James Lindsay | Woke Culture HAS NOT Gone Too Far - 6/8 | Oxford Union

Summary

The speaker passionately argues against the notion that 'woke culture' can go too far, asserting that it is a necessary force for social justice. They critique the debate's premise as an epistemic violence against marginalized groups and highlight the importance of conscientization, or critical consciousness, as a means to transcend oppressive structures. The speaker also addresses the need for a perpetual cultural revolution to prevent the establishment of new norms that could stifle progress towards a socially just society.

Takeaways

• 🎓 The speaker begins by expressing disappointment with the debate's premise, arguing that suggesting 'woke culture' can go too far is siding with the status quo and perpetuates epistemic violence against marginalized groups.
• 🗣️ The debate is described as a 'performative contradiction', implying that discussing the limits of woke culture is inherently problematic as it re-inscribes the dominant culture's perspective.
• 👎 The speaker criticizes the opposition for their past actions against woke culture, such as involvement in the 'grievance studies affair' and criticism of critical race theory and queer theory.
• 👔 The speaker points out the irony of wearing formal attire, which they refer to as 'colonizer formal wear', highlighting the impact on marginalized individuals who cannot express their authentic selves in such settings.
• 📚 The definition of 'woke' is explored through Paulo Ferrari's concept of conscientization, which involves raising critical consciousness to recognize and denounce structural oppression.
• 🌟 The speaker aligns woke culture with the pursuit of social justice, expanding on Karl Marx's idea of communism to include the transcendence of all forms of private property, not just material.
• 🔄 The concept of 'social equity' is introduced as a goal for woke culture, which involves making racial inequity unconstitutional and establishing a bureaucracy to enforce anti-racism.
• 🚫 The speaker argues that woke culture has not gone too far but rather has not gone far enough, emphasizing the need for a perpetual revolution against norms and social expectations.
• 🏳️‍🌈 Queer theory is mentioned as an example of a field that resists normalization, with the speaker suggesting that woke culture must continually challenge new forms of oppression as they arise.
• 🔄 The final point is a reiteration that woke culture cannot go too far because its goal is to create a socially just society, which requires the continuous denouncement and transformation of the existing societal structures.

Q & A

What does the speaker initially express disappointment about?

The speaker initially expresses disappointment about their first trip to Hogwarts, suggesting it was not as fun as they had anticipated.

What is the speaker's stance on the debate topic of 'woke culture'?

The speaker argues that the debate itself is absurd and that suggesting 'woke culture' can go too far is siding with the status quo and doing epistemic violence to marginalized groups.

What does the speaker accuse the debate of doing to marginalized groups?

The speaker accuses the debate of reinscribing epistemic violence against members of marginalized groups by giving a platform to opposition views that they claim are harmful.

What is the speaker's opinion on the opponent invited to the debate?

The speaker is critical of the opponent, listing their controversial views and actions against 'woke culture', such as involvement in the grievance studies affair and criticism of critical race theory.

How does the speaker interpret the term 'woke'?

The speaker defines 'woke' as conscientization, drawing from Brazilian Marxist educator Paulo Freire, which means raising a critical consciousness to recognize and denounce structural oppression.

What does the speaker suggest is the goal of 'woke' culture?

The speaker suggests that the goal of 'woke' culture is to pursue social justice and the positive transcendence of all forms of private property to end human self-estrangement.

What does the speaker propose as a solution to achieve social equity?

The speaker proposes an anti-racist amendment to the Constitution and the establishment of a federal department of anti-racism with punitive powers to ensure racial equity.

How does the speaker view the current state of 'woke' culture in relation to its goals?

The speaker argues that 'woke' culture has not gone too far but has not even come close to achieving its goals, and that it cannot go too far in its pursuit of social justice.

What does the speaker suggest is the remedy to potential issues after a cultural revolution?

The speaker suggests that after a cultural revolution, further conscientization and critical consciousness are needed to call out new forms of dehumanization and domestication.

What does the speaker imply about the perpetual nature of 'woke' culture?

The speaker implies that 'woke' culture must be perpetual in its pursuit of social justice and that it cannot become complacent or it risks becoming a new form of the status quo.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 Critique of 'Woke Culture' Debate

The speaker begins by expressing disappointment with the debate's premise, arguing that the notion of 'woke culture' going too far is inherently problematic. They assert that to even entertain this idea is to side with the status quo and to perpetuate epistemic violence against marginalized groups. The speaker uses Habermas' term 'performative contradiction' to describe the debate and criticizes the platforming of an opponent known for being against woke culture. They highlight the irony of this debate by pointing out the speaker's own complicity in perpetuating colonialist formal wear, suggesting that the very act of debating is an act of violence against those who cannot fully express themselves in such forums. The speaker concludes by questioning the debate's legitimacy, given the lack of progress towards social justice and the ongoing existence of oppressive structures.

