“Woke”

[theprestige]

Unless you have suddenly and unexpectedly succumbed to the error of run-on sentences you did:

"discovering novel systemic injustices, and uncritically endorsing such discoveries"

As I said, I presume that statement excludes endorsing injustices that are not novel, and critical evaluation.

No, you're still imagining an endorsement of injustice in a clause where no such endorsement exists. Take a closer look at the noun in the second half of that compound sentence.

 

[bruto]

No, you're still imagining an endorsement of injustice in a clause where no such endorsement exists. Take a closer look at the noun in the second half of that compound sentence.

Sorry if my initial statement accidentally omitted the "discovery" in that. It was unintentional to the extent that it took a second reading to realize what this was even about! You are right and I am wrong.

OK, of course you don't endorse injustice. What I meant was that your definition of "woke" appears to exclude reference to old injustices that have not been recently discovered, and to exclude reference to injustices of any sort that are judged critically. I don't actually dispute that as a reasonable idea, but I suspect that those using the term in the political arena would be unwilling to accept that limitation.

 

[uke2se]

I kind of like the definition given by DeSantis' lawyers. It's as official as it gets. That's what we should all understand when a fascist complains about something being "woke".

"The belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them." I'm definitely woke by that description.

I think we can close the book on defining the word.

 

[figarot]

I've never heard somebody refer to themselves as woke, which is a pity, for I do want to ask them, "Are you sure you're not just a narcoleptic insomniac?"

 

[theprestige]

Sorry if my initial statement accidentally omitted the "discovery" in that. It was unintentional to the extent that it took a second reading to realize what this was even about! You are right and I am wrong.

OK, of course you don't endorse injustice. What I meant was that your definition of "woke" appears to exclude reference to old injustices that have not been recently discovered, and to exclude reference to injustices of any sort that are judged critically. I don't actually dispute that as a reasonable idea, but I suspect that those using the term in the political arena would be unwilling to accept that limitation.

I was referring to the process of discovery and of validation of discovery, not to any real injustices that might be discovered.

 

[bruto]

I was referring to the process of discovery and of validation of discovery, not to any real injustices that might be discovered.

Yes, I see that. Unfortunately I think the De Santis version cited above is more common.

 

[d4m10n]

"The belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them." I'm definitely woke by that description.

Any given society is bound to suffer from systemic injustice; bit jingoistic to restrict one's purview to America.

 

[Ziggurat]

Ron DiSantos's lawyers have defined "woke" in response to the lawsuit challening their "anti-woke" law. They say woke is, "The belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them."

And it absolutely needs to be made illegal for government employees.

Here is the source for that quote:

https://twitter.com/elfsternberg/status/1599223334642012160

d4m10n's link provides two quotes which are similar but have important differences.

pgwenthold version:
"The belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them."

Other version also at d4m10n's link:
“To me it means someone who believes that there are systemic injustices in the criminal justice system and on that basis they can decline to fully enforce and uphold the law,”

I would like to see the entire context of that first quote because I think there's a good chance there's more to it than is being presented here. But that other version is what's really the basis for DeSantis firing Andrew Warren.

 

[wareyin]

d4m10n's link provides two quotes which are similar but have important differences.

pgwenthold version:
"The belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them."

Other version also at d4m10n's link:
“To me it means someone who believes that there are systemic injustices in the criminal justice system and on that basis they can decline to fully enforce and uphold the law,”

I would like to see the entire context of that first quote because I think there's a good chance there's more to it than is being presented here. But that other version is what's really the basis for DeSantis firing Andrew Warren.

Granted that d4m10n linked to twitter rather than to the article, but you shouldn't shorten your reading to the first 280 characters of the article if you're looking for pgwenthold's version. In literally the next paragraph from what you claim is d4m10n's version the article says: "Asked what “woke” means more generally, Newman said “it would be the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.”" (my emphasis, as you apparently missed it the first time)

 

[Ziggurat]

Granted that d4m10n linked to twitter rather than to the article, but you shouldn't shorten your reading to the first 280 characters of the article if you're looking for pgwenthold's version. In literally the next paragraph from what you claim is d4m10n's version the article says: "Asked what “woke” means more generally, Newman said “it would be the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.”" (my emphasis, as you apparently missed it the first time)

I know full well both versions are in that article, and I even said so. I started with "d4m10n's link provides two quotes". And when I wrote "Other version also at d4m10n's link:", that "also" was to indicate that both versions being discussed are in the link. If I thought that only the other version was in the link, I wouldn't have included the "also".

