Live data from Hacker News

The Origins of Wokeness

paulgraham.com

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#881

You can tell who a person does and doesn't talk with when reading something like this. To write an essay of this length, on this topic, and not bring up (at a minimum) Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority suggests you shouldn't be writing about it. I was a college student in the 1990s. Not only that, I was a member and even leader of evangelical Christian groups in college. Outrage, us versus them, claims of being pe…

Graham doesn't mention Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority by name, but he does explicitly compare wokeness to religion: > Previous generations of prigs had been prigs mostly about religion and sex. > Is there a simple, principled way to deal with wokeness? I think there is: to use the customs we already have for dealing with religion. Wokeness is effectively a religion, just with God replaced by protected classes.…

> it's abundantly clear that he does not condone priggishness whether it's coming from the right or the left

He tacitly condones Musk, whose priggishness currently consists of smugly rehashing alt-right talking points.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#882

I would have to refute the notion that wokeness is a mind virus. "Stay Woke" has a much deeper origin in African American culture, and it refers to the fact that one needs to stay vigilant about another's intentions. The implicit message is that the "us" cannot trust the "they", and writers like Paul Graham show the reason why: Any attempt at social change can easily be labeled a virus by capitalists if it does not p…

> I would have to refute the notion that wokeness is a mind virus.

So would anyone with even 4th grade critical thinking skills. Sadly the text is riddled with the kind of naive, unearned confidance that dominated Sillicon Valley in the early 2000s.

I grew up then, every kid on a computer was smarter than the entire world put together. If only things were run by engineers all the problems would be fixed. We werent racist, or sexist, as long as you used Latex for your work, and Vim for your coding and looked down on humanities you belonged.

Only problem is, engineers did end up running everything. FB replaced traditional media, and what it achieved rather than the mass of uninformed working class, the mildly educated propagandised working class and perpetrating owner class. Well you ended up with heaps of misinformation, 2 genocides (one in africa and another in asia), 2 stable countries brought to the brink of civil war with brexit and trumpism, an arab spring that led to a decade of unstable countries from Lybia to Afghanistan. And the same safeguards that have been built for traditional media are now being built for FB, just 2 decades late and with way less regulatory teeth than the goverment fines imposed to early yellow newspapers.

Uber and wework were another engineer led proyects. Transport and Offices all gonna be cheap, available and with that magic Sillicon valley sauce, where people at google use a slide to go to work. But now wework is a documentary of failure and hubris and Uber is on a long term bet for self driving cars to try and abate its unionising workers who are recreating the old taxi system without the medallions or insurance.

Tesla and Airbnb were gonna change our lives. But one is a plastic badly built car with no lidar because its owner made a bad bet a decade ago, and the other is being demonised in every city for aggravating the housing crisis while remaining less safe and more expensive than most hotels.

Engineers like PG run the show and we are recreting 100 years of guardrails, while they become billionaires over our inability to stop them and punish them. They then buy newspapers, social media platforms and think tanks and destroy words made up by marginalised communities to use as insults. Then useful idiots like PG read the insult, and not the original word and write lengthy essays with nothing interesting to say because they are attacking a strawman created by a republican think tank because some billionaire cant say the n word anymore.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#883
As a general principle, if you are hurt by _words_ then the problem is you and not the other person.

Those prigs exist but they're just emotionally immature and adopt a victim-cause as a means to express their frustration. If somebody is looking for a fight, if you give him a gun he's going to use it.

If you want to kill it forever, you should probably teach emotional intelligence in high school.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#887
There's left-wing orthodoxy.

There's also right-wing orthodoxy.

On the internet right-wing orthodoxy is the prevailing one, and it's also better funded (and more politically connected).

You are not a rebel if you support the oligarchs.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#888
This is a long essay; there's a lot of really good and a lot of not so great.

One might compare the first century of Christianity, where the only way to increase the number of adherents was to personally convince each one to make a commitment which would potentially be costly to them; and the situation a few centuries later, where Christianity offered opportunities of riches and power to those who accepted it, and many of those with power succumbed to the temptation to increase the number of the faithful at the point of a sword -- although of course, all that can be imposed is compliance with certain kinds of external behavior, not an actual change of heart.

The thing about BLM and Me Too is that these things are still problems. Black people are still disproportionately killed by police officers, and it's very difficult to hold them to account. One powerful person was found by a jury, who had examined evidence which the accused person had every opportunity to rebut, to have sexually assaulted a woman; after that he was elected president of the United States.

When the only way to make people more aware of these problems ("woke") was to personally convince each person to make a commitment which would be personally costly to them, things were fine. But as Paul points out, at some point getting on the "woke" bandwagon offered opportunities for riches and power; and it became a temptation to short-cut the process of transformation with threats of punishment, rather than changing people's minds individually.

I mean, yeah, the ideological madness that refuses to have reasoned discussions, and attempts to enforce the latest complex orthodoxy (chosen by a few without the proper level of reasoned debate) with the threat of punishment rather than convincing each person one by one, needs to die. But if the result is that people in power are still not held responsible for their actions, then I think we will have lost something important.

EDIT: One thing I've tried to do when possible is to point out that bullying people into silence won't change their mind. Obviously it takes the right kind of person to hear this, but it has at least a few times seemed to help someone begining to go "woke" wake up to what it is they're actually doing.

Re: The Origins of Wokeness

#889
post #226

Black person here. Like most discussions of "woke" and "wokeness," this one too fails HARD by not fully and directly addressing the origins of the term -- and by "fails hard" I do mean will almost certainly do more obscuring than clarifying by starting from an information-deficient premise. Including, e.g. "The term 'woke' has its origins in the Black American community as a signifier of awareness about ones politica…

Sure but that has almost nothing to do with how it’s used today. Language and the meanings of words change over time, and it’s all but impossible to make people go back to using tre old definition.

It's what it meant until white people started lecturing each other on what it means, then conservatives started using it as a derisive catch-all for anything conceivably liberal or simply empathetic.
Post reply on HN