05:01

📚 The Pursuit of Social Justice and Equity

In this paragraph, the speaker delves into the concept of 'wokeness' and social justice, drawing on the works of Paulo Ferrari and Karl Marx. They define 'wokeness' as conscientization, or the raising of critical consciousness, which involves recognizing and denouncing structural oppressions. The speaker argues that social justice is about transcending all forms of private property to end human self-estrangement. They critique Marx for focusing only on material property, suggesting that social justice should extend to social and cultural property as well. The speaker also discusses the need for an anti-racist amendment to the Constitution and the establishment of a federal department of anti-racism, which would have authority over public and private entities to ensure racial equity. They conclude by emphasizing that woke culture cannot go too far because its goal is to create a socially just society, and it must continually evolve to prevent becoming sclerotic and oppressive like the systems it seeks to replace.

10:04

🔢 Mathematical Conclusion on 'Woke Culture'

The speaker, identifying as a mathematician, humorously introduces the concept of 'irat demonstrandum' to conclude their argument. They use this term, which is a play on 'quod erat demonstrandum' (which was to be demonstrated), to suggest that their points have been proven through the preceding discussion. The speaker receives applause, indicating that the audience acknowledges the strength of their argument. The use of mathematical jargon in this context serves to underscore the speaker's logical and structured approach to the debate, and it also lightens the mood after a heavy discussion on social justice and cultural revolution.

Keywords

💡Woke Culture

Woke culture refers to a social and political stance that is characterized by a heightened awareness of social and cultural issues, particularly those related to race, gender, and social justice. In the video, the speaker argues that the proposition of 'woke culture going too far' is a performative contradiction, implying that it is an attempt to maintain the status quo and does epistemic violence to marginalized groups. The speaker uses this concept to critique the notion that there is a limit to how far woke culture should go, suggesting instead that it is a necessary force for societal change.

💡Performative Contradiction

A performative contradiction is a term used in philosophy and social theory to describe a situation where an action or statement contradicts the very principles it is supposed to uphold. In the context of the video, the speaker uses this term to criticize the debate's premise, suggesting that debating the limits of woke culture is inherently contradictory because it implies that there should be limits to the pursuit of social justice.

💡Epistemic Violence

Epistemic violence refers to the act of discrediting or dismissing the knowledge or experiences of a marginalized group. In the video, the speaker claims that debating the limits of woke culture is a form of epistemic violence because it undermines the validity of the experiences and knowledge of marginalized people who are fighting against oppression.

💡Marginalized Groups

Marginalized groups are those that are pushed to the social and economic periphery and are often excluded from the benefits of society. The video discusses how marginalized groups are affected by the dominant culture's norms and how woke culture aims to bring awareness and change to these dynamics. The speaker argues that the debate's premise does violence to these groups by suggesting that their fight for recognition and justice could be excessive.

💡Conscientization

Conscientization is a term coined by Brazilian educator Paulo Freire, referring to the process of raising critical consciousness among people to recognize and challenge oppressive social structures. In the video, the speaker uses this term to define 'woke' and to argue that being woke is about becoming aware of societal injustices and working towards liberation from them.

💡Social Justice

Social justice is the concept of fair and just relations between individuals within a society. It involves the fair distribution of resources, opportunities, and privileges. The speaker in the video draws a connection between social justice and woke culture, suggesting that the ultimate goal of being woke is to pursue social justice and end various forms of oppression.

💡Structural Racism

Structural racism refers to the ways in which racial discrimination is embedded within the social, economic, and political systems. It is not about individual acts of racism but rather the broader systems that perpetuate racial inequality. The speaker mentions structural racism as one of the forms of oppression that woke culture seeks to recognize and dismantle.

💡Cultural Appropriation

Cultural appropriation is the adoption of elements of one culture by members of another culture, often in a way that is disrespectful or exploitative. In the video, the speaker humorously points out that the term 'woke' itself could be considered cultural appropriation, highlighting the complexities and ironies inherent in cultural and social debates.

💡Queer Theory

Queer Theory is a field of study that examines the social construction of sexuality and the cultural norms that surround it. The speaker references queer theory to argue that woke culture should resist the normalization of queer identities, instead of establishing new norms that could potentially police these identities.

💡Dictatorship of the Proletariat

The dictatorship of the proletariat is a Marxist concept referring to the period where the working class holds political power and suppresses the bourgeoisie to establish communism. The speaker uses this term to draw a parallel with the idea of an 'anti-racist dictatorship,' suggesting that woke culture's pursuit of social justice could lead to a form of governance that enforces anti-racist policies.

💡Cultural Revolution

A cultural revolution refers to a period of rapid and radical change in societal values and norms. The speaker mentions that conscientization should lead to a cultural revolution, but warns that without continuous revolution, the new government or society could impose its values and become sclerotic, bureaucratic, and oppressive.

Highlights

The speaker humorously expresses disappointment about their first trip to Hogwarts, setting a light-hearted tone.

The debate is called absurd, suggesting that the very proposition is a performative contradiction.

The act of debating 'woke culture' is equated to siding with the status quo and perpetrating epistemic violence.

The speaker argues that interrupting someone speaking on behalf of social justice is a form of violence and injustice.

The speaker's self-introduction includes a critique of their own past actions and beliefs.

A critique of the formal wear as a symbol of colonialism and its impact on marginalized groups.

The definition of 'woke' is explored through the lens of Brazilian Marxist educator Paulo Ferrari.

Conscientization is described as the essence of woke, aiming for social justice and liberation.

Social justice is redefined beyond Marx's concept of communism to include all forms of private property.

The speaker references Ibrahim Kennedy's views on achieving social equity through anti-racist discrimination.

A critique of the Supreme Court's challenge to Harvard and UNC's anti-racist policies.

The idea of an anti-racist amendment to the Constitution is introduced as a step towards social equity.

The concept of a dictatorship of the anti-racist is compared to Marx's dictatorship of the proletariat.

The necessity for a perpetual cultural revolution to prevent the new government from becoming sclerotic and oppressive.

Queer Theory is discussed as a means to resist norms and social expectations, not to establish new ones.

The conclusion that 'woke culture' cannot go too far because its goal is to create a socially just society.

The speaker concludes with a mathematical flourish, using 'Q.E.D.' to signify the end of their argument.

Transcripts

[Music]

so in light of the vote earlier the

first thing I'd like to say is that you

know not gonna lie I seriously thought

my first trip to Hogwarts was gonna be a

lot more fun

now that aside let's get to this

um with all due respect thank you for

the invitation but this debate is absurd

it is absolutely absurd it is what

habermas would refer to as a

performative contradiction to hold this

proposition that woke culture can go too

far because to say that woke culture can

go too far is to side with the status

quo

to say that this is a matter of a debate

in this house

is to re-inscribe the epistemic home

terrain of the dominant culture and to

do epistemic violence against members of

marginalized groups

who occupy marginalized knowledges

to platform in such an esteemed location

in opposition to what culture at all

is again to reinscribe that violence

but furthermore

no

in fact to interrupt someone speaking on

behalf of social justice is again to

reinscribe violence and do epistemic

Injustice to people who are fighting to

end oppression

[Applause]

[Music]

[Applause]

