Why I no longer use "woke"
There was a time where I’d go on about “woke” this and “woke” that. But no more. While I’ll occasionally slip into it, I’ve decided to consciously make an effort, for the most part, to avoid that terminology. I understand why people use it, it’s a convenient shorthand. But there are a few reasons why I’ve decided to do my best to minimize my own usage of it.
First of all, it’s a case of “word misappropriation” — a phenomenon where we divorce words from their original meanings. I think that’s harmful to discourse. It weaponizes certain words (“Nazi”), and confuses others (also “Nazi”). It’s difficult to have meaningful conversations when we don’t even have a shared understanding of what the words and terms we use are.
Historically, the term woke had referred to the idea that one is awakened to injustices. It was first used in the 1940s and was associated with black Americans fighting racism. As time went on, other activist groups took the term on to be applied more broadly towards awareness of social issues, prejudices, inequalities, and injustices.
It meant to be “awake” and aware of the truth—particularly that which unjust institutions may seek to keep you blind to.
Under that definition, it seemed reasonable to be “woke.”
Of course, in the current ‘culture war’ discourse, that word has become a stand-in for all sorts of things like virtue signalling, victimhood, identity politics, grievance culture, intolerance, self-righteousness, performative morality, authoritarian impulses, and so on. Although this type of “wokeness” was associated more with the left initially, some had gone on to call it out on the right too (see: the rise of the woke right).
Which brings me to the second reason why I’ve chosen to stay away from the term.
What we’re really trying to do is describe a pattern of behavior rather than just ideology. It’s a pattern of behavior that can be found in humans of all stripes—even if, some will argue, that it happens more frequently in one group than another. So why not call out the specific behaviors that we take an issue with?
Doing so helps foster more meaningful discourse because it addresses the underlying actions that are so troubling and harmful, rather than relying on vague, often politically charged terminology. When it’s aimed at the “woke left” or the “woke right,” it usually also causes people to become defensive rather than try to understand the behaviors we take issue with.
I’d rather we focus on the real issues—like intolerance or mob mentality—than use “woke” as a catch-all for all the bad things that we might even have trouble verbalizing in the first place. Being precise causes us to reflect more and eliminates any misunderstanding, too. (The people being accused of being “woke” often don’t get why it’s a bad thing to be aware of social injustices, and will thus assume those attacking them are racists—which is usually not the case).
Addressing and pinpointing the behaviors and ideas that are problematic is a better use of time than arguing over a label. It also acknowledges that these are harmful behaviors that can appear in anyone, across the political spectrum—rather than creating further division by just blaming one or the other, further polarizing us and erasing nuance.
Look, as I mentioned, for many people it is a convenient shorthand and it’s doubtful that we’ll actually eliminate the use of the term as per its morphed meaning. I also have no intention of policing people’s language and I’m sure that I’ll slip up every once in a while. Sometimes it can even be useful, in certain contexts…or even just to save time when discussing with people who have a shared agreement on the word’s meaning. But as much as possible, I would like to be more thoughtful of how I use language and more precise when it comes to identifying behaviors that I believe are worth tackling. Perhaps it’s a small shift, but being more deliberate (and less accusatory) with our language might lead to clearer conversations, less polarization, and a greater focus on resolving the issues that truly matter.
I didn't realize it's been in use since the forties
I agree with all your conclusions and reasoning here! I also mostly avoid using it because the term has become too laden with meaning and it is causes any genuine discourse that may be occurring to stop. It’s almost like if you call someone a racist (whether they’re being one or not): the conversation is over as soon as you do this. Same with “woke” at this point.
I prefer “identitarian illiberals” or some such similar term that is descriptive of the real issue with wokeness, and I think descriptions like this encompass both those on the left and the right who do this.
Our language evolves incredibly fast now, and terms like “woke” get co-opted quickly. Same thing happened with “fake news” very quickly such that by like 2018 it was unhelpful to use that term anymore.
Using variants on the lexeme “wake” has a long history in politics and it’s both good and bad. The “Wide Awakes” supported Abraham Lincoln in the 1860 presidential election (sorry, another Lincoln reference). In Nazi Germany, signs that said “Deutschland Erwache!” (Germany Wake Up!) Were very common at earlier Nazi rallies. In my US state a group called “Awake Illinois” sprang up in 2020 to protest lockdowns. And of course there’s “woke” in the sense you mention here. And many other cases.