WHAT IS WOKE MORALITY? How does it work? More to the point, can it be countered without making use of the same arguments and justifications deployed by the woke themselves?
To begin with, “woke” is just the latest political shorthand for the ethical architecture supporting the tactics and strategies of anti-capitalism. The belief that capitalism lies at the root of all social inequality and injustice has been the prime driver of left-wing thought and action since at least the mid-nineteenth century. (By the arrival of the twenty-first, environmental despoliation and climate change had been added to capitalism’s rap-sheet.)
If only the ingenuity and understanding of human-beings were harnessed to a better purpose than squalid private enrichment, argue the anti-capitalists, then a world of abundance, equality, freedom and happiness would emerge spontaneously from the reeking capitalist corpse.
Certainly the radical reformers of the mid-nineteenth century did not have to work very hard to convince those at the sharp end of the industrial revolution that they were the victims of a viciously exploitative system. To appreciate capitalism’s iniquities, the industrial working-class had only to look around them. Not for nothing did the English poet, William Blake, describe their workplaces as “dark satanic mills”.
Satisfying human need would be a relatively simple matter, declared the anti-capitalists of the 1840s – better known to their contemporaries as ‘socialists’. But overcoming the human greed that fuelled capitalism – that was an altogether more daunting proposition.
Just how daunting was demonstrated by the steady improvement in the lives of working people made possible by the enormous wealth which capitalism was generating. Only a small fraction of capitalist profit was required to improve dramatically the material conditions of working-class life – a fact which the more intelligent capitalists acknowledged by allowing the state to tax the worst excesses of laissez-faire out of their system. More importantly, they also encouraged the state to lay before the best and brightest toilers a pathway out of working-class poverty.
The capitalist promise? That education, augmented by hard work, would conduct the children and grandchildren of the working-class into a larger, more exciting world.
For the socialists, however, this combination of incremental improvement and socio-economic co-option was intolerable. While its material circumstances may have improved marginally, the working-class’s relationship with capitalism had, to socialist eyes, become even more exploitative and unequal.
By providing their employees with a modicum of comfort and leisure, the capitalists had pared down the dangerous ‘Us versus Them’ dynamic of the Victorian era to the much safer ‘Us’ of the early twentieth century. To the socialists, however, the gulf between master and servant remained as great as ever. It was just that rising living standards and the glittering tinsel of empire had made it much harder to see.
How else could the masters have killed and maimed so many millions of their servants in the First World War?
Ah, yes, the First World War. In the wake of its horrors the anti-capitalists of the 1920s were encouraged to exchange their gently persuasive ‘social-democracy’ for the unapologetically coercive ‘communism’ of Lenin and his Bolsheviks.
The left-wing vision of humanity redeemed: its attachment to an emancipatory global revolution in which the world’s peoples, liberated by science and technology, would build a better world in friendship and equity; was still there. But getting there required men and women prepared to use any means – up to and including terror, torture and mass murder – to achieve the revolution’s ends. The omelette of communism would require the cracking of millions and millions of eggs.
This was no gentle poet’s dream of building “Jerusalem in England’s green and pleasant land”. By the 1920s, the construction of paradise had become the global project of the Communist International – better known as the Comintern. Not a reckoning of masters and servants in one country, but a full-scale assault upon the manifold injustices flowing from European and American capitalism’s attempted subjugation of the entire planet.
Murder, rape and plunder; enslavement and exploitation; all of it perpetrated under the cover of spurious anthropological hierarchies. A global system dedicated to rewarding Europeans in perpetuity for the inestimable virtue of not being black. That, at least, was the way the Comintern portrayed capitalism’s predation upon the rest of the planet. Communism and anti-imperialism were joined at the hip.
By the 1930s, however, the ideological foes of capitalism were growing increasingly embittered. Lenin and Stalin may have embedded communism in the Soviet Union, but everywhere else the emancipatory vision animating the Left was being hacked to pieces by the ferocious forces of a racially and/or religiously charged nationalism.
Why were the masses so unmoved by the communist saints, but so aroused by the fascist devils? Could it be that emancipation was something more than a straightforward exercise in wealth redistribution? Was the refusal of the world’s workers to lose their chains attributable to deeper and darker forces moving beneath the surface of capitalism? Was the Marxist social psychologist Eric Fromm correct in his diagnosis? Did the masses truly live in “fear of freedom”?
The answers emerging from World War II, the most destructive event in human history, were not encouraging. When leftists, gasping for breath, finally broke the surface of the War’s bloody ocean, they were slick with the evidence that their faith in human nature may have been … misplaced.
And, as if the Left’s dark night of the soul wasn’t dreary enough, the political managers of post-war capitalism made everything worse by shrewdly applying the scientific and technological advances of the War to the much more congenial challenges of peace. For close to three decades, in those parts of the world beyond the repressive concrete drabness of “actually existing” Soviet-style socialism, apprehension had grown on the Left that its vision of a free, equal, and abundant society might end up being realised by capitalism itself.
More than a few Capitalists were equally apprehensive that the Left might be right: that, just as Marx predicted, the system would end up digging its own grave. But not, they resolved, on their watch. Since the 1970s, the number one priority of these uncompromising free-market capitalists has been very clear: stop digging!
The accommodating capitalism of 1946-1976: the capitalism responsible for strong unions, social welfare, public housing, and an ever-expanding state sector, had to be utterly destroyed – along with the left-inspired “new social movements” its policies were at once empowering and emboldening.
These new social movements have, over the past 40 years, become more and more synonymous with what most people identify as ‘The Left’. It was within their ranks that the word “woke” was first used to describe the need to be alert to all the manifestations of injustice. They were born out of the conviction that human emancipation cannot be delivered by economic means alone. That unless the root causes of oppression, those psychic and cultural conduits sustaining human exploitation and violence, are exposed and destroyed, then the capitalist tree, no matter how many times it is felled, will always grow back stronger from the stump.
What does this mean in terms of woke politics? It means attacking all the belief systems, all the institutions, all the cultural practices, that the Left has come to identify as the fundamental sources of oppression.
The belief that men are superior to women.
The belief that Europeans and their cultural heritage are superior to all the other ethnicities and cultures of the world.
The belief that the family is the single most important constitutive component of human society.
The belief that gender is biologically determined.
The belief that science and technology are the neutral arbiters of human progress.
The belief that the human world and the natural world are separate entities.
That belief that capitalism and democracy are mutually reinforcing.
These are the beliefs the woke are going to war to extinguish.
And woke morality?
It is the philosophical system which, since the 1930s, has been constructed by anti-capitalist intellectuals to identify the core cultural components of capitalism; the prime enablers of its exploitative and oppressive behaviours; and thereby to awaken capitalism’s victims to the urgent necessity of destroying them.
The characteristic zealotry and intolerance of woke politics is a consequence of its practitioners’ conviction that nothing good can be achieved unless and until the whole repertoire of contemporary capitalism’s self-justification is confronted, challenged, and disabled. In the moral universe of the woke, virtue is only obtainable through the active extirpation of vice.
To build a better world, the woke are convinced that this one must first be burned to the ground.
They can only be countered by the rest of us proving them wrong.
A version of this essay was posted on The Good Oil website on Monday, 21 April 2025.
7 comments:
Very good to see in print Chris - stating the reality - woke as listed by you is a new, dangerous puritanism by people who have the flatulent idea that they are perfect; everyone who is of value must agree with them. There is no real goodwill to others.
There is no excuse for puritanism by the 'woke' - we all have the potential to be awful. What we need to do is to acknowledge that, meditate on our own behaviours, be understanding of others to a point, and then seek atonement, control. The power of accumulating money and assets, and the exponential boost they give to people who have lost a personal value system is not answered by an authoritarian judgmental punishing and fining system. That does not make for a fairer society looking at each other with a modicum of goodwill. And it may only be a modicum, which would be be welcome in New Zealand right now from the middle class, the administrators and the politicians playing improvisations on stage of decent thinking people to our tired eyes.
OK, Mr Trotter.
I could take issue with your somewhat peculiar (and English-centric) assessment of the Left's history... but let's put that to one side. I welcome a similar lineage tracing of the Anti-Woke Movement, its history and its view of the world. Because I don't think you can describe the intellectual lineage of the Anti-Wokery Movement without first referencing the shenanigans of a certain Austrian gentleman with a strange moustache.
Your Cartoon:
Some Maoris and Pacific Islanders support the dominant group's mythologies much to the consternation of activists and to the delight of conservatives. The task of increasing the awareness of New Zealanders is obviously difficult given the commitment of particular groups to views which correspond to vested political and economic interests. Nevertheless, it is the aim of this book to inform, to stimulate discussion and to try and dispel some of the myths surrounding race relations in New Zealand.
