a lot of people are using this word, from a lot a different perspectives, with different meanings. We can't decide if it can be reduced to distortion, or fixating on annoyances. Usage makes meaning (sorry, don't know if it makes sense in english)
I'll need some time to chew and digest your two essays, it is late here and i'm not an academic. Your prose isn't obscure but i'll have to do a meticulous reading to understand it well. Sorry for my clumsy english.
Hi William. I think you like Vivek Chibber more than you can admit : at least, he made you think a lot ! And i agree, your essays are much more nuanced and precise than i first thought. I really don't think "wokeness" is ONLY a term of abuse though, even if the right made its best to make it so.
Chibber does define woke as "social justice without class", and still say anti-racist and anti-sexist struggles are crucial, but have to be centered around working class women/racial minorities. What perplexes me sometimes is that he don't seem to realize a lot of people are already doing it.
theoretical differences between your positions (and rethorical differences too, hehe, Chibber seeming to compete to be the Ultimate Grumpy Marxist dude with Adolph Reed.)
i'm not a specialist (and english isn't my first language), but it seems to me a lot of Chibber talking points about id pol/"wokeness" are not so far from your own Elite Capture (=struggles around race & gender have been vampirized by elites), although of course i can already detect strategic and
Thanks for your answer. I stumbled on Burgis article before reading the Roberts one, i'm gonna do it now. I have to confess reading "Chibber has to be ignored and doesn't know what he's talking about" seems like weird hyperbole to me.
What do you think of @benburgis.bsky.social answer to this piece ?
benburgis.substack.com/p/taking-the...
