It’s a broad label for anything they don’t like (LGBTQ+, feminism, DEI, etc.), but doesn’t “woke” mean you are awake? Would that imply that things that are not “woke” or are “anti-woke” are “asleep”?

Then they go on about conspiracies (“climate change is not real”, “deep state”, “5G is harmful”, “vaccines cause autism”, the list goes on unfortunately…) where they’re claiming that you need to “wake up to the truth”. Surely they don’t consider “woke” to be “the truth”, so shouldn’t they call it something like “asleep”, “sleepy”, “snoozy”, or similar?

I needed to use a lot of quotation marks there…

  • meejle@lemmy.worldEnglish
    54·
    7 days ago

    It’s from African-American English, from the 1930s! And it’s always had more or less the same meaning – originally “being awake to (aware of) racial discrimination”, but now it’s obviously grown to cover discrimination and inequalities in general.

    Would that imply that things that are not “woke” or are “anti-woke” are “asleep”?

    Yep! 👍 But don’t forget, these people are also against Antifa, i.e. “anti anti-fascist”. They don’t care how bad the labels sound, as long as they’re making people’s lives miserable.

    • MeowWeHaveAProblem@toast.oooEnglish
      35·
      7 days ago

      i.e. “anti anti-fascist”

      You mean anti-fascist, not the double negative? That might be an important typo. 🙂

      • cecilkorik@lemmy.caEnglish
        101·
        7 days ago

        No that’s quite accurate, they are against antifa. For example, Fox News hates antifa. They regularly call them a terrorist organization, use them as a pejorative or a bogeyman to dismiss protests or opinions. One could reasonably conclude they are very anti-antifa, making them anti-anti-fascist. This is indeed a double negative, which can be confusing and even misleading. If you seek to clarify the situation by removing the “anti-anti-” double negative, what does that make them?

        … that’s correct, “fascist”.

        Does that clarify things at all? Yes, I think it does. Interesting.

        • ɔiƚoxɘup@infosec.pub
          21·
          7 days ago

          Personally I don’t see how they keep up with all those different contradictions. It’s very confusing.

          • Worx@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
            1·
            15 hours ago

            I like to remind myself of the quote about anti-Semites (which applies more broadly to fascists in general, and more broadly still to some on the political right): they don’t believe what they are saying because words and truth aren’t important them. As long as the right people are being protected and the wrong people are being hurt, that’s all that’s important.

            Never believe that anti‐Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti‐Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert.

            From Jean-Paul Sartre, Anti-Semite and Jew (emphasis mine) https://antilogicalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/anti-semite-and-jew.pdf