Tauiwi: Racism and ethnicity in New Zealand Paperback – January 1, 1984
by P. Spoonley (Editor), C. MacPherson (Editor), D. Pearson (Editor), C. Sedgwick (Editor)
Robbie Nichol
We were invited to the Otaki summer camp that that um Nikki Hager and a few other people uh cool people run and I just met a lot of uh really awesome people who were doing really awesome work and I felt like the one thing that kind of United them was that they had a real clear sense of like our history and how New Zealand came to be the way it is and um it didn't overwhelm them or make them feel um like hopeless like they could still just get up in the morning and do their work to make um New Zealand better and that was kind of unfathomable to me at the time um and it's still something I'm working through and uh but I just kind of was really inspired by a lot of those people and just kind of felt like oh I wanna I wanna be like that and I want to go on that Journey um and so started going on that Journey um with my co-writer Fineas Tippett and um we also there's only one thing I really know how to do um which is kind of tell jokes and that's that's what I can do so I thought well if I'm gonna go on this journey then I will um take the audience that I've kind of built up with White Man Behind a Desk and be like let's go on this journey together let's try and like move through some like painful truths as a team um and so that was the idea behind it. And so then yeah so for people who don't know um White Man Behind the Desk was kind of more like just mocking news of the day and then the Citizens Handbook is like a little guidebook to history of New Zealand and then how the systems work now based on um you know as a result of that history um and just kind of yes hopefully uh in that starting place of helping people uh wake up and confront some some uncomfortable truths and I think like yeah definitely I think I'll talk more about this later but I just think that like most people are really um busy in their day-to-day lives and uh don't spend a lot of time thinking about stuff and like I'm just lucky that I have like conned RNZ into giving me time to do it
https://youtu.be/sqAfQd4w_Xk
Such a good thought provoking read Chris. I can’t argue with your analysis and I certainly can’t question your knowledge of political and social history. Like the evolution of language I believe your purist view and interpretation of woke will have been somewhat simplified and distorted by the public in general. Me included.
As a moderate righty I use the term in exasperation more than anything. The media gets it from me more than the politicians. Technically I might be misusing the word, but it fits my mood when I listen to a statement or argument that to me is obviously misleading, frivolous or is impracticable and with a political bias. I call the media attack on Erica Stanford over her emails woke. Not because I thought she was innocent, but the amount of time spent on the article by TV1 and the obvious use of media commentators just looking for an excuse to have a crack at one of the better government ministers. Another example of what I consider woke would be the chaos created by green councillors in Wellington, who seem completely irrational when creating bicycle and bus lanes at the expense of parking which has had a serious effect on retail in some areas. The woke and irrational decision of the last Labour government shutting off gas and oil exploration inTaranaki at the expense of the whole country, just to appease a misguided view that in some way this would teach us the right way, and would help save the planet.
Chris’s historical analysis and description sits well with me, but I sometimes wonder whether the Maori party for example, think Act is woke or whether the gender orientated community think Winston is woke. Do lefties call anything woke. I am an older NZer after all.
The problem I always have with discussion about the evils of capitalism is a definition of the term. In it's fundermental meaning I can't distinguish it from "free enterprise" and as such I am quite sure that it is fundamental human nature.. The problem comes when it , or rather it's operators get to control society instead of being ontroled by society. It is a good servant to society but a bad master.
There are obvious advantages of a mixed system that has the major universal needs of society , Like communication and electricity run by society as a whole through it's elected representatives , but much of our needs can be better run at a local level by individual enterprise. Going from Capitalism where capitalism is the master . as it has been in western democracies for the last nearly 40 years , to communism which seems to give absolutely no incentive for ingenuity or invention , as the only alternative seems to me to be going from the sublime to the ridiculous. Ther has to be something in between . And as near as any society in history I think we had it up until 1984..
The woke issue in as much as it has come to embrace gender issues such as men in Women's sport and transgender physical and chemical mutilation and indoctrination of parts society , especially children has taken over the idea of "woke " these days and I don't think it is a Right and Left issue at all. It crosses the boundaries for most people I believe, whatever their political persuasion.
Historian George Marsden expounded that there is a moral order woven in the fabric of the universe. Therefore, we get a sense of security that right and wrong are permanent. Eg. Slavery. However, thanks to post-modernism (wokeism) we have privatised our own morality and have agency to formulate our own values.
"If what is right and wrong depends on what each individual feels, then we are outside the bounds of civilization.” — Walter Lippman. 1955.
Chris. I forgot to enter my name with the Walter Lipmann, George Marsden comment. Could you do this for me please? Thanks. Mark Simpson
Post a Comment