claim to be 'bored'

It's a forum you can always skip threads or posts you don't want to read or engage in....
 
If there is one thing 'wokism' (Marxism) is very adept at doing it is screwing over groups it previously claimed to represent.

The poor white working class (the original class Marxism claimed to represent) were jettisoned decades ago.... when the proles turned out to be a dissapointment for Marxism (for largely rejecting the idology once its failures in places like the USSR became apparent) Marxism moved onto women and then same sex attracted people.

However these days the proponents of contemporary Marxism can't provide a coherent defintion of the former group and have throughly undermined the LGB groups by insisting that these people are 'bigots' for actually being same sex attracted!

I've always found this quite funny. Women (feminism) played such a large role in the creation of gender theory, now the ideology can barely acknowledge "women" exist. :)
 
Ive noticed that people are willing to accept being 'woke' even without asking for it to be clarified yet the same isnt the same with racists. They want to know what your defination of racist is despite everyone knowing.
That's because for years people knew the definition of racism, nowadays the left are trying to redefine the actual meaning of the word by throwing in the caveat that you can't be racist to 'xyz' as they have held positions of authority and power in western society throughout history. Which is why yourself, and others like you, lept the defence of Queen CRT herself, holder of the title 'racist labour MP of the year' for the past decade, Diane Abbot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom