This particular imbecile has great trouble getting her tongue to operate properly in coordination with her brain, but I can’t really tell why “woke” is any trouble to define.
“Woke” is, I believe, originally a slang word meaning “aware.” Not difficult.
What is a woke person aware of? I believe, broadly, “injustice.”
Injustice of what sort? Injustice to various marginalized or minority members of society–African-Americans, women, gays, etc.
As practiced by whom? I’d say, by “white, Christian, straight male Americans,” for the most part.
These are very general categories, with plenty of exceptions. (I’m sure there are white Christian straight women who indulge themselves in lots of injustice towards various minorities.) If you want to nitpick this definition, or defensively claim that there are specific problems with it, or that you personally are a white Christian straight male American who has never thought of oppressing anyone, okay.
But why is being “woke” a bad thing, or a difficult thing to define? You want to say you’re not woke, and you oppose woke, that’s cool. I’m in favor of my enemies defining themselves clearly as such.
It’s a “bad thing” because it means challenging and upsetting the established privilege. Which is the good and righteous order as mandated by God and the Founders /s
It’s “hard to define” because for practical purposes it is used as a snarl word for anything whatever it is that those in the upper tier of the privileged establishment want to wave in front of the “base” to keep them angry at the Other instead of at the rulers.
Exactly. It has (or had) a non-pejorative sense. But the imbecile realized that she couldn’t articulate that because that would make it sound like the virtue that it is.
To the right it’s “stuff that we hate only because it’s something liberals want”, or more often “a ridiculous straw man that we are pretending liberals want to give our base their fix of righteous indignation”.
“Woke” is the new “politically correct” - which is the old “good manners” (lightly seasoned with self-deprecating humour if perceived to be taken to extremes*)
*I’m trying to avoid the word "slavish’ here - I thought you ought to know.
In today’s usage it has come to mean a liberal-socialist who hates the flag and wants to tear down America and turn it over to unemployed, non-white invaders. And pay for the invaders’ lifestyles with patriotic tax dollars. Or something like that… Makes my head hurt to try to sort out what they mean.
Um… “historically enslaved persons of color who still expect white people to care,” if I’m not mistaken.
It’s difficult because it’s a pejorative. Being a pejorative isn’t part of the definition of the word.
Individualistic and self-interested might both have the same definition but one of them is good and the other is bad. Likewise with relaxed/lazy, organized/anal retentive, and voluptuous/chubby. Being concerned about injustice can be a good thing and it can be an obnoxious thing, just like it can be a good thing to organize and it can be an obnoxious thing.
For any thing in life, there’s a good amount of it, too little of it, and too much of it. You can be too nice, too caring, too smart, etc. Just because something is, on a surface level, a good thing that doesn’t mean that there isn’t an obnoxious, harmful, or self-defeating version of it.
You should care about injustice and you should vote and act accordingly. You shouldn’t be woke, though. If someone’s calling you that, it means that you’re probably being obnoxious.
I view it similarly to how I always viewed “political correctness:” as giving even the least little bit of a shit about the thoughts, feelings, rights, and lives of other people, particularly people who are different from you (more particularly: based on who they are as opposed to what they do).
I think both can be taken too far, but – in general – seldom are.
It’s both. Personally, I approve of n***** lovers, although I don’t call them that, so I guess I’m woke but some people don’t and those are the people who use the word pejoratively.
I think it’s just a handy and easily remembered word that can be used reflexively to dismiss a whole host of liberal ideas targeting diversity, inclusion, and equity efforts, without ever having to rub two brains cells together. CRT? Woke. Voter enfranchisement? Woke. LGBTQ rights? Woke. Library books? Woke. Ending real estate red-lining? Woke. Etc, etc…
It’s the “woke mob” that is investigating all these things that are meaning to allow every American equal access to the apples in the tree, but a lot of people are thinking these “others” are going to take their apples, which is not the case.
You forgot, “Pushing for globalism.” Which, in RWNJs’ minds, means “one world government.” In other words, no more US Constitution, no more US flag, no more America. That’s what the liberal socialists want, right? A one world government? (I’m being sarcastic, in case it wasn’t obvious.)
More to the question in the OP: “woke” means “stuff I don’t like.” Mostly policies that benefit LGBTQ+, Blacks, and Latin Americans, at some perceived loss to those who are not LGBTQ+, Blacks, and Latin Americans.
“Woke”, to conservative ears, is what “family values” is to liberal ears. Who could possibly oppose family values - isn’t that wholesome? Except that liberals know what it really means.