let's take an example of an opponent to

what culture who's been invited to this

debate me

no

how in the world could I have been

invited to this debate let's go through

a hit list of some of my greatest hits

I'm famously known for being against

woke culture

turns out I was involved in the

grievance studies Affair a number of

years ago in which I revealed it woke

scholarship is in fact fraudulent

I wrote a book in which I defined

critical race Theory as calling

everything you wish to control racist

until you control it

I'm at the center of identifying the

sexualization of children through queer

Theory as groomer Behavior

and while I was in London a couple of

days ago I might have visited Karl

Marx's grave and danced on it

more than that

look at this dress code look how great

we look don't we look great

I mean I do

that said

what we're celebrating by clapping for

this outfit is colonizer Formal Wear

and you laugh you laugh and it's fine

for a viral straight white male with

considerable prowess such as myself to

wear black tie but you have to think of

the impact that it has on members of

marginalized groups who cannot bring

their full authentic selves to a forum

such as this to share their ideas

how is it possible that woke culture has

gone too far as this households when it

hasn't even come to this house

but as everybody so far has mentioned if

we're going to debate this we must

understand it what is it what does it

mean to be woke I read the literature I

draw my definition of wokeness or woke

which by the way is cultural

appropriation

I draw my definition of the term woke

from the Brazilian Marxist educator

Paulo Ferrari who says at the point of a

thorough education is concientization

the raising of a critical Consciousness

as he phrases it what that means is

being able to recognize the structural

reality of Our Lives that means being

able to recognize dehumanizing forms

it's a structural racism sexism CIS

heteronormativity ableism oppression of

all kinds it also means house no it also

means house

being able to be aware and recognize

modes of what Prairie called

domestication such as wearing colonizer

Formal Wear

in doing debates

consientization is the essence of woke

because it is the idea that you learn to

see these things that you can denounce

these things so that you can denounce

them critically in order to announce the

possibility of our Liberation from them

what that means is that woke pursues

social justice and if we look for a

definition of social justice I draw

inspiration from a different definition

given by Karl Marx in 1844

he said that communism is often

misunderstood and then he went on to say

communism is the positive Transcendence

of private property as human

self-estrangement and I say that Karl

Marx was a damned conservative because

he was a privileged white European male

who didn't recognize the forms of Social

and cultural property he benefited from

so he ignored those and focused only on

material property

therefore social justice is the

necessary extension of this idea the

positive Transcendence of all forms of

private property such that we end human

self-estrangement

and social justice is the consummation

of something called social equity

where Karl Marx believed in something

called socialism that consummates to

Communism we could Define that as

something like I don't know a

administered political economy in which

shares or adjusted so citizens are made

equal it just so happens that's the

exact definition given to the public

administration literature by George

Fredrickson for social equity and we

don't even bother to take real steps

towards social Equity we turn to Ibrahim

Kennedy what does he say it takes to to

achieve social equity

and how to be an anti-racist on page 19

he says the only remedy to pass

discrimination is present discrimination

the only remedy the present

discrimination is future discrimination

the only remedy to raise this

discrimination is anti-racist

discrimination but look what's happening

right now in the Supreme Court of the

United States

Harvard and UNC are being challenged on

their anti-racist discrimination

that points toward Justice we are trying

to walk back our walk towards those

luckily and why it's not a surprise we

turn to Candy again we haven't taken the

first meaningful step towards social

equity in 2019 for Politico Kennedy

wrote in the United States at least if

we wish to have social Equity then what

we need is an anti-racist amendment to

our Constitution that makes

unconstitutional racial inequity

we don't have that we didn't even tried

what would it do he said well it will

establish a federal bureau a bureaucracy

the department of anti-racism that would

have absolute authority over all state

local Federal public policies public

figures private entities and their

officials to make sure that racist ideas

and racial inequities don't surface and

it would have punitive powers to make

sure that they're adjusted should those

things surface we've taken no steps

toward achieving this now Scholars of

Communism since I've invoked Karl Marx

would recognize that this is a perfect

reconception of a dictatorship of the

anti-racist and parallel to the

dictatorship of the proletarian then

Marx and Lennon perfectly clearly

understood is the only way to Usher

people to the positive Transcendence of

private property as human

self-exstrangement AKA communism

this is what woke pursues and it's not

just that woke has not gone too far it's

that it cannot go too far

if we go and we look at Paulo Ferrari

again he says the point is

conscientization what does

conscientization lead to a cultural

revolution he says have we had one no

but then he warns us

that after a cultural revolution it's

very likely that the new government will

impose its values upon the the existing

the new Society we'll impose it and so

that will make them necessarily right

wing he says that it threatens to make

the new government sclerotic

bureaucratic necrophiliac death loving

everything it professes to be against

and he gives us a remedy to this problem

what fairy says is that once you have

conscientization once you have your

cultural revolution what you need is not

less well culture but more about culture

you need to conscientize further you

need deeper critical Consciousness you

need to call out new forms of

dehumanization new modes of

domestication

that's what you must do so what culture

hasn't just not gone far enough it

cannot go far enough we see this

reflected in the queer Theory literature

David Halperin and Saint Foucault

wrote that the definition of queer

should be that which resists all norms

and social expectations so we do

practice for queer Theory do the work

to try to bring awareness empathy to

ways of being ways of living under the

LGBT umbrella under the queer umbrella

and what we threaten to do is to make

those things normal to establish new

Norms to establish new social

expectations around those modes of being

modes of living and those police people

so they must be queered so queer Theory

cannot go too far that's just one aspect

of voculture we heard from Ferrari what

culture cannot go too far become he says

that the revolution must be perpetual

otherwise it becomes a status quo

so what culture cannot possibly

have gone too far or far enough

it cannot go too far it's not possible

but that said the point of what culture

is to make room for a socially just

Society the only way to do that under

the understanding of woke is to denounce

the existing Society until it no longer

stands but the existing Society hanging

by a threat as it is still exists

no

woke culture cannot go too far therefore

well culture has not gone far enough and

since I am a mathematician may I have

this pleasure

quote irat demonstrandum

thank you

[Music]

[Applause]