Another Look at Woke

Grouping policies together by placing them under a common negative label is a dangerous political tactic.

Photo by Alexandra Gorn on Unsplash

Once political elites are able to make a label mean “dangerous,” it is a small step to increase the number of ideas and policies that are collected under that label.  We are now seeing virtually all the Democratic Party policy agenda described as “woke.”  If done successfully, it is no longer necessary to treat any of them with respect or to debate them on their merits.  They are just “woke.” Citizen pass by!

I want to narrow in on one set of policies that are presently labeled as “woke.”

We have long debated the idea of “fairness” in our country. Some refer to it as fairness of opportunity and others as fairness in the distribution of the rewards of a prosperous society. The former has had a greater hold on the minds of Americans.  We see ourselves as “the land of opportunity.”  In this way, inequality of outcomes is seen as the inevitable consequence of how well individuals have used their opportunities. We imply that people deserve their “outcomes.”

(There are important ideas about the economic import of inequality that suggest that, apart from who deserve their wealth, the system as a whole functions better when the rewards of the system are more evenly distributed.  Save this discussion for another day.)

For the purposes of this essay, I want to point out that notwithstanding the bias I referred to above, it is legitimate to feel that social justice requires government intervention to make personal economic outcomes more equal, i.e. sufficient and more secure. 

Sometimes we refer to this as providing “a floor” or “safety net.”  Others see it as supporting the growth of a “middle class.”  Some see it as a necessary precondition for equality of opportunity for the next generation.  Perhaps it is all three.  Regardless, it has been the stated political goal of the social justice movement in this country for many years, more explicitly in the policy recommendations of political parties of the “left,” (New Deal, Fair Deal, Great Society, etc.). We have debated its merits. But now it is likely to be dismissed out of hand, in part or in whole, because it is “woke.” 

Let’s put a little history to work.  The neo-liberal creed of less government intervention in the economy has had an effect on law and policy in the United States over the past half century.  Many would say that such laws and their application have had a profound effect on the overall distribution of wealth in the society.  Those who have wealth are never without means to influence the legal frameworks that govern rules of finance, inheritance and rights. This implies that government has been partially responsible for present economic outcomes, and it is reasonable to look to government for change.

Those that have “lost” the most tend to be a substantial part of the “old working class,” white men of high school education who work in mining and manufacturing.  Add to this group substantial parts of the service industries and an increasing number of people in the lower ranks of management and the professions.

They have legitimate grievances and thus credible political interests. They deserve representation in the political system. They deserve a place at the table. Ideas about how government action can introduce more fairness into the economic system should stand or fall on their merits.

But at present it seems all opposition media elites and political candidates have to do is yell “woke,” and voters will run away scared.