Live data from Hacker News

The Origins of Wokeness

paulgraham.com

451–460 of 1001 posts

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#451

I thought this was an interesting read. For me, it sparked the insight that wokeness parallels the rise and fall of the attention economics, with the premise that attention is the real bottleneck in social justice. It places an emphasis on awareness, and the solution is often left as an exercise to the observer. Political correctness and language codes are not new. I think what was new is the idea that people could r…

The Unabomber manifesto talks about this a surprising amount too -- https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/unab...

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#452

The article missed the biggest opportunity to be curious by avoiding the question: What if they're right?

[flagged]

I think it's best to understand it in terms of entirely different separate realities that define political ideologies nowadays, like it's not just that I disagree with you, we don't even share the same plane of existence anymore. Like for example conservatives love to call Biden a marxist/far-leftist — it's incomprehensible gibberish to me, it goes against everything I believe to know about reality, but it probably makes a lot of sense to you, you might even agree with the statement. It's not a disagreement in the traditional sense, it's not something we could talk about and reach some sort of mutual understanding.

The same is true with people using the term "woke", to describe something they believe exists and is a great danger somehow, the most important political struggle of our times even perhaps. And you're right, in your perception of reality it really is scary and worth fighting against. It's just that I believe you are living in a dangerous, delusional fantasy that has nothing to do with reality. That's why finding common ground is pretty much impossible unfortunately.

Like one time I saw a conservative calling the world economic forum a far-left institution, I really don't think a productive conversation between leftists, liberals and conservatives is even possible at this point.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#453
> The woke sometimes claim that wokeness is simply treating people with respect. But if it were, that would be the only rule you'd have to remember, and this is comically far from being the case.

This seems like a good argument. It's very clear that 'wokeness'/political correctness is more about fixating on syntax (the literal words used) over semantics (the intention of the speaker). But in my book, it's the intention that matters — in fact I'd argue it's the only thing that matters. If you're choosing to wilfully misinterpret and be offended by something someone innocently said, that's completely on you. We shouldn't celebrate the act of taking offence, but at the same time we should all make an effort not to accidentally create it. Why are people who can do both seemingly so rare?

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#454
I admire PG's essays, but this one seems to give an origin theory about a complex societal issue without any evidence.

My pet theory is is that liberalism won the battle with conservatism and achieved everything useful that it could with it's existing instruments. But then it kept looking for something more and went into wokeness with good intentions. With women's equality and gay marriage the movement was able to convince people and also create legislation. When going into equity and inclusiveness there isn't a legislative solution (or there are, but they don't do much to fix the root of the problem). And people are already convinced that it's good in theory. The only solution is to make an incredible effort to actually help the communities that are raising the disadvantaged- an incredibly challenging task. Instead they maintained the existing approach of convincing and cancellations and DEI policies (in place of legislation).

I think the approach for liberalism to get back on track and achieve their goals is to do the hard work of helping disadvantaged children. If you want to make a difference, the Big Brothers Big Sisters program is a program that helps things at their root- improving the support structure of children in need.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#455
I first heard the term from my ex-wife when she was involved with black politics in Chicago in 2014. At that time their definition was firmly in the "awareness of racial and social injustice". It was seemingly later twisted to mean hypocrisy or hyper political correctness. Redefining it seems to have nerfed any effect it once had.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#456
"Prig" is in the eye of the beholder. What about when the "prigs" were right? I'm sure the Quakers were seen as "prigs" by the southern slaveholders/traders. The Quakers were early to the abolition party and their opposition to slavery was based on religious zeal which made them seem like "prigs" to the people in the South who's whole society and economy was built on slavery. But we now consider the Quakers were right and the slaveholders wrong. MLK was viewed as a "prig" by many southern whites for interfering in their racism. But MLK was right.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#457
post #398
post #371

Unbelievable how anti-pg hn has gotten. I don't think what pg is saying is anything new, he's always had the same sentiment around anti-censorship, anti-authoritarian/mob and pro-breaking-the-rules attitude. It's called "hacker" news for a reason.

I take it as more of an indicator of how much liberal sentiment has shifted over the last 15 or so years.

That plus the community having grown.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#458
"Social justice" is a perversion of justice. Eastern Europe and other countries that tried communism used social justice as an excuse to eradicate middle and upper classes through mass murders, incarceration, confiscation of property, denial of access to education or higher-paying jobs, and promotion of lower classes to the levels of their incompetence.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#459
Focusing on the term “wokeness” is a bit silly. I’ve always liked to think of it (“it” being the wave of political thought that came into influence around 2013 or so) as the latest wave of the civil rights movement. I call it “social justice” since they often use that term, but of course that term has been around for decades as well. It doesn’t matter what name you use, as long as we agree on the phenomenon we’re describing.

But really, you can trace it back further than the 60’s, as far back as in the 1920’s with C Wright Mills. He was a sociologist who essentially argued that science shouldn’t pursue explanatory knowledge, but rather emancipatory knowledge. The idea was that science can’t be some external objective thing apart from human political systems.

As for why it didn’t enter the national awareness until the last decade, I have no idea. But I think it has to do with the internet, that’s my intuition.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#460
post #323

Paul was on the board of, and advisor to, many of these companies that exported their culture to the world through their products and services. He wasn't the black sheep of the group whom others simply ignored and promoted their own independent political convictions.

There is reason why he is writing this now. He did not get rich by having an opinion.
Post reply on HN