 

[wareyin]

I know full well both versions are in that article, and I even said so. I started with "d4m10n's link provides two quotes". And when I wrote "Other version also at d4m10n's link:", that "also" was to indicate that both versions being discussed are in the link. If I thought that only the other version was in the link, I wouldn't have included the "also".

Ah, yes, when you were attributing a "version" to pgwenthold, it's obviously the fault of the reader for thinking you meant that was provided by pgwenthold instead of d4m10n.

Now that we've cleared up that both "versions" are in the article and both were said by the same speaker in the same conversation, moments apart from each other, we can dispense with any pretense that we should ignore the more broad definition of literally the subject of this thread because you think that Warren was only being punished for the narrower definition.

 

[Ziggurat]

Now that we've cleared up that both "versions" are in the article and both were said by the same speaker in the same conversation, moments apart from each other,

I never said otherwise.

we can dispense with any pretense that we should ignore the more broad definition of literally the subject of this thread because you think that Warren was only being punished for the narrower definition.

I'm not the one asking anyone to ignore either version. I am saying that upon consideration of both versions, one version is obviously more relevant than the other to the legal case where the quotes were made. You haven't actually suggested any reason to think otherwise. That quote was not previously mentioned by anyone here. So let's dispense with any pretense that I'm the one trying to get people to ignore what was actually said.

 

[d4m10n]

"The belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them." I'm definitely woke by that description.

I think we can close the book on defining the word.

Has anyone come across a clear and useful definition of "systemic injustices" which seems to be the key phrase here?

 

[arthwollipot]

Any given society is bound to suffer from systemic injustice; bit jingoistic to restrict one's purview to America.

Indeed - there is a substantial anti-"woke" brigade here in Australia too.

That said, the fact that there are systemic injustices in society does imply that there is a need to address them, so by this definition I would also proudly call myself woke.

Now if only other people used this definition, it might become a useful term.

 

[arthwollipot]

Has anyone come across a clear and useful definition of "systemic injustices" which seems to be the key phrase here?

I hope it isn't necessary to define "injustice" so I assume you're asking why the adjective "systemic" is added to it.

It means that the injustice is built in to the norms of society. It's part of the system. The gender pay gap is systemic. Gay people being unable to marry is systemic. African Americans being overrepresented in US prisons is systemic.

Systemic injustice is a lot harder to address than individual injustice. In the individual case you can just stop doing that. Systemic injustice requires potentially complex societal change. It can be done, as illustrated by the fact that gay people can now marry in some places, but it isn't easy and there is resistance from conservatives who believe that the status quo should be preserved.

 

[d4m10n]

It means that the injustice is built in to the norms of society. It's part of the system.

How can we tell ordinary or acceptable statistical gaps from gaps which implicate (in)justice?

For example, in the U.S. we've a huge and significant gender gap in workplace fatalities. I'd be hesitant to claim that this persistent and systemic gap is the result of injustice.

 

[Ziggurat]

The gender pay gap is systemic.

The gender pay gap is not an injustice. It is mostly due to differences in free choices, in terms of how many hours people work and what kind of jobs they take. A welder makes more than a day care assistant. An engineer makes more than a social worker. Allowing people to make different choices isn't a bad thing.

 

[arthwollipot]

The gender pay gap is not an injustice. It is mostly due to differences in free choices, in terms of how many hours people work and what kind of jobs they take. A welder makes more than a day care assistant. An engineer makes more than a social worker. Allowing people to make different choices isn't a bad thing.

Why don't more women become welders?

 

[Wolrab]

Why don't more men become nurses?

 

[arthwollipot]

More to the point, why are there fewer women in all STEM fields? It's not because they don't want to, it's that the system has for decades been stacked against them. It's not that long ago that women weren't even allowed to study STEM at university.

That's what is meant by systemic injustice. It's not just that women weren't applying to study engineering, it's that it was against the rules for them to do so.

Now they can, because the rules have been changed, but there are still fewer of them in the field than there are men. This demonstrates that systemic injustices can be addressed, but doing so is a slow and difficult process.