It seems like the stumbling block here is what we mean by global wokism. When George Floyd died, it caused an international stir and energized social justice groups in various countries. In India these are groups advocating better treatment for Dalits or feminist groups who are fighting battles that were already won in the West by first-wave feminists. Even though social justice activists in the West (who we describe as "woke") are being counterproductive and causing enormous damage, their effect on the rest on the world might be to energize movements whose struggles are much more legitimate and who are actually accomplishing positive good.
After all, Tyler agrees with the liberal view of history, which is that the pursuit of civil rights (for women, minorities and homosexuals) is very important and perhaps the most important form of civilizational progress in modern times. For him, wokeness has only been a derailing of a broader project that has on the whole done enormous good. In other countries, then, one ought to support all social justice activism.
Calling this "global wokism", however, is wrong. The term "woke", as I see it, refers specifically to the counterproduct and toxic forms of social justice, not social justice broadly. It is always used in a derogatory way. When Tyler asks, "shouldn't the world be more woke?", this is deliberately inflammatory.
It seems like the stumbling block here is what we mean by global wokism. When George Floyd died, it caused an international stir and energized social justice groups in various countries. In India these are groups advocating better treatment for Dalits or feminist groups who are fighting battles that were already won in the West by first-wave feminists. Even though social justice activists in the West (who we describe as "woke") are being counterproductive and causing enormous damage, their effect on the rest on the world might be to energize movements whose struggles are much more legitimate and who are actually accomplishing positive good.
After all, Tyler agrees with the liberal view of history, which is that the pursuit of civil rights (for women, minorities and homosexuals) is very important and perhaps the most important form of civilizational progress in modern times. For him, wokeness has only been a derailing of a broader project that has on the whole done enormous good. In other countries, then, one ought to support all social justice activism.
Calling this "global wokism", however, is wrong. The term "woke", as I see it, refers specifically to the counterproduct and toxic forms of social justice, not social justice broadly. It is always used in a derogatory way. When Tyler asks, "shouldn't the world be more woke?", this is deliberately inflammatory.
In which Brian battles bravely against his cognitive dissonance